You know, all the free marketers are for the Invisible Hand of zombie Adam Smith. They're especially for it when they're cutting other people's pay or positions. They use it to justify their outrageous management and executive raises because they have to retain the best people. Oh, they're all for it when they don't want to be tied down by those nasty regulations, like making sure your paint and gas doesn't have lead added to it. But when that Hand comes around to dope slap them, they no wanna.
I keep hearing about all these employers gnashing their teeth and rending their shirts that they just can't find good employees. Yes, after making sure that the unemployed shouldn't even bother to apply, cut benefits and pay scales, removed OSHA regulations, and generally create a work environment that people of my age (tween Boomer and Gen-X) and younger know for certain that the job you're giving them won't last a moment longer than you need it too (and that cycle is about 5 years or so), that you're constantly looking for younger employees, you're bitching because you can't find anybody willing to take that shit and be happy about it.
Well here are the cows coming back to Capistrano to lay in the bed they made.
Okay Mr. Free Market, yes, I know you're just trying to hammer home the point about how there are jobs out there if people would just bend over and take them (there wouldn't be any unemployment if we could just pay people $1 an hour to flip hamburgers). I know you're also trying to make a point about how horrible the laboring class is (see, those lazy labor unionists just want to soak us dry of our well earned 8-12% yearly raises). I get that this is an ongoing part of the "we need to outsource overseas" idiocy (we can't find anybody).
But here is the Invisible Hand coming to dope slap you. If those are the actual conditions you find yourself in (can't get anybody to apply, those that do aren't skilled, or don't have the work ethic), then you have to respond to the market by hiring older workers (ageism is rampant again) and pay more for them. That's the Invisible Hand of the Market working.
I know, you don't want to hear it. I believe there's a proverb about living by cutting things out. Oh, wait, I think it was about a sword.
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Sunday Blathering
Since I'm tired of it.
Okay, so, remember the Spring, Summer, and Fall of 2010, and a little bit into the Winter of 2011? Remember the economic and job conditions? You know, GDP growth on target for an average 3% growth, job outlook improving with an average 100,000+ jobs added each month (granted, job growth was below a sustainable factor of about 225,000 a month, but still damn better than the less than 30,000 a month we had this past Summer)?
So, what's the difference between then and now?
I don't know. Maybe the stimulus?
Nah. That couldn't be it because the Republicans want us to believe the Stimulus was a failure. I mean, they keep saying it all the time, like they're trying to convince us of something that's counterfactual. Because they want to offset emergency funding and defeat the President's Jobs Bill.
And, again, I'll lay down the gauntlet. Please, someone, anyone, show me where lower taxes and austerity programs during a recession(ish) economy has ever improved job growth and GDP growth in the past century (the time of modern economics). Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Okay, so, remember the Spring, Summer, and Fall of 2010, and a little bit into the Winter of 2011? Remember the economic and job conditions? You know, GDP growth on target for an average 3% growth, job outlook improving with an average 100,000+ jobs added each month (granted, job growth was below a sustainable factor of about 225,000 a month, but still damn better than the less than 30,000 a month we had this past Summer)?
So, what's the difference between then and now?
I don't know. Maybe the stimulus?
Nah. That couldn't be it because the Republicans want us to believe the Stimulus was a failure. I mean, they keep saying it all the time, like they're trying to convince us of something that's counterfactual. Because they want to offset emergency funding and defeat the President's Jobs Bill.
And, again, I'll lay down the gauntlet. Please, someone, anyone, show me where lower taxes and austerity programs during a recession(ish) economy has ever improved job growth and GDP growth in the past century (the time of modern economics). Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Monday, July 18, 2011
Hypothetically speaking
In my post about business people claiming "uncertainty" is keeping them back, Anonymous Cassie poses this hypothetical (and my answer would be longer than a comment should/can be):
Okay, let's add a little more to make this close to what I was talking about. You also have the cash to go in a few directions.
Now, here is what I would tell you in the real world (in case anybody is in or knows someone in this position), call up Nela Park (GE) And their Lighting Institute and ask to speak to them in a consulting position. The lighting were talking about here is the shittiest kind available. It is cheap. That's THE only reason they still sell it. Trust me on this.
But, okay, let's say there is someone's real world case and we don't have standard incandescent bulbs that meet the new standard (hint, we do, it wasn't that hard to make them, seriously, I can't stress this point enough, the bulbs being phased out are crap, they're specifically manufactured to be crap).
Okay, you have a choice. See, the bulbs we're talking about won't last you a year in a retail/business environment (unless you don't turn them on, and this question is moot at that point anyway). And let's say you and all your employees and customers are the minority of people who can see the flickering of the cfls/incandescents. And for some reason buying a warm light LED bulb is, I don't know, not an option (the argument about not liking the light is non-sensical, you've just been buying the cheapest bulb available and you get the crappiest light, you aren't noticing it with the incandescents because you're used to it (but I can tell you that as bad as those cfls and cheap LEDs look, the same is the case with your incandescents if you're buying those that can't meet the new standard, and for a business, crappy light is deadly).
Here's the solution for you, stock up on bulbs. It's an expense you would have to make anyhow. And since you're making a bulk purchase (if you're buying the cheap bulbs, trust me that you're buying in bulk here) that you should be able to itemize it and depreciate the value (this only works because you're buying in bulk). Problem solved, cash spent. You know, until 3 or 6 years down the road when you're now out of bulbs. But then your in the position you are in now. Hopefully you've planned for the conversion by now and are ready to go.
If Congress repeals the law (again, can I say how much this is a tempest in a tea pot? Seriously, this is a non-issue), well, you would have had to buy those bulbs anyway. If they don't, then you're positioned to get more of your ducks in order to make the switch (and if you were in business and haven't prepared for this, frankly, 1) you're wasting money with inefficiency and 2) you aren't really competitive). So, no matter what happens you're ahead of the game (except for not being prepared for the new regulations that were passed over 5 years ago).
If that's you're plan, you're screwed. Doing nothing, and engaging in wishful thinking is a sure way to lose. The old maxim, "pigs get slaughtered, rabbits get skinned," is true in investing and in business. Standing still in business is not an option.
What you can do (valid strategy) is plan for the worst case scenario and move forward. If things turn out better than you planned, that's great. But sitting on the sidelines is a sure way to have someone else eat your lunch. Not growin, or shrinking, or going out and finding business, or meeting your customer's needs (try and sell something in a dark showroom) is a sure recepie for business stagnation. Which leads to death. I've seen it too many times.
There is always an excuse for doing nothing. Again, engaging in wishful thinking. Understand that even if you get you're way and ACA is repealed, then it'll be "will Congress extend the Bush Era tax cuts," (earliest repeal will be next year, tax cut extension expires December 2012). There's always something that you won't know. Hell, Democrats could retake state governments and the House as well as keep the Presidency, and then your uncertainty will be if they increase taxes. There's always some excuse to not do something.
Edited to add Understand the issue is if you have unproductive capital (ie. cash on hand). Now, if you're struggling with cash flow, those are different issues. But with the cash, you can do various things. However, letting it accumulate a great deal without a plan (such as short-term investments to grow cash while you're pulling together enough capital to do a big move) just isn't smart. And that's what is happening with much of this cash companies are keeping on the books. It's sitting in (at best) short term, quick liquidity vehicles.
Running your business without examination will run you into the grounds. There is always going to be uncertainty in business. It's part and parcel of the business gig (and one of the reasons I'm not running my own business at this point, btw, I understand the paralysis of not knowing which way to turn, also I hate sales). So, if you're using some future possible event as a reason for staying still, maybe being in business isn't really for you? Because, like I said, there will always be uncertainty.
If you're in a business that doesn't have that, I want to know what it is.
Letting the cash sit helps no one. Non-working capital is outside the economy (economy is the movement of cash, unproductive capital is a negative on GDP, etc). The technical recession is over, has been for over a year and a half now. Except for construction, most retail numbers are back to normal. So what's different? All those businesses are sitting on their cash instead of doing the smart thing. Because they're afraid. If it continues for too much longer, it'll become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So the goal is to get that capital moving and working. Hell, pay it as a dividend to your shareholders.
Right now is the exact opportune time to make a move. Waiting until everybody is moving it too late. You'll have missed the boat, and even if you're able to catch up, you'll be paying a premium for it (both in costs, and in any loans you may have to take). Building your business now is the smart money. In two years you'll be reading about the companies that are doing that, because they'll be the industry leaders (like I've said before, this isn't my first time on this merry-go-round).
Now, if you're facing the opposite problem (not enough cash flow), then you have different choices to make. And in either case, YMMV (not everybody's situation/market is the same as others).
I own Business A. I need to upgrade my lighting in my business. I prefer incandescents for a variety of reasons - my product looks better under them, my fixtures currently work with them, I like them better, what-have-you.
Right now, there's a repeal working its way through Congress. Hey, if it goes through, I get to continue to buy the product I like best. If it doesn't, and I don't want to use CFLs and halogens have some side issues that concern me. LEDs aren't an option because of their poor quality of light.
What do I do?
Okay, let's add a little more to make this close to what I was talking about. You also have the cash to go in a few directions.
Now, here is what I would tell you in the real world (in case anybody is in or knows someone in this position), call up Nela Park (GE) And their Lighting Institute and ask to speak to them in a consulting position. The lighting were talking about here is the shittiest kind available. It is cheap. That's THE only reason they still sell it. Trust me on this.
But, okay, let's say there is someone's real world case and we don't have standard incandescent bulbs that meet the new standard (hint, we do, it wasn't that hard to make them, seriously, I can't stress this point enough, the bulbs being phased out are crap, they're specifically manufactured to be crap).
Okay, you have a choice. See, the bulbs we're talking about won't last you a year in a retail/business environment (unless you don't turn them on, and this question is moot at that point anyway). And let's say you and all your employees and customers are the minority of people who can see the flickering of the cfls/incandescents. And for some reason buying a warm light LED bulb is, I don't know, not an option (the argument about not liking the light is non-sensical, you've just been buying the cheapest bulb available and you get the crappiest light, you aren't noticing it with the incandescents because you're used to it (but I can tell you that as bad as those cfls and cheap LEDs look, the same is the case with your incandescents if you're buying those that can't meet the new standard, and for a business, crappy light is deadly).
Here's the solution for you, stock up on bulbs. It's an expense you would have to make anyhow. And since you're making a bulk purchase (if you're buying the cheap bulbs, trust me that you're buying in bulk here) that you should be able to itemize it and depreciate the value (this only works because you're buying in bulk). Problem solved, cash spent. You know, until 3 or 6 years down the road when you're now out of bulbs. But then your in the position you are in now. Hopefully you've planned for the conversion by now and are ready to go.
If Congress repeals the law (again, can I say how much this is a tempest in a tea pot? Seriously, this is a non-issue), well, you would have had to buy those bulbs anyway. If they don't, then you're positioned to get more of your ducks in order to make the switch (and if you were in business and haven't prepared for this, frankly, 1) you're wasting money with inefficiency and 2) you aren't really competitive). So, no matter what happens you're ahead of the game (except for not being prepared for the new regulations that were passed over 5 years ago).
I sit and wait to see what Congress is going to do. Maybe I go out and buy up a supply, delaying my decision. Maybe I hold onto the cash pending the development of a better light bulb.
If that's you're plan, you're screwed. Doing nothing, and engaging in wishful thinking is a sure way to lose. The old maxim, "pigs get slaughtered, rabbits get skinned," is true in investing and in business. Standing still in business is not an option.
What you can do (valid strategy) is plan for the worst case scenario and move forward. If things turn out better than you planned, that's great. But sitting on the sidelines is a sure way to have someone else eat your lunch. Not growin, or shrinking, or going out and finding business, or meeting your customer's needs (try and sell something in a dark showroom) is a sure recepie for business stagnation. Which leads to death. I've seen it too many times.
Uncertainity is indeed an issue. Maybe it's the MBAs running the show. Maybe it's my uncles in their businesses -not one of them is an MBA, btw - who say "Until I get a clue what's going on with the health care, I'm not doing anything."
There is always an excuse for doing nothing. Again, engaging in wishful thinking. Understand that even if you get you're way and ACA is repealed, then it'll be "will Congress extend the Bush Era tax cuts," (earliest repeal will be next year, tax cut extension expires December 2012). There's always something that you won't know. Hell, Democrats could retake state governments and the House as well as keep the Presidency, and then your uncertainty will be if they increase taxes. There's always some excuse to not do something.
Edited to add Understand the issue is if you have unproductive capital (ie. cash on hand). Now, if you're struggling with cash flow, those are different issues. But with the cash, you can do various things. However, letting it accumulate a great deal without a plan (such as short-term investments to grow cash while you're pulling together enough capital to do a big move) just isn't smart. And that's what is happening with much of this cash companies are keeping on the books. It's sitting in (at best) short term, quick liquidity vehicles.
Running your business without examination will run you into the grounds. There is always going to be uncertainty in business. It's part and parcel of the business gig (and one of the reasons I'm not running my own business at this point, btw, I understand the paralysis of not knowing which way to turn, also I hate sales). So, if you're using some future possible event as a reason for staying still, maybe being in business isn't really for you? Because, like I said, there will always be uncertainty.
If you're in a business that doesn't have that, I want to know what it is.
Letting the cash sit helps no one. Non-working capital is outside the economy (economy is the movement of cash, unproductive capital is a negative on GDP, etc). The technical recession is over, has been for over a year and a half now. Except for construction, most retail numbers are back to normal. So what's different? All those businesses are sitting on their cash instead of doing the smart thing. Because they're afraid. If it continues for too much longer, it'll become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So the goal is to get that capital moving and working. Hell, pay it as a dividend to your shareholders.
Right now is the exact opportune time to make a move. Waiting until everybody is moving it too late. You'll have missed the boat, and even if you're able to catch up, you'll be paying a premium for it (both in costs, and in any loans you may have to take). Building your business now is the smart money. In two years you'll be reading about the companies that are doing that, because they'll be the industry leaders (like I've said before, this isn't my first time on this merry-go-round).
Now, if you're facing the opposite problem (not enough cash flow), then you have different choices to make. And in either case, YMMV (not everybody's situation/market is the same as others).
Monday, June 20, 2011
Investors of the World, Unite
Once again I reach out to the great internet brain to ask a question.
I'm re-evaluating the funds I place my 401k into. With the (at least Wall Street) economy in slightly better shape, I think the prospectuses are a little more truthful on how funds will perform going forward. Unfortunately, I don't have access to my preferred funds (from American Funds).
When I signed up last year, I went with some funds that I thought were good. And I did pretty well. However, I'm now looking at performance vs. fund fees and thinking of switching two funds to lesser well known names (but performing just as well) funds that have about half the administrative fees (0.8% average to 0.4% average, in case you want to know). The fund mix would remain the same (growth and index funds).
But here is the question, should I keep my existing amounts in the original accounts (the returns more than cover the admin costs, so I won't lose money), or transfer the balances into the new funds (as well as direct withholdings to them)?
I'm of two minds. On one hand, for simplicity (and lower fees) I should transfer the existing account amounts. On the other hand I like having diversity to spread risk (and these funds are solid, or I wouldn't have picked them in the first place). These are both about equal in my mind at the moment. Any other ideas I should take into account?
I'm re-evaluating the funds I place my 401k into. With the (at least Wall Street) economy in slightly better shape, I think the prospectuses are a little more truthful on how funds will perform going forward. Unfortunately, I don't have access to my preferred funds (from American Funds).
When I signed up last year, I went with some funds that I thought were good. And I did pretty well. However, I'm now looking at performance vs. fund fees and thinking of switching two funds to lesser well known names (but performing just as well) funds that have about half the administrative fees (0.8% average to 0.4% average, in case you want to know). The fund mix would remain the same (growth and index funds).
But here is the question, should I keep my existing amounts in the original accounts (the returns more than cover the admin costs, so I won't lose money), or transfer the balances into the new funds (as well as direct withholdings to them)?
I'm of two minds. On one hand, for simplicity (and lower fees) I should transfer the existing account amounts. On the other hand I like having diversity to spread risk (and these funds are solid, or I wouldn't have picked them in the first place). These are both about equal in my mind at the moment. Any other ideas I should take into account?
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Really, Discover
One of the first credit cards I ever got was a Discover. It was brand new, back then. And it's the card I've had the longest. Although I hardly ever use it (too many times they sent those checks after I asked them to stop, too many questionable "related" deals, etc). And now I get a mailer that I can earn an extra $150 cashback bonus (cashback bonus, btw, stands for "biggest scam ever") if I spend more that $1000 (or more) each calendar month for July to September. But first I have to call a number to register for it.
Really?
If I put $3000 on any card within any 3 month period, the CEO of the card company should fly out to my house and personally kiss my ass in gratitude.
When I lost my job over a year ago, I started putting more things on credit cards than I had ever done before (for various reasons, as we always, always, pay off the balance every month). I used to like to use cash as much as possible before that. But now getting cash has become a little harder, so I like to keep the hard cash as much as possible. It's sort of like the opposite of what I used to do.
But you know what? I still don't put $1000 on the card within a month. And I have a 44 mile (one way) commute. I also do a lot of grocery shopping and errand running. Not to mention completing several home improvement projects this past Spring. Still, not at $1000 a month. I think I did go over one month. But that was when I bought the iPad, a 25 anniversary gift for Bette, and her birthday presents.
The unfortunate thing is I expect this will be a successful promotion for them.
Really?
If I put $3000 on any card within any 3 month period, the CEO of the card company should fly out to my house and personally kiss my ass in gratitude.
When I lost my job over a year ago, I started putting more things on credit cards than I had ever done before (for various reasons, as we always, always, pay off the balance every month). I used to like to use cash as much as possible before that. But now getting cash has become a little harder, so I like to keep the hard cash as much as possible. It's sort of like the opposite of what I used to do.
But you know what? I still don't put $1000 on the card within a month. And I have a 44 mile (one way) commute. I also do a lot of grocery shopping and errand running. Not to mention completing several home improvement projects this past Spring. Still, not at $1000 a month. I think I did go over one month. But that was when I bought the iPad, a 25 anniversary gift for Bette, and her birthday presents.
The unfortunate thing is I expect this will be a successful promotion for them.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
It's beginning to look a lot like Tax Day
Eric pointed to an article on Bob Cesca's blog, which quotes this news story about the nine things the rich don't want you to know about taxes. I'm not sure I'm going to have the time to do a full tax post as I'd like, but you really ought to read that article. I know it's long, but there's lots of charts to help you out. It doesn't say anything much different or new that I haven't been harping on for the past three years or so (at least here in this forum, in person I've been doing it a whole lot longer). And it discusses some of the word play that's being used to bamboozle you.
While he covers it obliquely, I'll state it here openly. You know all this talk about Social Security and Medicare reform? I'll remind you that we pay a separate tax for each of those that fully funds those programs. To claim they contribute to the deficit is an outright lie, those taxes you pay are "dedicated" - or mandated - which is why politicians don't like them. Add in the conservative ranker over any social program that helps people and you can see why lots of people want to roll them back in the closet.
Taxes have become regressive instead of progressive. Don't believe it? I keep hearing about how my taxes have "gone down" since 1998. Bullshit. Before 1998 I always (always) had a tax refund. Between 1998 and 2002 my refund lowered to just barely cover the costs of having someone prepare my taxes. Since 2002 I've owed taxes above my withholdings. Since 2003 I've been lowering my deductions every single year and still had to pay extra. Every. Single. Year. Right now I'm at claiming 1 deduction and have my W4 marked to withhold at the higher single rate. I'm about to adjust my W4 once again which means I'll need to fill out the line that says I want an extra amount withheld ($50 a pay, if you need to know, I've been increasing the withholding from the Council job to about $100 a month, and I only get $400 before taxes).
In that time I've gone from renting to home ownership (a deduction). My medical expenses have gone up (a deduction). I can now claim mileage (a lot of it last year, big deduction). I'm also making, numerically (I haven't done the "adjusted for income" calculation yet), a lot more. Not as much of a percentage change from '90 to '98, but still pretty good.
What I don't have is children. If I did, I'd be seeing less taxes. Without children, while the withholding tables have been adjusted to hold back less, my tax burden hasn't shifted. In fact, my Federal tax has gone up.
How do I know? Because I still get a refund from the state (normally local as well, but the Census didn't withhold local and I did significant freelance last year). And while my federal tax owed wasn't as much as I expected (thanks to the mileage deductions, mostly), it was still more than I paid for the tax preparation (and my tax guy is a partner in the firm).
Well, look, I guess I did do the post after all. After reading that article, if you aren't pissed, I don't think you're paying attention. I'll also remind you that Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader, said that Pres. Obama's talk of raising taxes on those who make more that $250,000 wasn't what we needed two days before tax day.
While he covers it obliquely, I'll state it here openly. You know all this talk about Social Security and Medicare reform? I'll remind you that we pay a separate tax for each of those that fully funds those programs. To claim they contribute to the deficit is an outright lie, those taxes you pay are "dedicated" - or mandated - which is why politicians don't like them. Add in the conservative ranker over any social program that helps people and you can see why lots of people want to roll them back in the closet.
Taxes have become regressive instead of progressive. Don't believe it? I keep hearing about how my taxes have "gone down" since 1998. Bullshit. Before 1998 I always (always) had a tax refund. Between 1998 and 2002 my refund lowered to just barely cover the costs of having someone prepare my taxes. Since 2002 I've owed taxes above my withholdings. Since 2003 I've been lowering my deductions every single year and still had to pay extra. Every. Single. Year. Right now I'm at claiming 1 deduction and have my W4 marked to withhold at the higher single rate. I'm about to adjust my W4 once again which means I'll need to fill out the line that says I want an extra amount withheld ($50 a pay, if you need to know, I've been increasing the withholding from the Council job to about $100 a month, and I only get $400 before taxes).
In that time I've gone from renting to home ownership (a deduction). My medical expenses have gone up (a deduction). I can now claim mileage (a lot of it last year, big deduction). I'm also making, numerically (I haven't done the "adjusted for income" calculation yet), a lot more. Not as much of a percentage change from '90 to '98, but still pretty good.
What I don't have is children. If I did, I'd be seeing less taxes. Without children, while the withholding tables have been adjusted to hold back less, my tax burden hasn't shifted. In fact, my Federal tax has gone up.
How do I know? Because I still get a refund from the state (normally local as well, but the Census didn't withhold local and I did significant freelance last year). And while my federal tax owed wasn't as much as I expected (thanks to the mileage deductions, mostly), it was still more than I paid for the tax preparation (and my tax guy is a partner in the firm).
Well, look, I guess I did do the post after all. After reading that article, if you aren't pissed, I don't think you're paying attention. I'll also remind you that Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader, said that Pres. Obama's talk of raising taxes on those who make more that $250,000 wasn't what we needed two days before tax day.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Quoting and the economics of disaster
Printing is a competitive business. Cut-throat is the "nice" mood. Lately, however, we're going up against quotes that are less than our paper costs for the same job. I don't think anybody is getting their paper for better costs than we do. And it's not like we're quoting against differing technologies (such as sheet-fed versus web for 100,000 40 page catalogs, yeah, the web press is going to kick our butts). Even if we were competing against printers in different markets (we're less than NYC and Chicago printers, and probably Cincinnati, but we're probably a little more than St. Louis) I can understand. Note to competition, cutting your own throat to win work to keep cash flow while sacrificing, okay, obliterating the chance of profit (well, I guess negative profit is still a profit level) all on the hope you may get continuing business (ha! Have you looked at our marketplace lately?) once this economy turns around will only lead to everybody dying. You suck money away from businesses trying to make a go of it while damaging the pricing expectations of the market. And yes, pricing below paper costs (forget ink, labor time, production/finishing, wear and tear, etc) is one sure way to the grave. I just wish you weren't taking the rest of us with you.
Want and example? Look at the Akron Printing Marketplace. What market, you may ask? You're right about that one. They're almost all gone. Even the victors. A cold wind disturbs the dust on the presses cold-welding solid in darkened plants down in Akron. That's a business disease you don't want to infect your own market.
Want and example? Look at the Akron Printing Marketplace. What market, you may ask? You're right about that one. They're almost all gone. Even the victors. A cold wind disturbs the dust on the presses cold-welding solid in darkened plants down in Akron. That's a business disease you don't want to infect your own market.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
I got a crazy teacher, he wears dark glasses
No, this isn't about Kim Jung Not-doing-so-well. Although I've been thinking of a post about him and those wacky North Koreans who seem stuck in the 1950s mind set.
This is about future planning. With somewhat better personal fortunes going forward (although there are forces aligned against us) I'm putting some plans back in place that I had taken off the table earlier this year. I'll be attending Confluence this year. I'm not on the program, but a bunch of really good people are. And there are several friends I like to catch up with. Plus, they have excellent programming, and are very literary (and Filk) focused. Maybe this year I'll get up and do a poetry reading.
Another event I had taken off the "wants to go" list when the day thing went to 32 hour weeks, and now is back on the list is Viable Paradise. I have a good 8000 words out to send, and with the feedback from Hasting Point Writers ::waves at everybody:: I can make it an excellent submission. The price still has me worried. Without sharing a room, it'll be a little north of $2000, and I seem to remember in the past they had rooms for four people, but rereading their site it looks like two people (or a very familiar three) in a room. I wanted to apply for the past three years and just never had it together enough. I really wanted to last year but found myself without 8000 words that weren't in submission and being a little scared about money. The teaching group is the same this year, so it feels like the universe is giving me a second go at it. And when the big U does that, one should listen.
There's also ConClave again this year. It's the weekend at the end of the week that VP is running. So if I get into VP, I don't think I could swing it. After than there's the Feral Writers Retreat at the end of the same month. If things keep going the way they are, if I don't get into VP, but get invited to the Feral Writers again, then I'll have to decide (as that much time off in one month probably won't happen, of course I could be wrong). With my determination going strong I'd be more favorable to Feral Writers, although I had a great time last year at ConClave with both old and new friends.
All this is contingent on the day job going strong (I believe I'm showing my value to the company still). The night thing has it's own issues. There are those forces aligned against us (like $560 in car bills for regular maintenance, brake pads and tires, and another $120 to spend in three weeks for the 100,000 mile maintenance). We're doing some work outside this year, so cash is flowing for that as well. Last month we went through an obscene amount of money, and this month looks about the same.
So there it is.
Today, Chapter 11, start of Act II, came rushing on me. It's almost as action packed as the first chapter, and we get to see just what a cold-hearted SOB Santana is. As he'll say later, "They don't pay me. They guy that does expects me to be this way." Just realized (Sha-Blam-ski!) what they'll get out of it (other than plot movement, what they had to do given the situation, but could be seen as violence for violence sake. It also solves another plot bunny. So probably 300-600 words came tumbling out over lunch. Keep it up little brain. Keep driving me on, oh Muse.
This is about future planning. With somewhat better personal fortunes going forward (although there are forces aligned against us) I'm putting some plans back in place that I had taken off the table earlier this year. I'll be attending Confluence this year. I'm not on the program, but a bunch of really good people are. And there are several friends I like to catch up with. Plus, they have excellent programming, and are very literary (and Filk) focused. Maybe this year I'll get up and do a poetry reading.
Another event I had taken off the "wants to go" list when the day thing went to 32 hour weeks, and now is back on the list is Viable Paradise. I have a good 8000 words out to send, and with the feedback from Hasting Point Writers ::waves at everybody:: I can make it an excellent submission. The price still has me worried. Without sharing a room, it'll be a little north of $2000, and I seem to remember in the past they had rooms for four people, but rereading their site it looks like two people (or a very familiar three) in a room. I wanted to apply for the past three years and just never had it together enough. I really wanted to last year but found myself without 8000 words that weren't in submission and being a little scared about money. The teaching group is the same this year, so it feels like the universe is giving me a second go at it. And when the big U does that, one should listen.
There's also ConClave again this year. It's the weekend at the end of the week that VP is running. So if I get into VP, I don't think I could swing it. After than there's the Feral Writers Retreat at the end of the same month. If things keep going the way they are, if I don't get into VP, but get invited to the Feral Writers again, then I'll have to decide (as that much time off in one month probably won't happen, of course I could be wrong). With my determination going strong I'd be more favorable to Feral Writers, although I had a great time last year at ConClave with both old and new friends.
All this is contingent on the day job going strong (I believe I'm showing my value to the company still). The night thing has it's own issues. There are those forces aligned against us (like $560 in car bills for regular maintenance, brake pads and tires, and another $120 to spend in three weeks for the 100,000 mile maintenance). We're doing some work outside this year, so cash is flowing for that as well. Last month we went through an obscene amount of money, and this month looks about the same.
So there it is.
Today, Chapter 11, start of Act II, came rushing on me. It's almost as action packed as the first chapter, and we get to see just what a cold-hearted SOB Santana is. As he'll say later, "They don't pay me. They guy that does expects me to be this way." Just realized (Sha-Blam-ski!) what they'll get out of it (other than plot movement, what they had to do given the situation, but could be seen as violence for violence sake. It also solves another plot bunny. So probably 300-600 words came tumbling out over lunch. Keep it up little brain. Keep driving me on, oh Muse.
Friday, May 29, 2009
The Summer of Healthcare
Most of you know that healthcare and the cost of healthcare are very near and dear to my heart. It's something we as a nation will be discussing this summer as the President has laid down the law saying that if we are to get health care reform done, it needs to be done this year. After that, the pressure to change may lessen, slightly. The cost of healthcare is a lion clinging to the hindquarters of the cape buffalo of the bull-market economy. It may not necessarily be the lion that ends up bitting the neck, suffocating the beast, but it is the one that makes it possible for a weaker, slower lion to do the job. Sure, we might shake off this first "Troubled-Asset" lion that's been squeezing our economic windpipe, but unless we get that other lion off our ass, something else is going to kill us off, like the "Energy Cost" or the "Trade Deficit" lion.
Here's a New Yorker article on "The Cost Conundrum" (groked from Jay Lake's link salad). The money shot?
"Providing health care is like building a house... Imagine that, instead of paying a contractor to pull a team together and keep them on track, you paid an electrician for every outlet he recommends, a plumber for every faucet, and a carpenter for every cabinet. Would you be surprised if you got a house with a thousand outlets, faucets, and cabinets, at three times the cost you expected... Getting the country’s best electrician on the job... isn’t going to solve this problem. Nor will changing the person who writes him the check."
As you read the article, pay close attention to the "for profit" and "not-for-profit" tags. Also, near the end there's a conversation with Dr. Dyke about changing the payor of health care that you should read. It may seem that what he's advocating is an HMO, but it really isn't. What he's advocating is a business practice and professional organization. That's a fancy way of saying "Professional Union," but that last word gives many people too high a squick response to work well. In Ohio, as we limited healthcare malpractice awards in an attempt to lower the increases in malpractice insurance (because "allz our doctors is gonna leave us", which didn't work because that wasn't really the cause of high insurance rates, and the doctors haven't increased their retirement rates), we also discussed opening up a database that patients could search to see if their doctors had malpractice claims or professional black marks on their records. That part of the bill died pretty quick.
For our village, as well as many of the local businesses, we've been discussing healthcare programs. The most prominent idea that's being pushed is the healthcare savings program. This is where you set up a savings plan, have automatic payroll deductions to match up to a specific plan deductible (a very high deductible, normally on the order of $5000 and above). The individual is then responsible to spend the money out of the savings plan wisely. The actual insurance part of the plan is essentially a catastrophic plan (something that used to be the norm before we did the surveys that preventative care was more cost effective).
I can't tell you how much I hate these plans. Not so much for the patient (except that it's a way to shift more costs onto the individual from the company benefit side), but for what it will need do to the rest of the industry. I'll say this here, if you want the consumer to make decisions based on cost for health care, the providers will need to provide price sheets for common procedures and provide estimates for the rest. The system based on consumer choice cannot work any other way. And yes, I'm talking about a McDonalds' menu board style price list out front, before I see the doctor and start incurring costs.
Right now all the arguments I keep hearing are about how to control costs and who pays for what and to whom. As the article explains, no matter what we do on that side of the argument will have any real impact. What will have an impact is taking the profit incentive out of healthcare. I'll probably write a whole other post on why that's going to face a tough battle, but it's been done. Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland all have private health insurance, private doctor systems, and controllable costs systems (that all sides feel are too tough), and they've done it by removing profit from the game plan. Insurance companies are by law non-profts. They must insure any applicant, doctors must accept the insurance, and everybody (as much as possible) needs to be insured. These countries also have structures that remove much of the profit incentive (or outside plausible reasoning for high costs, like providing free medical schooling). Our system costs more per patient, and provides less care (by outcomes such as infection rates, hospital stay lengths, mortality and morbidity rates).
When I was in the ER on Monday, they started to wheel me out to do a CT scan. At the time, the logic part of my brain was saying, "Wait, shouldn't we test the urine first to see if there's blood before we use the machine that goes 'Bing!'?" But at that moment I wasn't in a position to argue, and I doubt that my wife wasn't going to stop treatment for something that she knew was exceedingly painful to me. Now, in the end, they would probably have done the scan anyway to see how large the stone was, and if there were any others waiting in the wings (4mm, and no, it was a single). But if I had a health savings plan, I might have argued. Because I'm a cheap bastard. I might have also said, "I'll only take the second shot of morphine if you discount it, because I shouldn't need a second dose only 25 minutes after the first one" (they believe the stone moved to a more painful spot, which made me glad for the first dose because it got just as painful again).
The time to worry about costs is not when you're in the middle of treatment. Unless you think blackmail is an acceptable business model. As a consumer, I'm buying the insurance. Part of that payment, part of the insurer's job, is to control costs. Or, as I've told my fire chief when we moved from all volunteer force to a token hourly payment for our firefighters, "I don't want to get to the point that you're telling fire fighters who've responded not to get on the truck because we're worried about costs."
And I'm going to give a shout out to Hot Chick Janiece, who sometimes comments here, to write her own post on healthcare giving us the knowledge she accumulated doing the report for her class (at least I think it was on healthcare).
Here's a New Yorker article on "The Cost Conundrum" (groked from Jay Lake's link salad). The money shot?
"Providing health care is like building a house... Imagine that, instead of paying a contractor to pull a team together and keep them on track, you paid an electrician for every outlet he recommends, a plumber for every faucet, and a carpenter for every cabinet. Would you be surprised if you got a house with a thousand outlets, faucets, and cabinets, at three times the cost you expected... Getting the country’s best electrician on the job... isn’t going to solve this problem. Nor will changing the person who writes him the check."
As you read the article, pay close attention to the "for profit" and "not-for-profit" tags. Also, near the end there's a conversation with Dr. Dyke about changing the payor of health care that you should read. It may seem that what he's advocating is an HMO, but it really isn't. What he's advocating is a business practice and professional organization. That's a fancy way of saying "Professional Union," but that last word gives many people too high a squick response to work well. In Ohio, as we limited healthcare malpractice awards in an attempt to lower the increases in malpractice insurance (because "allz our doctors is gonna leave us", which didn't work because that wasn't really the cause of high insurance rates, and the doctors haven't increased their retirement rates), we also discussed opening up a database that patients could search to see if their doctors had malpractice claims or professional black marks on their records. That part of the bill died pretty quick.
For our village, as well as many of the local businesses, we've been discussing healthcare programs. The most prominent idea that's being pushed is the healthcare savings program. This is where you set up a savings plan, have automatic payroll deductions to match up to a specific plan deductible (a very high deductible, normally on the order of $5000 and above). The individual is then responsible to spend the money out of the savings plan wisely. The actual insurance part of the plan is essentially a catastrophic plan (something that used to be the norm before we did the surveys that preventative care was more cost effective).
I can't tell you how much I hate these plans. Not so much for the patient (except that it's a way to shift more costs onto the individual from the company benefit side), but for what it will need do to the rest of the industry. I'll say this here, if you want the consumer to make decisions based on cost for health care, the providers will need to provide price sheets for common procedures and provide estimates for the rest. The system based on consumer choice cannot work any other way. And yes, I'm talking about a McDonalds' menu board style price list out front, before I see the doctor and start incurring costs.
Right now all the arguments I keep hearing are about how to control costs and who pays for what and to whom. As the article explains, no matter what we do on that side of the argument will have any real impact. What will have an impact is taking the profit incentive out of healthcare. I'll probably write a whole other post on why that's going to face a tough battle, but it's been done. Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland all have private health insurance, private doctor systems, and controllable costs systems (that all sides feel are too tough), and they've done it by removing profit from the game plan. Insurance companies are by law non-profts. They must insure any applicant, doctors must accept the insurance, and everybody (as much as possible) needs to be insured. These countries also have structures that remove much of the profit incentive (or outside plausible reasoning for high costs, like providing free medical schooling). Our system costs more per patient, and provides less care (by outcomes such as infection rates, hospital stay lengths, mortality and morbidity rates).
When I was in the ER on Monday, they started to wheel me out to do a CT scan. At the time, the logic part of my brain was saying, "Wait, shouldn't we test the urine first to see if there's blood before we use the machine that goes 'Bing!'?" But at that moment I wasn't in a position to argue, and I doubt that my wife wasn't going to stop treatment for something that she knew was exceedingly painful to me. Now, in the end, they would probably have done the scan anyway to see how large the stone was, and if there were any others waiting in the wings (4mm, and no, it was a single). But if I had a health savings plan, I might have argued. Because I'm a cheap bastard. I might have also said, "I'll only take the second shot of morphine if you discount it, because I shouldn't need a second dose only 25 minutes after the first one" (they believe the stone moved to a more painful spot, which made me glad for the first dose because it got just as painful again).
The time to worry about costs is not when you're in the middle of treatment. Unless you think blackmail is an acceptable business model. As a consumer, I'm buying the insurance. Part of that payment, part of the insurer's job, is to control costs. Or, as I've told my fire chief when we moved from all volunteer force to a token hourly payment for our firefighters, "I don't want to get to the point that you're telling fire fighters who've responded not to get on the truck because we're worried about costs."
And I'm going to give a shout out to Hot Chick Janiece, who sometimes comments here, to write her own post on healthcare giving us the knowledge she accumulated doing the report for her class (at least I think it was on healthcare).
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Random Saturday
Well, first up, I'm slow getting up to date with my friends blogs, but, uh, all around hoopy frood Mer Haskell can has agent! You go Mer.
The news organizations continue to plumb the depths of stupidity. The latest fun-ness is an intense focus on employment numbers and how that shows the economy is still crappy. Well, it is. But employment is a trailing-indicator. As the economy goes bad, companies hang on to employees hoping either they won't be affected, or that they can make it through the rough patch. Hiring people is damn expensive, as is training them. It's better to loose a little money to keep good employees in place (because you'll probably lose more through lay-offs and rehires). Then, as the economy gets better, it's cheaper to work your existing employees harder than hire in more employees. Because the uptick may also be a temporary phenomenon. So jobs lag behind the actual economy. I don't say this because I like it, hell I'm about to be hurt by it (and I have friends who are being hurt by it, some very badly).
So, for all those "economic experts" certain news organizations like to have on who point to the jobs market and talk about how we're not around the corner and even though all the major numbers they track say the economy has found the bottom (the housing market, not so much, but it's close) and are all doom and gloom because their road-killed ideology is being kicked to the side of the road, you're full of crap. We're before, are now. Now to be clear, even though I think we've found the bottom, the rebound isn't going to be fast.
And thinking of the economy and jobs, the good people over at Energy Tomorrow, that think tank of marketing manipulation (whose message pretty much is "Oh dear God, please don't regulate or tax us or well take you all with us") has a new commercial out about how they're going to put our economy back on track and create all these jobs because they're gonna drill and make us independent. Um, yeah. Money talks, suckers walk, dudes. Have you restarted the fabrication plants to create these off shore oil derricks (that we only need one to exploit what we used to need ten to exploit)? Have you hired these legions of people to start drilling on all those lands you hold leases to? Have you increased domestic production by anything more than 2% in the past decade (and here I'm talking about total output, not new production to replace tapped out fields)? Do you have the capacity to put those people top work now? Yeah, didn't think so.
It appears we're going to go back to a rash of shootings and other bad personal behavior. I've been dreading this. It's a well known canard that crime goes up during recessions (domestic crime does go up, as does white collar crime, but violent crime actually goes down a little as does robberies, however it's mostly amateurs that do the robberies, which leads to higher conviction rates). But spectacular crime goes up. As the amateurs pattern their crimes after TV and movies and try and grab a lot of attention, professionals keep to the shadows and don't go for flash. There's also been a growing trend of wack-a-loon feeding (like feeding the trolls) from those main stream news organizations and talk shows that like to think they aren't main stream press. I expect (although dread) there will be some school shootings. There will be more police shootings because a pattern is being set. The freeze dried wack-a-loons of the world are nothing if they aren't intense media consumers and they're always looking for templates to play out their own twisted fears. It's something that keeps me up at night.
The news organizations continue to plumb the depths of stupidity. The latest fun-ness is an intense focus on employment numbers and how that shows the economy is still crappy. Well, it is. But employment is a trailing-indicator. As the economy goes bad, companies hang on to employees hoping either they won't be affected, or that they can make it through the rough patch. Hiring people is damn expensive, as is training them. It's better to loose a little money to keep good employees in place (because you'll probably lose more through lay-offs and rehires). Then, as the economy gets better, it's cheaper to work your existing employees harder than hire in more employees. Because the uptick may also be a temporary phenomenon. So jobs lag behind the actual economy. I don't say this because I like it, hell I'm about to be hurt by it (and I have friends who are being hurt by it, some very badly).
So, for all those "economic experts" certain news organizations like to have on who point to the jobs market and talk about how we're not around the corner and even though all the major numbers they track say the economy has found the bottom (the housing market, not so much, but it's close) and are all doom and gloom because their road-killed ideology is being kicked to the side of the road, you're full of crap. We're before, are now. Now to be clear, even though I think we've found the bottom, the rebound isn't going to be fast.
And thinking of the economy and jobs, the good people over at Energy Tomorrow, that think tank of marketing manipulation (whose message pretty much is "Oh dear God, please don't regulate or tax us or well take you all with us") has a new commercial out about how they're going to put our economy back on track and create all these jobs because they're gonna drill and make us independent. Um, yeah. Money talks, suckers walk, dudes. Have you restarted the fabrication plants to create these off shore oil derricks (that we only need one to exploit what we used to need ten to exploit)? Have you hired these legions of people to start drilling on all those lands you hold leases to? Have you increased domestic production by anything more than 2% in the past decade (and here I'm talking about total output, not new production to replace tapped out fields)? Do you have the capacity to put those people top work now? Yeah, didn't think so.
It appears we're going to go back to a rash of shootings and other bad personal behavior. I've been dreading this. It's a well known canard that crime goes up during recessions (domestic crime does go up, as does white collar crime, but violent crime actually goes down a little as does robberies, however it's mostly amateurs that do the robberies, which leads to higher conviction rates). But spectacular crime goes up. As the amateurs pattern their crimes after TV and movies and try and grab a lot of attention, professionals keep to the shadows and don't go for flash. There's also been a growing trend of wack-a-loon feeding (like feeding the trolls) from those main stream news organizations and talk shows that like to think they aren't main stream press. I expect (although dread) there will be some school shootings. There will be more police shootings because a pattern is being set. The freeze dried wack-a-loons of the world are nothing if they aren't intense media consumers and they're always looking for templates to play out their own twisted fears. It's something that keeps me up at night.
Monday, March 23, 2009
That clacking noise is the car going up the roller-coaster hill
On the way home tonight I debated this post. A lot. Still not sure about it. Finally I decided that I had promised to be as open as possible (I hope you all understand that I don't share everything) and this is something that will be major. And about those things I was going to be open about I was also going to be truthful. So there.
The day thing is still experiencing issues. edited decided I should be circumspect, somewhat end A future event that might happen will be dependent on seniority and I'm low man on the totem-pole in the way of seniority. We have a union meeting this weekend to discuss (I'm all perclumped, discuss amongst yourselves) options and various situations.
Right now I'm still in a little bit of denial. I'm also in the "gritty determination" stage.
If it does happen it'll break a streak I had. Each time this has happened before there had been a Bush in the White House and we were at war with Iraq. Granted we're still at war in a Iraq and experiencing the economy a Bush left us.
Of course it has sucked the wind out of the word-count sails. Tonight's bandwidth will be used on searches.
The day thing is still experiencing issues. edited decided I should be circumspect, somewhat end A future event that might happen will be dependent on seniority and I'm low man on the totem-pole in the way of seniority. We have a union meeting this weekend to discuss (I'm all perclumped, discuss amongst yourselves) options and various situations.
Right now I'm still in a little bit of denial. I'm also in the "gritty determination" stage.
If it does happen it'll break a streak I had. Each time this has happened before there had been a Bush in the White House and we were at war with Iraq. Granted we're still at war in a Iraq and experiencing the economy a Bush left us.
Of course it has sucked the wind out of the word-count sails. Tonight's bandwidth will be used on searches.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Just one of those things
Today I had a nearly catastrophic run in at work as I went to get tea. I mean a real run in. As in almost knocked me down the stairs. So, of course you know I'm a math freak, and I started making calculations while I poured on the hot water. And here's what I came up with, and yeah, it stopped me for a minute.
I should also mention that my Social Security statement came yesterday.
If I had an accident right then and was permanently disabled, I would receive more from Social Security in a month than I'm getting now in take-home pay with our 20% pay cut (four day weeks, remember).
So, you know, there was a moment there when I kinda thought it might have been good to have been knocked down the stairs.
Yes, I know, that's gross pay and I'm comparing it to take-home, and 20% less take-home than I normally would get (with a forty-hour week). With my luck I wouldn't be permanently disabled, but would just shatter some other bone. Going through that with my fibula wasn't any fun (but then I also went back to work in two weeks when most people, and my doctor advised me to, stay home for months with that injury, as it was I used up my sick time and more than half my vacation - I had sucky benefits then). It was just a momentary thought.
I should also mention that my Social Security statement came yesterday.
If I had an accident right then and was permanently disabled, I would receive more from Social Security in a month than I'm getting now in take-home pay with our 20% pay cut (four day weeks, remember).
So, you know, there was a moment there when I kinda thought it might have been good to have been knocked down the stairs.
Yes, I know, that's gross pay and I'm comparing it to take-home, and 20% less take-home than I normally would get (with a forty-hour week). With my luck I wouldn't be permanently disabled, but would just shatter some other bone. Going through that with my fibula wasn't any fun (but then I also went back to work in two weeks when most people, and my doctor advised me to, stay home for months with that injury, as it was I used up my sick time and more than half my vacation - I had sucky benefits then). It was just a momentary thought.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Reality Bites
Okay, on some of the rewrite, reality decided to mess me up. Seems that modern kevlar vests will stop a sharp-blade puncture. So there goes an easy resolution to a situation. Of course, they guy also is recently missing his leg from the knee down, so he's not going to be doing much, having missed his shot by not taking the safety off. However the other gunboy across the room is the problem. Reality, it spoils so many plot points.
Then there's the stimulus and it's reduced money to the States. My own state is looking at even heavier cuts because the legislature reduced the money to the states. Weee.
And then there's the weather. While Orwell is high ground, we have a few major streams around us. And all of them are in major flood right now. Depending on what comes down tonight, some roads maybe flooded out tomorrow morning. And with our yard we could probably go outside and scoop up some perfectly hydrated clay. The best thing for throwing pots. Or, in other words, the ground is saturated so everything is going to sit on top.
Finally we have the latest "Domestic Gas and Oil Exploration Is Good for Jobs" commercial. You know, the latest in the campaign produced by the only avowed conservative ad agency (yes, there is one, and their whole thing of outing themselves were to go after clients like this) that has the woman in the pants suit telling us how we better let the oil and gas companies own all thes leases and drill everywhere around the country. Those ads that have questionable stats (of sure, drill under everybody's house and you may get to those figures, but I doubt you're going to be able to) and the implied threat of "give us what we want, or we'll trash everything." Yeah, those. So, the new one talks about how drilling in the US (well, giving the gas and oil companies the leases to the land that they might drill on at a later date) is all about the jobs. Really? Okay, Mrs. Gas and Oil Company, just how many drilling rigs and derricks did you manufacture last year to help exploit all those leases you already hold but haven't started even exploring? How many deep-sea drilling-platforms did you bring back from the African Coast? Yeah, thought so. With all due respect, reality bites.
Then there's the stimulus and it's reduced money to the States. My own state is looking at even heavier cuts because the legislature reduced the money to the states. Weee.
And then there's the weather. While Orwell is high ground, we have a few major streams around us. And all of them are in major flood right now. Depending on what comes down tonight, some roads maybe flooded out tomorrow morning. And with our yard we could probably go outside and scoop up some perfectly hydrated clay. The best thing for throwing pots. Or, in other words, the ground is saturated so everything is going to sit on top.
Finally we have the latest "Domestic Gas and Oil Exploration Is Good for Jobs" commercial. You know, the latest in the campaign produced by the only avowed conservative ad agency (yes, there is one, and their whole thing of outing themselves were to go after clients like this) that has the woman in the pants suit telling us how we better let the oil and gas companies own all thes leases and drill everywhere around the country. Those ads that have questionable stats (of sure, drill under everybody's house and you may get to those figures, but I doubt you're going to be able to) and the implied threat of "give us what we want, or we'll trash everything." Yeah, those. So, the new one talks about how drilling in the US (well, giving the gas and oil companies the leases to the land that they might drill on at a later date) is all about the jobs. Really? Okay, Mrs. Gas and Oil Company, just how many drilling rigs and derricks did you manufacture last year to help exploit all those leases you already hold but haven't started even exploring? How many deep-sea drilling-platforms did you bring back from the African Coast? Yeah, thought so. With all due respect, reality bites.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Funky Fresh Economic Crap
And things just keep getting better. Oh, I'm so glad the conservatives don't think they need to do anything to help out, and that putting people to work is the wrong policy, because their in action and giving money to their banking buddies is working so damn well so far. Yes, I am a little ticked.
We've gone to four day weeks across the board. That is only 32 hours, not four-days of ten-hours. Just four eight-hour days. And I was told 5 minutes before I left that tomorrow would be my day this week. And then I had to log back in to work and extra twenty-minutes of overtime because of an emergency rush request.
So, not only are we down $8 a week from health care increases (erasing all previous raises), now we'll be down and extra full days worth of pay. And the kicker, I was just trained on how to help out with a project that is way behind. And then there was the overtime.
Unfortunately, the major indicator on the health of the company is if the big presses turn. And they aren't, even though other things are running behind.
We've gone to four day weeks across the board. That is only 32 hours, not four-days of ten-hours. Just four eight-hour days. And I was told 5 minutes before I left that tomorrow would be my day this week. And then I had to log back in to work and extra twenty-minutes of overtime because of an emergency rush request.
So, not only are we down $8 a week from health care increases (erasing all previous raises), now we'll be down and extra full days worth of pay. And the kicker, I was just trained on how to help out with a project that is way behind. And then there was the overtime.
Unfortunately, the major indicator on the health of the company is if the big presses turn. And they aren't, even though other things are running behind.
Monday, February 9, 2009
The other thing was death, so we didn't do that
Finished up taxes this past weekend. Wow, last year sucked. without getting into specifics we saw a total 16% drop in overall pay, even with the doubling of my pay for being a councilman (granted, twice of very little is still little). And this year isn't off to as good a start as last year.
One of the things that I think is just hysterical is that for all the blustering and bloviating from the US Senate on how they needed to cut the stimulus package, and they did cut many things, things I personally think are very important and could create many jobs, like the "greening" of federal buildings, but for all that the Senate version is going to come in a hundred billion dollars larger than the House's version.
As to all those who feel that the government can't do anything, let me just remind you that the government (and here lets just say the Federal Government) is the largest single buyer in the country. Back when I started in design it was difficult to find paper with post-consumer waste in them. At any percentage. Instead we were talking about kerf paper and other non-tree-pulp based paper. Until it became law that the federal government was going to purchase most of their paper with at least 10% post-consumer waste (IIRC it's now 25% pcw). Practically overnight the market changed (well, within a year). All of a sudden we had plenty of stocks available with recycled content (post and pre-consumer). While you can buy paper that's 100% virgin, but all of those are special order items. And even those are now rated as regular and FSC papers (pimping my own day-job, we are an FSC printer). And there are more and more papers lining up to go FSC (it involves sourcing and a lot of paperwork/tracking).
So, yeah, having the government making their buildings "greener" does three things. One, it forms the base of the new "Green Technology Industry" with proving a very big client. Lots of private investor money would flow into companies that could supply those technologies. Then there are the building trades for actually implementing this new technology. Lots of builders get involved and trained on how these things work and that translates into other projects that are non-government related. Which then also increases the market for those green technologies. Finally, all that economic activity reduces the price of these technologies which then leads to consumers requesting them and DIY people being able to afford them as being off the shelf technologies. And in the end, we'll need fewer tax dollars to run our government because we'll be reaping the benefit of conservation.
Please tell me where in that chain of events there is anything wrong? And yet the Senate Republicans cut funding for that project in half. I want to go up to them, and in the words of Bill Engvall say, "Here's your sign."
One of the things that I think is just hysterical is that for all the blustering and bloviating from the US Senate on how they needed to cut the stimulus package, and they did cut many things, things I personally think are very important and could create many jobs, like the "greening" of federal buildings, but for all that the Senate version is going to come in a hundred billion dollars larger than the House's version.
As to all those who feel that the government can't do anything, let me just remind you that the government (and here lets just say the Federal Government) is the largest single buyer in the country. Back when I started in design it was difficult to find paper with post-consumer waste in them. At any percentage. Instead we were talking about kerf paper and other non-tree-pulp based paper. Until it became law that the federal government was going to purchase most of their paper with at least 10% post-consumer waste (IIRC it's now 25% pcw). Practically overnight the market changed (well, within a year). All of a sudden we had plenty of stocks available with recycled content (post and pre-consumer). While you can buy paper that's 100% virgin, but all of those are special order items. And even those are now rated as regular and FSC papers (pimping my own day-job, we are an FSC printer). And there are more and more papers lining up to go FSC (it involves sourcing and a lot of paperwork/tracking).
So, yeah, having the government making their buildings "greener" does three things. One, it forms the base of the new "Green Technology Industry" with proving a very big client. Lots of private investor money would flow into companies that could supply those technologies. Then there are the building trades for actually implementing this new technology. Lots of builders get involved and trained on how these things work and that translates into other projects that are non-government related. Which then also increases the market for those green technologies. Finally, all that economic activity reduces the price of these technologies which then leads to consumers requesting them and DIY people being able to afford them as being off the shelf technologies. And in the end, we'll need fewer tax dollars to run our government because we'll be reaping the benefit of conservation.
Please tell me where in that chain of events there is anything wrong? And yet the Senate Republicans cut funding for that project in half. I want to go up to them, and in the words of Bill Engvall say, "Here's your sign."
Friday, February 6, 2009
What a silly old (r)ant
Next time you're found standing in the unemployment line
There's a lot to be learned, like the thinness of a dime
Just what makes that young President
Think he'll move the conservative Senate-ant
Anyone knows a President, cant
Move an ideological ant
But he's got high hopes, he's got high hopes
He's got high IQ pie, in the sky hopes
So any time your savings are low
Instead of just letting go
Just remember the President can't
Whoops there goes another half-million
Whoops there goes another half-million
Whoops there goes another half-million jobs.
When troubles call and your 401K is against the wall
That's when you'll learn that Wall Street could fall
Once there was a silly old man
Tried to punch a hole in the economic plan
No one could make that man scram
He kept rebutting that plan
Cause he had ideology, he had ideology
He had born-again fiscal conservative philosophy
So any time your feeling bad
Instead of getting mad
Just remember that man
Oops there goes Mitch McCon-onell off
Oops there goes Mitch McCon-onell off
Oops there goes Mitch McConnell off his rocker again
All problems are just a toy balloon
The economy will be bursted soon
The conservative ideological flop
Oops there goes another 500,000 jobs,
Oops there goes another chance to turn around,
Oops there goes the economic plan, kerplop!
There's a lot to be learned, like the thinness of a dime
Just what makes that young President
Think he'll move the conservative Senate-ant
Anyone knows a President, cant
Move an ideological ant
But he's got high hopes, he's got high hopes
He's got high IQ pie, in the sky hopes
So any time your savings are low
Instead of just letting go
Just remember the President can't
Whoops there goes another half-million
Whoops there goes another half-million
Whoops there goes another half-million jobs.
When troubles call and your 401K is against the wall
That's when you'll learn that Wall Street could fall
Once there was a silly old man
Tried to punch a hole in the economic plan
No one could make that man scram
He kept rebutting that plan
Cause he had ideology, he had ideology
He had born-again fiscal conservative philosophy
So any time your feeling bad
Instead of getting mad
Just remember that man
Oops there goes Mitch McCon-onell off
Oops there goes Mitch McCon-onell off
Oops there goes Mitch McConnell off his rocker again
All problems are just a toy balloon
The economy will be bursted soon
The conservative ideological flop
Oops there goes another 500,000 jobs,
Oops there goes another chance to turn around,
Oops there goes the economic plan, kerplop!
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Submission Thursday
Well, finally got off my duff and finished some rewrites. My flash piece, Prince Wanted, is the first out of the gates. It's off to a little known place called Abyss & Apex. But I hear they're good. :)
Good luck little story.
I was informed a half-hour before clocking out that tomorrow would be my day off. We're on a 5/4 day (40/32 hour) per week schedule now. Thank you wonderful economy. So I'm not really geared up to do anything, but I'll try edits and writing to fill up the day. I also need to do some cleaning. There's some critiquing that I may need to get on top of. And then there's the sleep. Gotta catch up with the sleeping, which I haven't been able to do for a few weeks.
Good luck little story.
I was informed a half-hour before clocking out that tomorrow would be my day off. We're on a 5/4 day (40/32 hour) per week schedule now. Thank you wonderful economy. So I'm not really geared up to do anything, but I'll try edits and writing to fill up the day. I also need to do some cleaning. There's some critiquing that I may need to get on top of. And then there's the sleep. Gotta catch up with the sleeping, which I haven't been able to do for a few weeks.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
It's the End of the World for a New Year
(Cross posted on Genre Bender)
If you've been paying attention to the publishing world lately, you know that they've been predicting Armageddon for all of the past November-December. As the economy hits the skids, publishers haven't been immune from the bird-flue epidemic of layoffs and cutbacks. Since Harper-Collins' executive announcement about not purchasing new manuscripts leaked out, it's all been doom and gloom.
Well, genre sales have gone up this past Xmas buying season. You wouldn't know that except for actually looking at bookscan data (no, I don't have access, but those who do tell me it's true).
But things aren't all rosy. Since the 70s, genre publishing has been on a downhill slope. This was made manifest to me by going to a panel honoring Betty Ballantine at the 2007 World Fantasy Convention. Part of that panel interviewing and honoring her covered how the industry has changed since she helped start Ballantine Books. Of the major changes, print numbers and sell-through (how many actually sell) have been the most drastic (besides the switch from paperback to hard-cover and the rise of the trade paperback). In the 70s is wasn't uncommon to print 30,000 books for a new author and sell 90% of those. These are numbers a best-selling author would envy today. 30M (30,000 in print speak) books is the same as the combined total of the first, second, and third printings of a new author. And 70% sell through is considered good.
Here are two blog posts that shed light on not only the current state of genre publishing but also the history of how we got here (thanks, BTW, to Jay Lake's link salad).
First up is Charlie Stross' Why SF & F novels are the length they are.
Here's another from Scrivener's Error on the Publishing Squeeze.
Hope that helps with perspectives. As for me, I'm going to spend my Xmas Borders' gift cards as quick as possible and hunker down on the new work for the new year. Here's hoping with have happier news to talk about at the end of 2009.
If you've been paying attention to the publishing world lately, you know that they've been predicting Armageddon for all of the past November-December. As the economy hits the skids, publishers haven't been immune from the bird-flue epidemic of layoffs and cutbacks. Since Harper-Collins' executive announcement about not purchasing new manuscripts leaked out, it's all been doom and gloom.
Well, genre sales have gone up this past Xmas buying season. You wouldn't know that except for actually looking at bookscan data (no, I don't have access, but those who do tell me it's true).
But things aren't all rosy. Since the 70s, genre publishing has been on a downhill slope. This was made manifest to me by going to a panel honoring Betty Ballantine at the 2007 World Fantasy Convention. Part of that panel interviewing and honoring her covered how the industry has changed since she helped start Ballantine Books. Of the major changes, print numbers and sell-through (how many actually sell) have been the most drastic (besides the switch from paperback to hard-cover and the rise of the trade paperback). In the 70s is wasn't uncommon to print 30,000 books for a new author and sell 90% of those. These are numbers a best-selling author would envy today. 30M (30,000 in print speak) books is the same as the combined total of the first, second, and third printings of a new author. And 70% sell through is considered good.
Here are two blog posts that shed light on not only the current state of genre publishing but also the history of how we got here (thanks, BTW, to Jay Lake's link salad).
First up is Charlie Stross' Why SF & F novels are the length they are.
Here's another from Scrivener's Error on the Publishing Squeeze.
Hope that helps with perspectives. As for me, I'm going to spend my Xmas Borders' gift cards as quick as possible and hunker down on the new work for the new year. Here's hoping with have happier news to talk about at the end of 2009.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
If we all pull together as a team
Yesterday the official word came out, we're in recession. The National Bureau of Economic Research came out yesterday and officially proclaimed we've been in a recession since last December. The NBER is the official body that declares these kinds of things. It's kind of like the Seal of Good Housekeeping, only not so much.
Well, now that it's all official and everything, I mostly have just this to say, "D'uh, dudes." Yeah, those of us in the real economy, or working in real government, we already knew this.
So, there's going to be a slew of numbers being thrown at us in the coming days in an effort to soothe your fears and concerns. Two of those are going to be cost of living and rate of inflation. You need to listen carefully to these numbers because for the past eight years the numbers reported have a caveat. They've been "core number" which "exclude the volatile energy and food prices." You know, those things that those of us in the middle and lower ends of the economy spend most of our money on. With the recent drop in fuel prices I'll bet the numbers that you hear won't be the "core numbers" but instead the numbers that include those volatile energy and food (maybe they'll just exclude food this time) prices." This is what's known as "lying through statistic." Just thought I'd give you a preview.
I wonder how the current administration will blame this on the Clintons. Oh yes, see, Nancy Pelosi and her liberal cabal have been in charge of Congress. Thankfully the true patriot conservatives have kept them from getting any business done or else this would have been worse. Yeah, I'm sure that will be the line. Bonus points if you can spot the contradiction in that reasoning.
Well, now that it's all official and everything, I mostly have just this to say, "D'uh, dudes." Yeah, those of us in the real economy, or working in real government, we already knew this.
So, there's going to be a slew of numbers being thrown at us in the coming days in an effort to soothe your fears and concerns. Two of those are going to be cost of living and rate of inflation. You need to listen carefully to these numbers because for the past eight years the numbers reported have a caveat. They've been "core number" which "exclude the volatile energy and food prices." You know, those things that those of us in the middle and lower ends of the economy spend most of our money on. With the recent drop in fuel prices I'll bet the numbers that you hear won't be the "core numbers" but instead the numbers that include those volatile energy and food (maybe they'll just exclude food this time) prices." This is what's known as "lying through statistic." Just thought I'd give you a preview.
I wonder how the current administration will blame this on the Clintons. Oh yes, see, Nancy Pelosi and her liberal cabal have been in charge of Congress. Thankfully the true patriot conservatives have kept them from getting any business done or else this would have been worse. Yeah, I'm sure that will be the line. Bonus points if you can spot the contradiction in that reasoning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)