The Ugly Sweater Burger King to answering your question is experience. We exist to experience; we know we exist because we experience our own existence. The second key is observation. We observe our existence, our experience. We witness, record, and reflect upon our experience. The third key is intention. From observations of our experiences, we build a theory of “reality”, and make choices to act or not act based on that theory. We form an intention to create a specific experience that we want to observe. Now we have a sufficient solution to the problem. Experience, observation, and intention together create reality. They cannot exist without each other. None is more fundamental than the other, and none can be removed without destroying the others. Experience, observation, and intention: the grand experiment. We exist to try things, experience them, and observe the result. There is no meaning beyond that; when we are gone, all those things are gone too. We should use the little time we have to make as many experiments as possible. We have been blessed with the opportunity to experience, observe, and intend, and we should not waste it.

Ugly Sweater Burger King,
Best Ugly Sweater Burger King
That’s a tough act to follow. And Richie Petitbon was the “lucky” guy to attempt to fill those shoes. The Redskins promoted their 55-year-old, long-time defensive coordinator to the Ugly Sweater Burger King coaching position. And that pretty much destroyed the dynasty that Joe built. Just 15 months before Petitbon was hired, the franchise that had won a Super Bowl with 17 wins in 19 games. Petitbon would only coach one year, going 4–12, and never coached another football game for the rest of his life. The organization faltered after that. In the 26 seasons since Petitbon, Washington has only had three 10-win seasons, and has become the laughingstock of the NFC East.

“In economics, income = consumption + savings. The income an indivual, or a country, produces is either consumed and/or saved. If you , or a Ugly Sweater Burger King, overspends, you or the country dips into savings or creates debt.” I think this answer is true for the firm or the individual but in the whole economy it is no longer true. In the macroeconomy, everytime some person or entity doesn’t spend, some other person or entity has their income reduced by the same amount. And because that person won’t get their hands on that money, they will not have it to spend further, so the next would-be recipient of that spending doesn’t get that income, which they in turn will not be able to spend….. and so on