Friday, January 29, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
How is the SOTU Polling
Voter Views on State-of-the-Union Points
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
During his State of the Union address tonight, President Obama touched on a number of topics that Rasmussen Reports has current polling data on measuring the attitudes of the American people.
In his speech, for example, the president called for taxing banks to repay bailouts. Most Americans like the general idea of a tax on large banks to help repay the bailout money. Voters think that only banks that received the bailout should pay the tax though, and 72% believe that other financial institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should also pay the tax.
The president presented the $787-billion economic stimulus package as a success story. However, just 35% of voters believe the stimulus plan has helped the economy, while 31% believe it hurt. At this time, 39% are concerned the government will do too little to deal with the economy while 49% fear it will do too much.
Obama said the unpopular bailouts saved the economy. He’s right that they’re unpopular. By a two-to-one margin, voters still believe they were a bad idea. Voters are evenly divided as to whether they helped or hurt the economy in the short-term. However, voters overwhelmingly believe the bailouts are bad for the long-term health of the economy.
The president spoke about small business issues at a time when just 29% of small business owners say conditions for their businesses are getting better. That’s up seven points from a month ago, but 43% still say conditions for their business are getting worse.
On the housing front, just 55% now say buying a home is the best investment a family can make. That’s down from 79% in 2008. The public was way ahead of Treasury officials on dealing with the reality of the mortgage crisis
The president asked Congress to counter the recent Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance. However, public reaction is mixed: 26% agree with the decision, 34% oppose it, and 41% are not sure. Sixty-five percent (65%) also say corporations and unions should be allowed to buy ads to let people know how politicians voted on issues.
Voters still say deficit reduction is the most important priority laid out by the president last February. They also believe it is the presidential priority least likely to be achieved.
The president referenced the Congressional Budget Office analysis that suggested his health care plan would reduce the deficit. However, most Americans don’t believe the numbers. Voters overwhelmingly think the plan's costs will be higher than projected, and 81% say passage of the plan will likely lead to higher middle class taxes. Sixty-eight percent (68%) say it will increase the deficit
Most voters continue to oppose the proposed health care plan.
Sixty-one percent (61%) now want Congress to drop health care and focus on jobs.
On Afghanistan, the president reaffirmed the strategy he outlined a couple of months ago. Most voters agree with his plan to send more troops in, and a slightly smaller number support his plan to begin withdrawal in 2011. However, few agree with both aspects of the plan.
On Haiti, 74% of voters say the government response has been good or excellent.
Obama said he has cut taxes for 95% of Americans, but nearly half the nation’s voters expect their taxes will go up during the Obama years. Hardly anybody expects their taxes to be cut.
Americans strongly believe that cutting taxes is the best way to create jobs. However, few expect the nation’s elected politicians to follow that route.
The president said he has never been more hopeful about the nation’s future. However, a solid plurality of voters believe that the nation’s best days have come and gone.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
During his State of the Union address tonight, President Obama touched on a number of topics that Rasmussen Reports has current polling data on measuring the attitudes of the American people.
In his speech, for example, the president called for taxing banks to repay bailouts. Most Americans like the general idea of a tax on large banks to help repay the bailout money. Voters think that only banks that received the bailout should pay the tax though, and 72% believe that other financial institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should also pay the tax.
The president presented the $787-billion economic stimulus package as a success story. However, just 35% of voters believe the stimulus plan has helped the economy, while 31% believe it hurt. At this time, 39% are concerned the government will do too little to deal with the economy while 49% fear it will do too much.
Obama said the unpopular bailouts saved the economy. He’s right that they’re unpopular. By a two-to-one margin, voters still believe they were a bad idea. Voters are evenly divided as to whether they helped or hurt the economy in the short-term. However, voters overwhelmingly believe the bailouts are bad for the long-term health of the economy.
The president spoke about small business issues at a time when just 29% of small business owners say conditions for their businesses are getting better. That’s up seven points from a month ago, but 43% still say conditions for their business are getting worse.
On the housing front, just 55% now say buying a home is the best investment a family can make. That’s down from 79% in 2008. The public was way ahead of Treasury officials on dealing with the reality of the mortgage crisis
The president asked Congress to counter the recent Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance. However, public reaction is mixed: 26% agree with the decision, 34% oppose it, and 41% are not sure. Sixty-five percent (65%) also say corporations and unions should be allowed to buy ads to let people know how politicians voted on issues.
Voters still say deficit reduction is the most important priority laid out by the president last February. They also believe it is the presidential priority least likely to be achieved.
The president referenced the Congressional Budget Office analysis that suggested his health care plan would reduce the deficit. However, most Americans don’t believe the numbers. Voters overwhelmingly think the plan's costs will be higher than projected, and 81% say passage of the plan will likely lead to higher middle class taxes. Sixty-eight percent (68%) say it will increase the deficit
Most voters continue to oppose the proposed health care plan.
Sixty-one percent (61%) now want Congress to drop health care and focus on jobs.
On Afghanistan, the president reaffirmed the strategy he outlined a couple of months ago. Most voters agree with his plan to send more troops in, and a slightly smaller number support his plan to begin withdrawal in 2011. However, few agree with both aspects of the plan.
On Haiti, 74% of voters say the government response has been good or excellent.
Obama said he has cut taxes for 95% of Americans, but nearly half the nation’s voters expect their taxes will go up during the Obama years. Hardly anybody expects their taxes to be cut.
Americans strongly believe that cutting taxes is the best way to create jobs. However, few expect the nation’s elected politicians to follow that route.
The president said he has never been more hopeful about the nation’s future. However, a solid plurality of voters believe that the nation’s best days have come and gone.
Wow, Did You Know?
I found this to be amazing. Life comes at you fast. I never realized how fast.
Labels: Education, Electronics, Technology
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Do You Believe Him?
It seems our president continually says one thing and does another. The State of the Union seems to be full of much more of the same. Looks like the facts are starting to cloud over already.
Fact Check: How State of Union Compares With Reality
WASHINGTON -- President Obama, who once considered government spending freezes a hatchet job, told Americans on Wednesday it's now part of his solution to the exploding deficit. He didn't explain what had changed.
His State of the Union speech skipped over a variety of complex realities in laying out a "common-sense" call to action.
A look at some of his claims and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: "Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't."
THE FACTS: The anticipated savings from this proposal would amount to less than one percent of the deficit -- and that's if the president can persuade Congress to go along.
Obama is a convert to the cause of broad spending freezes. In the presidential campaign, he criticized Republican opponent John McCain for suggesting one. "The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel," he said a month before the election. Now, Obama wants domestic spending held steady in most areas where the government can control year to year costs. The proposal is similar to McCain's.
------
OBAMA: "I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."
THE FACTS: Any commission that Obama creates would be a weak substitute for what he really wanted -- a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. That idea crashed in the Senate this week, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. Any commission set up by Obama alone would lack authority to force its recommendations before Congress, and would stand almost no chance of success.
------
OBAMA: Discussing his health care initiative, he said: "Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan."
THE FACTS: The Democratic legislation now hanging in limbo on Capitol Hill aims to keep people with employer-sponsored coverage -- the majority of Americans under age 65 -- in the plans they already have. But Obama can't guarantee g point of contention for the president. In December, the administration reported that recipients of direct assistance from the government created or saved about 650,000 jobs. The number was based on self-reporting by recipients and some of the calculations were shown to be in error.
The Congressional Budget Office has been much more guarded than Obama in characterizing the success of the stimulus plan. In November, it reported that the stimulus increased the number of people employed by between 600,000 and 1.6 million "compared with what those values would have been otherwise." It said the ranges "reflect the uncertainty of such estimates." And it added: "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package."
------
OBAMA: He called for action by the White House and Congress "to do our work openly, and to give our people the government they deserve."
THE FACTS: Obama skipped past a broken promise from his campaign -- to have the negotiations for health care legislation broadcast on C-SPAN "so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies." Instead, Democrats in the White House and Congress have conducted the usual private negotiations, making multibillion-dollar deals with hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders behind closed doors. Nor has Obama lived up consistently to his pledge to ensure that legislation is posted online for five days before it's acted upon.
------
OBAMA: "We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year."
THE FACTS: Identifying savings is far from achieving them. If the past is any guide, little will result from this exercise because Congress routinely rejects the White House's suggested spending cuts.
------
OBAMA: "The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades."
THE FACTS: Despite insisting early last year that they would complete the negotiations in time to avoid expiration of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in early December, the U.S. and Russia failed to do so. And while officials say they think a deal on a new treaty is within reach, there has been no breakthrough. A new round of talks is set to start Monday. One important sticking point: disagreement over including missile defense issues in a new accord. If completed, the new deal may arguably be the farthest-reaching arms control treaty since the original 1991 agreement. An interim deal reached in 2002 did not include its own rules on verifying nuclear reductions.
------
OBAMA: Drawing on classified information, he claimed more success than his predecessor at killing terrorists: "And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008."
THE FACTS: It is an impossible claim to verify. Neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has published enemy body counts, particularly those targeted by armed drones in the Pakistan-Afghan border region. The pace of drone attacks has increased dramatically in the last 18 months, according to congressional officials briefed on the secret program.
Anyone notice the "No Lobbyists in my Administration" comment?
"American Business is the True Engine For Jobs" - Could it be any more obvious.
Yes it can -- "We need to export more goods." - Sentences like this in speeches that are supposed to make an impact on America and set our course before the rest of the world only serve to demonstrate how little our leaders really understand about business and financial matters. Is it any wonder why we are in a recession given this obvious lack of basic economics. Any hope that might have been offered has been dashed by a completely stupid comment.
In case you missed it Obama wants people to step up and show him a better plan for fixing healthcare. My wife right away suggested I send him most of my blog articles for the past couple of years. He isn't going to listen. He already KNOWS what we need and no amount of facts of information is going to change his point of view.
Once again our nation missed an opportunity to move forward. Obama is still using the same lines and the same list. America needs to move forward but our leaders are still in the past. The people have become more vocal and our leaders have closed the doors and attempted to shut us out. We are only beginning to be heard. Massachusetts sent a clear message to congress. More messages are soon following.
Fact Check: How State of Union Compares With Reality
WASHINGTON -- President Obama, who once considered government spending freezes a hatchet job, told Americans on Wednesday it's now part of his solution to the exploding deficit. He didn't explain what had changed.
His State of the Union speech skipped over a variety of complex realities in laying out a "common-sense" call to action.
A look at some of his claims and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: "Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't."
THE FACTS: The anticipated savings from this proposal would amount to less than one percent of the deficit -- and that's if the president can persuade Congress to go along.
Obama is a convert to the cause of broad spending freezes. In the presidential campaign, he criticized Republican opponent John McCain for suggesting one. "The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel," he said a month before the election. Now, Obama wants domestic spending held steady in most areas where the government can control year to year costs. The proposal is similar to McCain's.
------
OBAMA: "I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."
THE FACTS: Any commission that Obama creates would be a weak substitute for what he really wanted -- a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. That idea crashed in the Senate this week, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. Any commission set up by Obama alone would lack authority to force its recommendations before Congress, and would stand almost no chance of success.
------
OBAMA: Discussing his health care initiative, he said: "Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan."
THE FACTS: The Democratic legislation now hanging in limbo on Capitol Hill aims to keep people with employer-sponsored coverage -- the majority of Americans under age 65 -- in the plans they already have. But Obama can't guarantee g point of contention for the president. In December, the administration reported that recipients of direct assistance from the government created or saved about 650,000 jobs. The number was based on self-reporting by recipients and some of the calculations were shown to be in error.
The Congressional Budget Office has been much more guarded than Obama in characterizing the success of the stimulus plan. In November, it reported that the stimulus increased the number of people employed by between 600,000 and 1.6 million "compared with what those values would have been otherwise." It said the ranges "reflect the uncertainty of such estimates." And it added: "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package."
------
OBAMA: He called for action by the White House and Congress "to do our work openly, and to give our people the government they deserve."
THE FACTS: Obama skipped past a broken promise from his campaign -- to have the negotiations for health care legislation broadcast on C-SPAN "so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies." Instead, Democrats in the White House and Congress have conducted the usual private negotiations, making multibillion-dollar deals with hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders behind closed doors. Nor has Obama lived up consistently to his pledge to ensure that legislation is posted online for five days before it's acted upon.
------
OBAMA: "We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year."
THE FACTS: Identifying savings is far from achieving them. If the past is any guide, little will result from this exercise because Congress routinely rejects the White House's suggested spending cuts.
------
OBAMA: "The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades."
THE FACTS: Despite insisting early last year that they would complete the negotiations in time to avoid expiration of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in early December, the U.S. and Russia failed to do so. And while officials say they think a deal on a new treaty is within reach, there has been no breakthrough. A new round of talks is set to start Monday. One important sticking point: disagreement over including missile defense issues in a new accord. If completed, the new deal may arguably be the farthest-reaching arms control treaty since the original 1991 agreement. An interim deal reached in 2002 did not include its own rules on verifying nuclear reductions.
------
OBAMA: Drawing on classified information, he claimed more success than his predecessor at killing terrorists: "And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008."
THE FACTS: It is an impossible claim to verify. Neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has published enemy body counts, particularly those targeted by armed drones in the Pakistan-Afghan border region. The pace of drone attacks has increased dramatically in the last 18 months, according to congressional officials briefed on the secret program.
Anyone notice the "No Lobbyists in my Administration" comment?
"American Business is the True Engine For Jobs" - Could it be any more obvious.
Yes it can -- "We need to export more goods." - Sentences like this in speeches that are supposed to make an impact on America and set our course before the rest of the world only serve to demonstrate how little our leaders really understand about business and financial matters. Is it any wonder why we are in a recession given this obvious lack of basic economics. Any hope that might have been offered has been dashed by a completely stupid comment.
In case you missed it Obama wants people to step up and show him a better plan for fixing healthcare. My wife right away suggested I send him most of my blog articles for the past couple of years. He isn't going to listen. He already KNOWS what we need and no amount of facts of information is going to change his point of view.
Once again our nation missed an opportunity to move forward. Obama is still using the same lines and the same list. America needs to move forward but our leaders are still in the past. The people have become more vocal and our leaders have closed the doors and attempted to shut us out. We are only beginning to be heard. Massachusetts sent a clear message to congress. More messages are soon following.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Soon No One Will Accept Medicare
Medical clinics and hospitals are starting to refuse Medicare patients. The current "Public Option" is failing miserably and more failure is on the way.
Why Doctors Are Abandoning Medicare
By C.L. Gray - FOXNews.com
Physicians will not be bullied into bankruptcy. Our system needs reform, but what's being hammered out in Washington is not the answer.
Two weeks ago the Mayo Clinic shocked the nation when it closed the doors of one of its Arizona clinics to patients on Medicare. Just this past June President Obama himself praised Mayo as a model of medical efficiency noting that Mayo gives “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” If Mayo feels compelled to walk away from this government-run program, others will surely follow. The nation must understand why.
Doctors are leaving Medicare for two reasons: one obvious, the other more concealed.
The first is simple—the math:
1) For the past decade Medicare consistently paid physicians 20% less than traditional insurance companies for identical service.
2) On January 1, 2010 Washington made hidden cuts to Medicare by altering its billing codes.
3) Medicare will cut physician reimbursement by another 21% on March 1. The CBO said this cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
4) Even more, Congress pledged to cut Medicare by yet another $500 billion. Again, the CBO said this additional cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
Many physicians were operating at a loss even before this series of massive cuts. In 2008, Mayo Clinic posted an $840 million loss in caring for Medicare patients. No businesses can survive when patient care expenses exceed revenue.
The second is more ominous—Washington’s increasingly abusive posture toward physicians.
President Obama reflected this attitude last summer. On national television, he stated as fact a surgeon is paid between $30,000 and $50,000 for amputating a patient’s foot.
In reality, a surgeon is paid between $740 and $1,140 to perform this unfortunate, but often life-saving procedure. This reimbursement must cover a pre-operative evaluation the day of surgery, the surgery, and follow-up for 90 days after surgery—not to mention malpractice insurance, salaries for clinic nurses, and clinic overhead. It is frightening to think our president is so wildly misinformed even as he stands on the cusp of overhauling American health care. But it gets worse.
Read The Rest
Few would deny that Healthcare needs reform. The problem is our leaders don't have a clue as to what is needed. Worse yet, they refuse to listen to those who do.
Why Doctors Are Abandoning Medicare
By C.L. Gray - FOXNews.com
Physicians will not be bullied into bankruptcy. Our system needs reform, but what's being hammered out in Washington is not the answer.
Two weeks ago the Mayo Clinic shocked the nation when it closed the doors of one of its Arizona clinics to patients on Medicare. Just this past June President Obama himself praised Mayo as a model of medical efficiency noting that Mayo gives “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” If Mayo feels compelled to walk away from this government-run program, others will surely follow. The nation must understand why.
Doctors are leaving Medicare for two reasons: one obvious, the other more concealed.
The first is simple—the math:
1) For the past decade Medicare consistently paid physicians 20% less than traditional insurance companies for identical service.
2) On January 1, 2010 Washington made hidden cuts to Medicare by altering its billing codes.
3) Medicare will cut physician reimbursement by another 21% on March 1. The CBO said this cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
4) Even more, Congress pledged to cut Medicare by yet another $500 billion. Again, the CBO said this additional cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
Many physicians were operating at a loss even before this series of massive cuts. In 2008, Mayo Clinic posted an $840 million loss in caring for Medicare patients. No businesses can survive when patient care expenses exceed revenue.
The second is more ominous—Washington’s increasingly abusive posture toward physicians.
President Obama reflected this attitude last summer. On national television, he stated as fact a surgeon is paid between $30,000 and $50,000 for amputating a patient’s foot.
In reality, a surgeon is paid between $740 and $1,140 to perform this unfortunate, but often life-saving procedure. This reimbursement must cover a pre-operative evaluation the day of surgery, the surgery, and follow-up for 90 days after surgery—not to mention malpractice insurance, salaries for clinic nurses, and clinic overhead. It is frightening to think our president is so wildly misinformed even as he stands on the cusp of overhauling American health care. But it gets worse.
Read The Rest
Few would deny that Healthcare needs reform. The problem is our leaders don't have a clue as to what is needed. Worse yet, they refuse to listen to those who do.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Rush To The End
Have you ever noticed that everything comes due at either the end of the month or the first of the month. It is slow going the bulk of the month but when that last week comes the insanity commences. Everyone in any type of production industry, knows the pain I'm talking about all to well.
Most people accept it as the standard practice for their industry. They blame it on the customers and resign themselves to it as if it is set in stone. The truth is there is nothing to motivate the customers to do anything different. Why change?
There are some simple ways that you can reduce some of this chaos and still retain your business and your customers. Before I give away the secret, let's look at how what you are doing is hurting your business and costing you money and maybe even a few customers.
Have you noticed how much of your overtime comes at the end of the month. Everyone is working more hours to do the work they had plenty of time to do in the middle of the month. This increased activity usually breeds exhaustion and mistakes that cost additional time and money. The overtime is generally welcome every now and then but this is usually a six to ten day panic that puts everyone on edge. This increased stress is not only effecting you and your employees but I am willing to bet it is effecting current customers and potential customers. You answer the phone in a frantic rush, or short change conversation that is an investment in your customers and your future business. Some may "know" not to call at this time of the month. That is a big missed oportunity that may invite your competition in and drive your customers away.
Often we fail to notice are schedule is so packed we can't squeeze another thing in. Have you had to turn down work during this busy period? Have you ever thought, I wish they would have called last week?
What about those mistakes that occur during the chaotic rush? In todays economic times we need to make every dollar count. Mistakes are wasted time and materials that rob the bottom line of your business.
We have seen how the month end rush has cost us time, materials, future business and even chased away some current customers, but how do we take control and get this back? If you had all the savings this could generate you could probably make more money and reduce your costs while increasing your sales.
The answer is found in your customer service and sales team. Most businesses pay sales commissions shortly after the close of the month. Your sales staff is only motivated to press for the sale at the end of the month. They are pushing to boost their commission check and customers who are riding the fence are often pushed into the purchase side of the equation. Armed with this information, a business owner should move the commission closing day to the fifteenth. Using the motivational drive of the sales team to invigorate the middle of the month and reduce the end of the month.
Your customer service team can get into the act by pressing for action more in the middle of the month then at the end. Use phrasing like "Beat the Rush" and "Stay ahead of schedule". Focus your customer on smooth quality projects without the stress and deadline rush. Human nature seems to embrace procrastination. Work on turning this around plant wide. If you create a company culture of "get it done right and get it done ahead of schedule" your business will reap the rewards.
I have seen businesses offer discounts for doing work during slow periods. I would generally refrain from this as long as possible, margins are to tight to toss out a number. If the upper programs start to work and you start cutting some of the above mentioned costs, it wouldn't be a bad idea to share a small portion of the savings in a form of discounts. Start with your regular customers who have helped you build your business. Once they have been encouraged to use the middle of the month it will open up more opportunity to serve new customers who will eventually come around to your way of thinking. This business building system will make your company better and stronger. You will enjoy more success with happier employees.
Get It Done Right, and Get It Done Ahead of Schedule. Why Wait?
Most people accept it as the standard practice for their industry. They blame it on the customers and resign themselves to it as if it is set in stone. The truth is there is nothing to motivate the customers to do anything different. Why change?
There are some simple ways that you can reduce some of this chaos and still retain your business and your customers. Before I give away the secret, let's look at how what you are doing is hurting your business and costing you money and maybe even a few customers.
Have you noticed how much of your overtime comes at the end of the month. Everyone is working more hours to do the work they had plenty of time to do in the middle of the month. This increased activity usually breeds exhaustion and mistakes that cost additional time and money. The overtime is generally welcome every now and then but this is usually a six to ten day panic that puts everyone on edge. This increased stress is not only effecting you and your employees but I am willing to bet it is effecting current customers and potential customers. You answer the phone in a frantic rush, or short change conversation that is an investment in your customers and your future business. Some may "know" not to call at this time of the month. That is a big missed oportunity that may invite your competition in and drive your customers away.
Often we fail to notice are schedule is so packed we can't squeeze another thing in. Have you had to turn down work during this busy period? Have you ever thought, I wish they would have called last week?
What about those mistakes that occur during the chaotic rush? In todays economic times we need to make every dollar count. Mistakes are wasted time and materials that rob the bottom line of your business.
We have seen how the month end rush has cost us time, materials, future business and even chased away some current customers, but how do we take control and get this back? If you had all the savings this could generate you could probably make more money and reduce your costs while increasing your sales.
The answer is found in your customer service and sales team. Most businesses pay sales commissions shortly after the close of the month. Your sales staff is only motivated to press for the sale at the end of the month. They are pushing to boost their commission check and customers who are riding the fence are often pushed into the purchase side of the equation. Armed with this information, a business owner should move the commission closing day to the fifteenth. Using the motivational drive of the sales team to invigorate the middle of the month and reduce the end of the month.
Your customer service team can get into the act by pressing for action more in the middle of the month then at the end. Use phrasing like "Beat the Rush" and "Stay ahead of schedule". Focus your customer on smooth quality projects without the stress and deadline rush. Human nature seems to embrace procrastination. Work on turning this around plant wide. If you create a company culture of "get it done right and get it done ahead of schedule" your business will reap the rewards.
I have seen businesses offer discounts for doing work during slow periods. I would generally refrain from this as long as possible, margins are to tight to toss out a number. If the upper programs start to work and you start cutting some of the above mentioned costs, it wouldn't be a bad idea to share a small portion of the savings in a form of discounts. Start with your regular customers who have helped you build your business. Once they have been encouraged to use the middle of the month it will open up more opportunity to serve new customers who will eventually come around to your way of thinking. This business building system will make your company better and stronger. You will enjoy more success with happier employees.
Get It Done Right, and Get It Done Ahead of Schedule. Why Wait?
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Too Bad Tom Didn't Survive as Our Candidate
I was a big Tom Tancredo supporter for president. He has a much clearer view of the problems in the US. Our current president doesn't appear to have a clue about most issues we face. Tom wrote a opinion piece about Iran. Give it a fair read.
Obama: AWOL in Iran crisis
It is now abundantly and painfully clear that President Obama is clueless about America's national security interests in this dangerous world.
Obama is playing golf in Hawaii as the Islamist regime in Tehran shoots protesters in the streets and admits it has beaten to death scores of other protesters taken to jail. Obama's silence in not voicing support for the protesters is deafening.
Anyone who has watched events unfold in Iran over the past three months can see that the street protests have evolved from a protest against a stolen election to a wider protest against the regime itself. The protests are not only taking place in the capital but in major cities all across the country. The most recent protests featured banners and shouts aimed at America: "Obama, which side are you on?" is a chant heard often. Unfortunately, that's a good question.
Since the revolution in 1979 that overthrew the pro-Western shah, Iran has pretended to be a democracy, but its "fundamentalist regime" slowly concentrated power in the hands of radical clerics. So, Iran now pretends to be a democracy, and the world pretends to believe it. Last October, the regime pretended to have a presidential election but overplayed its hand by stuffing the ballot boxes.
In the last 27 years, over 120,000 citizens in Iran have been killed by the regime, executed after sham trials or simply shot or beaten to death in prison without benefit of a trial. The street protests are escalating because millions of Iranian citizens have decided they have no other recourse. The question is not, what do Iranians want? The question is, is the civilized world listening? Is Obama listening?
Go Read the rest.
We the people are forced to take a more active roll in directing our government. We somehow managed to vote an entirely incompetent group into office who needs to be lead around before they do something stupid. I have got plenty of evidence to prove they will head to stupidity very quickly if we don't constantly give them guidance through letters and calls.
Obama: AWOL in Iran crisis
It is now abundantly and painfully clear that President Obama is clueless about America's national security interests in this dangerous world.
Obama is playing golf in Hawaii as the Islamist regime in Tehran shoots protesters in the streets and admits it has beaten to death scores of other protesters taken to jail. Obama's silence in not voicing support for the protesters is deafening.
Anyone who has watched events unfold in Iran over the past three months can see that the street protests have evolved from a protest against a stolen election to a wider protest against the regime itself. The protests are not only taking place in the capital but in major cities all across the country. The most recent protests featured banners and shouts aimed at America: "Obama, which side are you on?" is a chant heard often. Unfortunately, that's a good question.
Since the revolution in 1979 that overthrew the pro-Western shah, Iran has pretended to be a democracy, but its "fundamentalist regime" slowly concentrated power in the hands of radical clerics. So, Iran now pretends to be a democracy, and the world pretends to believe it. Last October, the regime pretended to have a presidential election but overplayed its hand by stuffing the ballot boxes.
In the last 27 years, over 120,000 citizens in Iran have been killed by the regime, executed after sham trials or simply shot or beaten to death in prison without benefit of a trial. The street protests are escalating because millions of Iranian citizens have decided they have no other recourse. The question is not, what do Iranians want? The question is, is the civilized world listening? Is Obama listening?
Go Read the rest.
We the people are forced to take a more active roll in directing our government. We somehow managed to vote an entirely incompetent group into office who needs to be lead around before they do something stupid. I have got plenty of evidence to prove they will head to stupidity very quickly if we don't constantly give them guidance through letters and calls.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Loud and Clear

I have lost count on the number of times I have written on healthcare. I am sure this won't be the last. In each of my writings I have tried to bring forth the actual wishes of the American People. The key issue that has kept Americans pushing on our leaders has been the cost. The cost of healthcare keeps rising higher and higher. If we are to afford healthcare, then something has to be done to stop this rise.
Our congressional leaders in all their wisdom have completely avoided all possible solutions that would cut costs and instead chose to further increase the cost burden. To make it even more felonious, they have chosen to take money in advance of any future services further increasing the burden on us all. We not only have to pay for todays health needs but now through additional taxes and fees, cuts in benefits and medical rationing, we will be paying for future benefits that will be even less then our current system.
They have attempted to hide the fact that we will pay this burden. Businesses pass on taxes and fees in increased cost of goods sold and cut backs in payroll and employment. Each of us is struggling to make ends meet now. How will you afford the cost increases you will have on daily need items? The market is far to fluid for only one group to bare this burden. It will ultimately be shared by all. The question is, how much is our share?
Enough is enough, tell them to dump this travesty and start over. Could we try incorporating some of the cost savings measures we have asked for and stop the power grab.
Write them again. If you don't have it memorized, use the tool on my side bar.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Possibly True
Have a Merry Government-Regulated Christmas
Posted By Frank J. Fleming On December 25, 2009 @ 12:00 am In Humor & Fun, Politics,
The following is the transcript of the speech President Barack Obama gave for this holiday season.
My fellow Americans, as you spend time with your family this holiday season, I have an important proposal for you all to consider. Many of you like to celebrate Christmas. Children love to wake up Christmas morning and go see all the presents waiting under the tree. But what about the children who don’t get any presents? What happens with them? The United States Marines have their Toys for Tots program [1], but that just attacks the symptom. We need a real solution, and that means tackling what is at the heart of the problem: Santa Claus.
For too long, present-giving has been held hostage by the whims of this single man who is accountable to no one. Bearded, obese, and probably mentally unstable, Santa is someone we obviously don’t want near our children. He’s even somehow associated with known malcontent Jesus Christ (I’m not quite sure who he is, but I remember Jeremiah Wright mentioning him once or twice so I assume he has something to do with the creation of the AIDS virus).
Every year, Santa engages in some sort of domestic spying program, watching our children like a pedophile in wait, and he determines which children are “naughty” or “nice.” His methods for determining this are unknown; we also can’t know whether there is a racial disparity in these lists. He then makes his presents for the select few using non-union elf labor and comes to our neighborhoods in an unregistered sleigh pulled by disease-bearing caribou. Then Santa breaks into our houses and engages in his personal form of justice, leaving presents for the children he arbitrarily deems “good” and coal for the children he labels “bad.” This is the worst form of vigilante justice — even worse than anything Batman would do — as it targets children.
Some would say we are helpless to fight the tyranny of Santa and must do nothing, lest he harms our kids; others say we must end Christmas and abolish all gift-giving. This is a false choice. We can have Christmas and presents, and we can be free of the judgmental madman known as Santa. What we need is a government takeover of the Christmas business.
The government has always made knowing the needs of its citizens its specialty, and the FBI already has extensive files on everyone, so we know who is naughty and who is nice. So what entity is better qualified to give gifts to all of its citizens? Plus, our methods would be open to the public — to a certain extent (you may need to file an FOIA request). Furthermore, we would make sure everyone receives gifts. Everyone. And best of all, it will be deficit neutral. In fact, it will actually reduce the deficit through efficiencies and through confiscating magic fairy dust from the North Pole and applying it to the budget.
Already, some are trying to scare you, saying this government takeover means you won’t get quality presents or there will be long delays in receiving them. This is false. I am a pro-present president. In fact, as a legislator, my favorite thing to vote was “present.” Let me be clear. Everyone will get the present he or she wants. And there will be no primitive moralizing to decide who is worthy of receiving gifts, and there will especially be no coal in anyone’s stocking, as that will be made illegal under cap and trade. That’s right: A Merry Christmas for all with gifts you’ll enjoy, and it will not cost you a single dime more. Not one dime.
Here is my plan. You will submit your lists to the newly-appointed Gift-Giving Committee, which will be headed by my present czar. The present czar will then record all these present suggestions and, keeping in mind the Christmas budget, get you something you want — or something similar or related to it — or better yet, something you need. This means gifts such as educational toys for children, abortions for teenagers, compact fluorescent light bulbs for adults, and euthanasia for seniors (which may or may not be optional, considering whatever version of health care reform passes).
And now you’ll be free from the burden of appeasing Santa, as the committee considers all children to be nice … unless they have shown discriminatory or intolerant behavior. You’ll also be free from having to buy gifts yourself, as that will result in imprisonment for gift-giving inequality. And, once again, there will be no new taxes for any of this, except for the wealthy — the wealthy being defined as anyone who buys excessive luxuries, such as tinsel, eggnog, trees, or colorful blinking lights, which will all be subjected to heavy holiday taxes.
The time for talk is over; the time for gift wish lists writing is now. So let’s get this started. Just go ahead and address the letters you’d normally write to Santa to me instead. And to help us meet the gift delivery date of December 25, it would be really helpful if you would tell me what you think you’ll want three years from now. And if some of you wouldn’t mind celebrating your Christmas later — possibly into the next year — please let me know; otherwise we’ll just have to randomly choose people.
So let’s all have a merry and, better yet, an equal and government-regulated Christmas.
Posted By Frank J. Fleming On December 25, 2009 @ 12:00 am In Humor & Fun, Politics,
The following is the transcript of the speech President Barack Obama gave for this holiday season.
My fellow Americans, as you spend time with your family this holiday season, I have an important proposal for you all to consider. Many of you like to celebrate Christmas. Children love to wake up Christmas morning and go see all the presents waiting under the tree. But what about the children who don’t get any presents? What happens with them? The United States Marines have their Toys for Tots program [1], but that just attacks the symptom. We need a real solution, and that means tackling what is at the heart of the problem: Santa Claus.
For too long, present-giving has been held hostage by the whims of this single man who is accountable to no one. Bearded, obese, and probably mentally unstable, Santa is someone we obviously don’t want near our children. He’s even somehow associated with known malcontent Jesus Christ (I’m not quite sure who he is, but I remember Jeremiah Wright mentioning him once or twice so I assume he has something to do with the creation of the AIDS virus).
Every year, Santa engages in some sort of domestic spying program, watching our children like a pedophile in wait, and he determines which children are “naughty” or “nice.” His methods for determining this are unknown; we also can’t know whether there is a racial disparity in these lists. He then makes his presents for the select few using non-union elf labor and comes to our neighborhoods in an unregistered sleigh pulled by disease-bearing caribou. Then Santa breaks into our houses and engages in his personal form of justice, leaving presents for the children he arbitrarily deems “good” and coal for the children he labels “bad.” This is the worst form of vigilante justice — even worse than anything Batman would do — as it targets children.
Some would say we are helpless to fight the tyranny of Santa and must do nothing, lest he harms our kids; others say we must end Christmas and abolish all gift-giving. This is a false choice. We can have Christmas and presents, and we can be free of the judgmental madman known as Santa. What we need is a government takeover of the Christmas business.
The government has always made knowing the needs of its citizens its specialty, and the FBI already has extensive files on everyone, so we know who is naughty and who is nice. So what entity is better qualified to give gifts to all of its citizens? Plus, our methods would be open to the public — to a certain extent (you may need to file an FOIA request). Furthermore, we would make sure everyone receives gifts. Everyone. And best of all, it will be deficit neutral. In fact, it will actually reduce the deficit through efficiencies and through confiscating magic fairy dust from the North Pole and applying it to the budget.
Already, some are trying to scare you, saying this government takeover means you won’t get quality presents or there will be long delays in receiving them. This is false. I am a pro-present president. In fact, as a legislator, my favorite thing to vote was “present.” Let me be clear. Everyone will get the present he or she wants. And there will be no primitive moralizing to decide who is worthy of receiving gifts, and there will especially be no coal in anyone’s stocking, as that will be made illegal under cap and trade. That’s right: A Merry Christmas for all with gifts you’ll enjoy, and it will not cost you a single dime more. Not one dime.
Here is my plan. You will submit your lists to the newly-appointed Gift-Giving Committee, which will be headed by my present czar. The present czar will then record all these present suggestions and, keeping in mind the Christmas budget, get you something you want — or something similar or related to it — or better yet, something you need. This means gifts such as educational toys for children, abortions for teenagers, compact fluorescent light bulbs for adults, and euthanasia for seniors (which may or may not be optional, considering whatever version of health care reform passes).
And now you’ll be free from the burden of appeasing Santa, as the committee considers all children to be nice … unless they have shown discriminatory or intolerant behavior. You’ll also be free from having to buy gifts yourself, as that will result in imprisonment for gift-giving inequality. And, once again, there will be no new taxes for any of this, except for the wealthy — the wealthy being defined as anyone who buys excessive luxuries, such as tinsel, eggnog, trees, or colorful blinking lights, which will all be subjected to heavy holiday taxes.
The time for talk is over; the time for gift wish lists writing is now. So let’s get this started. Just go ahead and address the letters you’d normally write to Santa to me instead. And to help us meet the gift delivery date of December 25, it would be really helpful if you would tell me what you think you’ll want three years from now. And if some of you wouldn’t mind celebrating your Christmas later — possibly into the next year — please let me know; otherwise we’ll just have to randomly choose people.
So let’s all have a merry and, better yet, an equal and government-regulated Christmas.
Labels: Humor
Saturday, December 26, 2009
What Are They Doing?
The Senate passed its version of Healthcare. There was a lot of posturing and back room deals. Did Americans win or lose?
The healthcare industry has been estimate at one sixth of our total economy. The size and continued rising costs made this a hot button for many years. Americans from every walk of life have been staggering under the weight of medical costs. They begged for some relief and many looked to congress to provide it.
Has anyone seen anything in these bills that will actually produce the results the people asked for? Here are the key points that would make healthcare cheaper.
Cost of Illegal Immigration to our healthcare system
Tort Reform - Frivolous and Record Breaking Awards
Education and Personal Health Responsibility
Freeing up Health Professionals to Deal with actual Health issues
Doctor Availability and the lack of new doctors entering the market
3rd party payer healthcare places incentives in the wrong area (HMOs and the real cost)
Reality is that the current bills passed by both houses don't do anything to contain costs or (What we really need.) reduce the cost to Americans. Instead we have regulations and manipulation of the marketplace that may eventually end up in cost overruns and future bailouts to fix the system that wasn't really broken in the first place. Not once were the issues above addressed in any real way that would actually reduce the burden on the healthcare system and in turn reduce the cost. If congress would have focused on enticing more of our finest into the medical field the issue of coverage and doctor availability would have solved itself in the ten year projections given to the current nightmares going before congress now.
I know Americans want something done about healthcare. Each and everyone of us feel the pain of costs and access, but does anyone honestly think that these bills and the compromises that will take place meet the needs we so desperately need met? We are looking at increases in bureaucracy and regulation that will change every area of healthcare for the worse.
It isn't too late. You can write or call your representatives and let your position be known. You still have the final say at the ballot box. They haven't taken that from you yet.
The healthcare industry has been estimate at one sixth of our total economy. The size and continued rising costs made this a hot button for many years. Americans from every walk of life have been staggering under the weight of medical costs. They begged for some relief and many looked to congress to provide it.
Has anyone seen anything in these bills that will actually produce the results the people asked for? Here are the key points that would make healthcare cheaper.
Cost of Illegal Immigration to our healthcare system
Tort Reform - Frivolous and Record Breaking Awards
Education and Personal Health Responsibility
Freeing up Health Professionals to Deal with actual Health issues
Doctor Availability and the lack of new doctors entering the market
3rd party payer healthcare places incentives in the wrong area (HMOs and the real cost)
Reality is that the current bills passed by both houses don't do anything to contain costs or (What we really need.) reduce the cost to Americans. Instead we have regulations and manipulation of the marketplace that may eventually end up in cost overruns and future bailouts to fix the system that wasn't really broken in the first place. Not once were the issues above addressed in any real way that would actually reduce the burden on the healthcare system and in turn reduce the cost. If congress would have focused on enticing more of our finest into the medical field the issue of coverage and doctor availability would have solved itself in the ten year projections given to the current nightmares going before congress now.
I know Americans want something done about healthcare. Each and everyone of us feel the pain of costs and access, but does anyone honestly think that these bills and the compromises that will take place meet the needs we so desperately need met? We are looking at increases in bureaucracy and regulation that will change every area of healthcare for the worse.
It isn't too late. You can write or call your representatives and let your position be known. You still have the final say at the ballot box. They haven't taken that from you yet.













