NOTE: I had the previlage of hearing this man speak at a conference yesterday. What an inspiration.
I found this article via google search.
From: NY Daily News (printed January 28, 2008)
His name is Lt. Col. Greg Gadson and he used to wear No. 98 for the Army football team and was with the Second Battalion and 32nd Field Artillery, on his way back from a memorial service for two soldiers from his brigade when he lost both his legs to a roadside bomb in Bahgdad. It was the night of May 7, 2007, and Lt. Col. Gadson didn't know it at the time because he couldn't possibly have known, but it was the beginning of a journey that brought him to Lambeau Field Sunday night.
He was there as an honorary co-captain of the Giants, there on the sideline at Lambeau because this Giants' season has become his season now and he wasn't going to watch from some box. This is a Giant at the Super Bowl worth knowing about, as much as any of them.
"Me being a part of this team," Gadson was saying Monday night from his home in Virginia, having made it back there from Green Bay, "really starts with the team I played on at West Point."
He played at West Point between 1985 and 1988, and one of his teammates was Mike Sullivan, who played cornerback and some safety and is now one of Tom Coughlin's assistants with the Giants. When Sullivan and so many other of Gadson's teammates found out what had happened on the night of May 7, found that Gadson had first lost his left leg to arterial infections and then his right, it brought that old Army team back together.
"My injury turned out to be a catalyst event," Gadson said. "These were guys who hadn't talked in years, but now were rallying around me, and my family. Some of us had stayed in contact, but not to any great degree. But now an incident in a war reminded us that we were still brothers."
Sullivan visited Gadson at Walter Reed, came back in June, this time with a No. 98 Giants jersey, Gadson's own name on the back, signed by several Giants players. When Sullivan left that day in June, he said to Gadson, "What else can we do?"
Greg Gadson said he'd love to take his family to a Giants game.
It was the Giants-Redskins game, in Washington, third Sunday of the season, Giants 0-2 by then. The tickets were arranged and then the Friday before the game Mike Sullivan called and asked if Gadson would be interested in addressing the team on Saturday night.
Gadson's wife Kim drove him to the Giants' hotel. Lt. Col. Greg Gadson, Second Battalion, 32nd Field Artillery, old outside linebacker from Army, spoke to the Giants. And just as no one knew that the Giants would begin a 10-game road winning streak the next day, just as no one knew this could ever become a Super Bowl season, no one in that room including Gadson himself knew that the soldier in the wheelchair was joining the season that night.
"I just spoke from the heart, as a soldier and as a former football player," he said, "for about 10 or 15 minutes. I talked to them about appreciating the opportunities in their lives, how special and privileged they were, how everybody needs to understand what they truly have. And I talked to them about the power of sports in people's lives, especially soldiers' lives, how many times I'd watched soldiers get up in the middle of the night after a 12-hour shift if there is a chance to watch a game, or how soldiers would do anything to watch a game before they went on that kind of shift.
"I told them that of course after all the exteriors had been stripped away, they played the game for themselves. But that they had to play the game for each other. Then I talked about myself, how my old teammates came to my need, and how I was reminded again the power of a team, the emotional commitment teammates have for each other, that when a team finds a way to do things greater than they thought they could do, that they couldn't have done individually, that a bond is formed that can live forever.
"I told them that truly great teams usually form that bond by going through something together, and how whatever they were going through at that point in the season that no success ever came easy. And finally I reminded them that nothing is promised to anybody in this life, starting with tomorrow."
The Giants won the next day against the Redskins, and began a six-game winning streak, and began that road winning streak that now takes them on the road to Super Bowl XLII. It began Greg Gadson's road to Lambeau, and being wheeled out by his 13-year old son Jaelen as an honorary co-captain of the Giants along with the great Harry Carson.
"I can't even remember the last time I was actually out on the field," he said. "Maybe when I played."
Gadson had been on the sidelines when the Giants won their first playoff game against the Bucs. The team wanted him in Dallas, but he was having more surgery, on what is left of his right leg, and his right arm, which had also been damaged by the IED. But he was well enough to travel to Green Bay, and strong enough to spend the whole game on the sideline with his son, the players calling him what they have all along: Sir.
"I wouldn't say I was warm," he said. "But I was comfortable enough not to be hugging one of those heaters all day."
He watched from the sidelines at Lambeau as the team he met at 0-2 played the way it played against the Packers and played itself to the Super Bowl, watched as the Giants came back from that missed field goal at the end of regulation, finally saw Lawrence Tynes kick it through from 47 yards out.
"When the ball went through, you could feel the elation on our sidelines, and hear the stadium go quiet at the same time," Gadson said. "It was like the air being let out of a whole state's soul. And then the next thing I saw was my son jumping in the air and running on that field."
The boy ran for both of them.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Sunday, August 14, 2011
What I Read Today - Sunday August 14, 2011
From: Mecktimes.com (seen in the Springfield Business Journal )
Is your mission statement just hot air?
by Jeffrey Gitomer
Published: July 22nd, 2011
Can you recite your mission statement?
Come on. You’ve seen it a hundred times, maybe a thousand times.
It’s some drivel about being No. 1, exceeding expectations and building shareholder value that contains other nonsensical words that mean nothing to anyone except the marketing people who dreamed it up one afternoon.
I often wonder if there is anyone actually in charge of implementing the mission statement. I think you could find such a person over at Disney World heading up the Fantasyland department.
Reality: Why is your mission statement always put in terms of you, rather than what you might do for others?
As a customer, or potential customer, I don’t really care about you unless you can do something of perceived value for me.
Which brings me to my prime question of the day, maybe of the decade: Is it a mission or a promise? And in the end, which is more powerful?
Several years ago I created a list of customer promises for my seminar company, my book publishing company and my online training company. The promises revolved around what would be done in favor of our customers. I would ask each of my employees to apply the promises in their daily interactions with customers.
And all of a sudden, I didn’t need a mission statement because the promises, when enacted, automatically created achievement, memorability, “wow” and loyalty.
Jeffrey Gitomer, Buy Gitomer and TrainOne customer promises and commitments:
•We will be friendly.
•We will be professional.
•We will provide the highest-quality products.
•We will provide the highest-quality training.
•We will do what we promise.
•We will keep you informed as we progress.
•We will keep our technology state-of-the-art.
•We will think long term in all our endeavors.
•We will be an expert resource for you.
•We will provide prompt service.
•We will maintain great attitudes toward service.
•We will earn your loyalty with quality and value.
•We will use creativity to differentiate and dominate.
•We will customize and personalize all enterprise training.
•We will increase your sales.
•We will cultivate relationships by paying attention to individual needs and interests.
•We will take as much pride in your business as you do.
•We will maintain our dedication to lifelong learning.
•We will recover memorably when an error occurs.
•We will respond in a heartbeat or faster.
•We will serve with a smile.
•We will serve memorably; service is an opportunity and a priority, not a job function.
•We will make providing you the best service our top priority.
•We will treat all customers the same: like gold.
•We will collaborate with you every step of the way.
•We will become an expert in your business to grow your business and ours.
•We will be your best partner.
•We will not just lead by example.
We will set a standard.
•We will always go the extra mile.
•We will kiss ass.
•We will practice what I preach.
One of the nicest compliments I receive is a single sentence: You walk your talk.
That’s the reaction of customers when they receive what we promise. We don’t tell them what the promises are. No one says, “We are going to be friendly.” Everyone is just genuinely friendly.
It’s taken me years to finally decide that these promises should be made public. The main reason I’m doing it is that service around the world is rapidly declining.
Big picture: All of these promises and commitments favor the customer, our relationship with them and what actions we have to take in order to earn their business, repeat business, loyalty, referrals and testimonials.
Note: None of these promises and commitments are “missions.” They’re all “actions.” They are all about what outcome the customer needs and is hoping for. In other words, what does the customer want after we take an action or they buy a product?
If your mission statement is all about you, get rid of it. Take this list of promises and commitments and revise them to suit your business, your employees and, especially, your customers. When you do, everyone will have a mission, not just the marketing department.
Jeffrey Gitomer is the author of “The Sales Bible” and “The Little Red Book of Selling.” President of Charlotte-based Buy Gitomer, he gives seminars, runs sales meetings and conducts Internet training on selling and customer service at www.trainone.com.
Is your mission statement just hot air?
by Jeffrey Gitomer
Published: July 22nd, 2011
Can you recite your mission statement?
Come on. You’ve seen it a hundred times, maybe a thousand times.
It’s some drivel about being No. 1, exceeding expectations and building shareholder value that contains other nonsensical words that mean nothing to anyone except the marketing people who dreamed it up one afternoon.
I often wonder if there is anyone actually in charge of implementing the mission statement. I think you could find such a person over at Disney World heading up the Fantasyland department.
Reality: Why is your mission statement always put in terms of you, rather than what you might do for others?
As a customer, or potential customer, I don’t really care about you unless you can do something of perceived value for me.
Which brings me to my prime question of the day, maybe of the decade: Is it a mission or a promise? And in the end, which is more powerful?
Several years ago I created a list of customer promises for my seminar company, my book publishing company and my online training company. The promises revolved around what would be done in favor of our customers. I would ask each of my employees to apply the promises in their daily interactions with customers.
And all of a sudden, I didn’t need a mission statement because the promises, when enacted, automatically created achievement, memorability, “wow” and loyalty.
Jeffrey Gitomer, Buy Gitomer and TrainOne customer promises and commitments:
•We will be friendly.
•We will be professional.
•We will provide the highest-quality products.
•We will provide the highest-quality training.
•We will do what we promise.
•We will keep you informed as we progress.
•We will keep our technology state-of-the-art.
•We will think long term in all our endeavors.
•We will be an expert resource for you.
•We will provide prompt service.
•We will maintain great attitudes toward service.
•We will earn your loyalty with quality and value.
•We will use creativity to differentiate and dominate.
•We will customize and personalize all enterprise training.
•We will increase your sales.
•We will cultivate relationships by paying attention to individual needs and interests.
•We will take as much pride in your business as you do.
•We will maintain our dedication to lifelong learning.
•We will recover memorably when an error occurs.
•We will respond in a heartbeat or faster.
•We will serve with a smile.
•We will serve memorably; service is an opportunity and a priority, not a job function.
•We will make providing you the best service our top priority.
•We will treat all customers the same: like gold.
•We will collaborate with you every step of the way.
•We will become an expert in your business to grow your business and ours.
•We will be your best partner.
•We will not just lead by example.
We will set a standard.
•We will always go the extra mile.
•We will kiss ass.
•We will practice what I preach.
One of the nicest compliments I receive is a single sentence: You walk your talk.
That’s the reaction of customers when they receive what we promise. We don’t tell them what the promises are. No one says, “We are going to be friendly.” Everyone is just genuinely friendly.
It’s taken me years to finally decide that these promises should be made public. The main reason I’m doing it is that service around the world is rapidly declining.
Big picture: All of these promises and commitments favor the customer, our relationship with them and what actions we have to take in order to earn their business, repeat business, loyalty, referrals and testimonials.
Note: None of these promises and commitments are “missions.” They’re all “actions.” They are all about what outcome the customer needs and is hoping for. In other words, what does the customer want after we take an action or they buy a product?
If your mission statement is all about you, get rid of it. Take this list of promises and commitments and revise them to suit your business, your employees and, especially, your customers. When you do, everyone will have a mission, not just the marketing department.
Jeffrey Gitomer is the author of “The Sales Bible” and “The Little Red Book of Selling.” President of Charlotte-based Buy Gitomer, he gives seminars, runs sales meetings and conducts Internet training on selling and customer service at www.trainone.com.
Friday, August 12, 2011
What I Read Today - Friday August 12, 2011
From: The Wall Street Journal
Tablet War Is an Apple Rout
By IAN SHERR
People don't have tablet fever; it seems they simply have a mania for iPads.
The latest evidence: Hewlett-Packard Co. is dropping the price of its TouchPad tablet by 20% little more than a month after it hit stores, as the computer giant tries to goose sales of its answer to Apple Inc.'s iPad.
H-P, Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. and Research In Motion Ltd. have all jumped into the tablet market this year, trying to close the gap with Apple.
The electronics giant created a multi-billion-dollar business last year when it launched the iPad—and has since seen its profits and market value swell as others have tried to keep pace.
Rivals have been routed so far. Motorola cut the price of its Xoom tablet after its February launch, released a cheaper model and warned shipments will decline this quarter. RIM's PlayBook was delayed until April and still isn't being offered for sale by the two biggest U.S. wireless carriers.
Samsung Electronics Co., which was the quickest to market an iPad rival and has shipped millions of tablets based on Google Inc.'s Android software, is now embroiled in a patent dispute with Apple that threatens sales of its Galaxy Tab in most of Europe.
Apple, meanwhile, says it is having difficulty keeping up with demand and selling every iPad it can manufacture. Five months after its release, its iPad 2 can be hard to find in retail stores. The company said it shipped 9.3 million iPads in the June-ended quarter.
An Apple spokeswoman reiterated an earlier comment from Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer, saying the company is "thrilled" with the iPad's momentum.
The consumer electronics giant has sold 28.7 million iPads since it was first launched in April 2010. Estimates of Apple's share of the tablet market vary but some researchers say it has about two-thirds of shipments, though they acknowledge it could be higher.
One sign of Apple's dominance: Rivals discuss how many tablets they are shipping, but don't disclose how many units are actually being purchased by customers. Motorola says it shipped 690,000 Xoom tablets since its launch in February, and RIM says it has shipped 500,000 PlayBooks between their April launch and the end its first quarter in May. Motorola and RIM declined to comment.
Samsung, which in January said it had shipped two million Galaxy Tabs to wireless carriers and retailers around the world since its release in September, has stopped disclosing shipments all together.
As some industry watchers put it: There are more iPads rival tablets sitting in warehouses and stores than current demand for those products, and that's prompting manufacturers to cut prices to move inventory.
"The numbers that we have reported are probably higher than what have actually been sold to customers, which is why you see companies like H-P trying to lower prices to move what's in the channel," said Tom Mainelli, an analyst at research firm IDC.
On Wednesday, H-P cut the price of its entry-model TouchPad to $399.99, so it now costs roughly $100 less than a comparable iPad. The TouchPad runs the webOS operating system created by smartphone maker Palm, which H-P acquired.
H-P took its time developing the device, and Chief Executive Leo Apotheker promised the TouchPad would be "perfect." Reviewers didn't feel that way. They complained about sub-standard hardware features and glitchy software.
Stephen DiFranco, a senior vice president in H-P's computer business, said in an online message Wednesday that the lower price will allow "both HP and our channel partners to be even more price competitive in the marketplace."
An H-P spokesman declined to say how many TouchPads have been sold, saying the company "continually evaluates pricing for its products."
H-P's price cut also marks a shift in strategy. Samsung tried to outmuscle the iPad with beefy processors but keep prices in line with Apple's machine. Motorola priced its Xoom, the first to run a tablet version of Android, at a premium to Apple's iPad—and was later forced to cut prices. RIM priced the PlayBook like the iPad even though its seven-inch screen is smaller.
Analysts say H-P is now conceding the obvious: consumers won't pay the same price for an imitator, even a well-appointed one, as they will for the original. That has left the market for tablets split in two.
"There's an iPad market," said Tim Bajarin, an analyst at Creative Strategies, "and then there's everyone else."
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
What I Read Today - Wednesday August 10, 2011
From: The New York Times
The Day Our Leaders Got Unstuck
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
This is a scary economic moment. The response we need is not easy, but it is totally obvious. We need a Grand Bargain between America’s two parties — and we need it right now. Until you read the following news article, we’ll be stuck in a world of hurt.
Washington (AP) — It was a news conference the likes of which the White House had never seen. President Obama stood in the East Room, flanked by the House speaker, John Boehner; the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell; the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid; and the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi. The president asked Mr. Boehner to speak first:
“My fellow Americans,” the Ohio Republican began. “We have just concluded a meeting with the president, prompted by this moment of extraordinary economic peril. Our party, as you know, is convinced that the main reason for our economic decline is that we have too much debt, that government has grown too big and that taxes and regulations are choking our dynamism. But I have to acknowledge that, over the years, our party has contributed to this debt burden and government spending binge. We are not innocent, and, therefore, we owe the country a strategy for governing and for fixing a problem that we helped to create — instead of just blocking the president. The G.O.P. is better than that and has more to offer the nation. Therefore, we have informed the president that our legislators are ready to reopen negotiations immediately on a ‘Grand Bargain’ to address all these debt issues once and for all and that everything will be on the table from our side — including tax reform that closes loopholes and eliminates wasteful subsidies, and, if need be, tax increases. To those who voted for us, rest assured that we will bring our conservative values to these negotiations and an emphasis on markets and meritocracies, but also a spirit of compromise and a recognition that both sides will have to bend if we are going to get the kind of comprehensive budget agreement the country needs. To my Tea Party colleagues, I say: thank you. Your passion helped spur the nation to action, but the country cannot be governed, and our future secured, by bowing solely to the passions of any single group — liberal or conservative. I know that the Tea Party activists are true patriots and they will work with us as well. President Obama: Let’s fix the country together and then compete in 2012 over who can best manage a growing pie rather than a shrinking one.”
President Obama warmly embraced Mr. Boehner and then took the podium and said:
“Speaker Boehner and Senator McConnell, thank you for your commitment to act in our nation’s highest interests. Let me say publicly what I committed to you privately: I have asked Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson to revive their deficit commission and to use their recommendations for how to cut spending and raise revenues as the starting point for our negotiations. But it will now be called ‘The National Commission for American Renewal.’ Because in addition to the original Bowles-Simpson members, it will include Senator McConnell, Speaker Boehner, Senator Reid and Congresswoman Pelosi, and its goal will indeed be a comprehensive plan for American renewal. Everything will be on the table — spending cuts, tax reform and increases, a framework for restructuring the debts of Americans whose homes are under water and the investments we need to renew the primary sources of our strength — infrastructure, education and scientific research. Each component will be integrated and timed to minimize pain and maximize job creation — and the entire package will be presented to Congress for an up-or-down vote. I am confident that real tax and entitlement reform will unleash billions of dollars in investments.
“But the most important thing that will be on the table will not just be a plan to make our country solvent. It will be a plan to make America great and guarantee that another generation will enjoy the American dream. Any fair-minded person who looks at all the stimulus investments I’ve made in education, clean energy, research and infrastructure can see that this has been my goal from the start. But I know those investments can’t be sustained without a new long-term budget deal. And I, too, have a confession: I’ve done a poor job integrating my nation-building ideas, including health care, into a single vision so people understood where I was going. I also let tactical political considerations — like abandoning the Bowles-Simpson commission — intervene, so Americans lost sight of my priorities. That will not happen again. No one loves this country more than I and my Democratic colleagues. While we will bring our traditional concerns for social justice and equality to these negotiations, we will not quit until a Grand Bargain to ensure American greatness is enacted into law.”
At that point, all five leaders shook hands and retreated into the Oval Office. It was exactly 9:29 a.m. One minute later, the New York Stock Exchange opened. The Dow was up 1,223 points at the open — an all-time record.
What’s sad is how much this is a fantasy and how easily — with just a little political will — it could be a reality.
The Day Our Leaders Got Unstuck
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
This is a scary economic moment. The response we need is not easy, but it is totally obvious. We need a Grand Bargain between America’s two parties — and we need it right now. Until you read the following news article, we’ll be stuck in a world of hurt.
Washington (AP) — It was a news conference the likes of which the White House had never seen. President Obama stood in the East Room, flanked by the House speaker, John Boehner; the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell; the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid; and the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi. The president asked Mr. Boehner to speak first:
“My fellow Americans,” the Ohio Republican began. “We have just concluded a meeting with the president, prompted by this moment of extraordinary economic peril. Our party, as you know, is convinced that the main reason for our economic decline is that we have too much debt, that government has grown too big and that taxes and regulations are choking our dynamism. But I have to acknowledge that, over the years, our party has contributed to this debt burden and government spending binge. We are not innocent, and, therefore, we owe the country a strategy for governing and for fixing a problem that we helped to create — instead of just blocking the president. The G.O.P. is better than that and has more to offer the nation. Therefore, we have informed the president that our legislators are ready to reopen negotiations immediately on a ‘Grand Bargain’ to address all these debt issues once and for all and that everything will be on the table from our side — including tax reform that closes loopholes and eliminates wasteful subsidies, and, if need be, tax increases. To those who voted for us, rest assured that we will bring our conservative values to these negotiations and an emphasis on markets and meritocracies, but also a spirit of compromise and a recognition that both sides will have to bend if we are going to get the kind of comprehensive budget agreement the country needs. To my Tea Party colleagues, I say: thank you. Your passion helped spur the nation to action, but the country cannot be governed, and our future secured, by bowing solely to the passions of any single group — liberal or conservative. I know that the Tea Party activists are true patriots and they will work with us as well. President Obama: Let’s fix the country together and then compete in 2012 over who can best manage a growing pie rather than a shrinking one.”
President Obama warmly embraced Mr. Boehner and then took the podium and said:
“Speaker Boehner and Senator McConnell, thank you for your commitment to act in our nation’s highest interests. Let me say publicly what I committed to you privately: I have asked Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson to revive their deficit commission and to use their recommendations for how to cut spending and raise revenues as the starting point for our negotiations. But it will now be called ‘The National Commission for American Renewal.’ Because in addition to the original Bowles-Simpson members, it will include Senator McConnell, Speaker Boehner, Senator Reid and Congresswoman Pelosi, and its goal will indeed be a comprehensive plan for American renewal. Everything will be on the table — spending cuts, tax reform and increases, a framework for restructuring the debts of Americans whose homes are under water and the investments we need to renew the primary sources of our strength — infrastructure, education and scientific research. Each component will be integrated and timed to minimize pain and maximize job creation — and the entire package will be presented to Congress for an up-or-down vote. I am confident that real tax and entitlement reform will unleash billions of dollars in investments.
“But the most important thing that will be on the table will not just be a plan to make our country solvent. It will be a plan to make America great and guarantee that another generation will enjoy the American dream. Any fair-minded person who looks at all the stimulus investments I’ve made in education, clean energy, research and infrastructure can see that this has been my goal from the start. But I know those investments can’t be sustained without a new long-term budget deal. And I, too, have a confession: I’ve done a poor job integrating my nation-building ideas, including health care, into a single vision so people understood where I was going. I also let tactical political considerations — like abandoning the Bowles-Simpson commission — intervene, so Americans lost sight of my priorities. That will not happen again. No one loves this country more than I and my Democratic colleagues. While we will bring our traditional concerns for social justice and equality to these negotiations, we will not quit until a Grand Bargain to ensure American greatness is enacted into law.”
At that point, all five leaders shook hands and retreated into the Oval Office. It was exactly 9:29 a.m. One minute later, the New York Stock Exchange opened. The Dow was up 1,223 points at the open — an all-time record.
What’s sad is how much this is a fantasy and how easily — with just a little political will — it could be a reality.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
What I Read Today - Wednesday August 3, 2011
From: The Wall Street Journal
The Saturday Essay - July 29, 2011
How to Tax the Rich
By SCOTT ADAMS
If the rich can be taxed at a different rate, why not other differences in how they are taxed?
The president was too polite to mention it during his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, but here's a quick summary of the problem: The U.S. is broke. The hole is too big to plug with cost cutting or economic growth alone. Rich people have money. No one else does. Rich people have enough clout to block higher taxes on themselves, and they will.
Likely outcome: Your next home will be the box that your laser printer came in. I hope that you kept it.
Whenever I feel as if I'm on a path toward certain doom, which happens every time I pay attention to the news, I like to imagine that some lonely genius will come up with a clever solution to save the world. Imagination is a wonderful thing. I don't have much control over the big realities, such as the economy, but I'm an expert at programming my own delusions. I make no apology for that. A well-crafted delusion can be a delicious guilty pleasure. And best of all, it's totally free. As a public service, today I will teach you how to wrap yourself in a warm blanket of imagined solutions for the government's fiscal dilemma.
To begin, assume that as the fiscal meltdown becomes more perilous, everyone will become more flexible and perhaps a bit more open-minded. That seems reasonable enough. A good crisis has a way of changing people. Now imagine that the world needs just one great idea to put things back on the right track. Great ideas have often changed history. It's not hard to imagine it can happen again.
Try to imagine that the idea that saves the country is an entirely new one. It's too much of a stretch to imagine that a stale idea would suddenly become acceptable. In fact, that's the dividing line between imagination and insanity. Only crazy people imagine that bad ideas can suddenly become good if you keep trying them. So let's assume that our imagined solution is a brand new idea. That feels less crazy and more optimistic. Another advantage is that no one has an entrenched view about an idea that has never been heard.
For those of you with healthy egos—and that would be every reader of The Wall Street Journal—you can make this fantasy extra delicious by imagining that you are the person who comes up with the idea that saves the world. I'll show you how to imagine that. I think you'll be surprised at how easy it is.
I spent some time working in the television industry, and I learned a technique that writers use. It's called "the bad version." When you feel that a plot solution exists, but you can't yet imagine it, you describe instead a bad version that has no purpose other than stimulating the other writers to imagine a better version.
For example, if your character is stuck on an island, the bad version of his escape might involve monkeys crafting a helicopter out of palm fronds and coconuts. That story idea is obviously bad, but it might stimulate you to think in terms of other engineering solutions, or other monkey-related solutions. The first step in thinking of an idea that will work is to stop fixating on ideas that won't. The bad version of an idea moves your mind to a new vantage point.
With that technique in mind, I will describe some bad versions of how society might go about the job of convincing the rich to accept higher taxes on themselves. But first I need to address the illusion of fairness.
We like to think that fairness is an objective condition. If you and a friend simultaneously find a dollar on the street, fairness suggests that you split it. But what if your friend is a billionaire and you are starving? Is it still fair to split the dollar? And what if you and your friend noticed the dollar at the same time but your friend was quicker to pick it up? Does that count for anything?
In reality, fairness is not so much about the actual distribution of loot as it is about the psychology of how you feel about it. That's important to understand because the rich won't give up their cash unless they feel they are getting something in return. And so far, saving the country doesn't seem to be enough of a payoff.
If we accept that the rich can be taxed at a different rate than everyone else, we can also imagine that there could be other differences in how the rich are taxed. That's the part we can tinker with, and that's where the bad version comes in. In a minute, I'll float some bad ideas about how the rich can feel good while the rest of society is rifling through their pockets.
I can think of five benefits that the country could offer to the rich in return for higher taxes: time, gratitude, incentives, shared pain and power.
Time. It's useful to keep in mind how the rich are different. When you are poor, you are willing to trade your time to earn money. When you are rich, you trade your money to get more time. For example, the rich hire people to clean their homes, and they don't waste time shopping for bargains. In business school I learned that when people have different preferences, you can usually find a way to engineer a deal.
Suppose we change the tax code so that in return for higher taxes on the rich, we figure out a way to give the rich some form of extra time. The bad version is that anyone who pays taxes at a rate above some set amount gets to use the car pool lane without a passenger. Or perhaps the rich are allowed to park in handicapped-only spaces.
Ridiculous, you cry! Remember, this is the bad version. And if the rich are only a tiny percentage of the population, they would have almost no impact on the traffic in car pool lanes or the availability of parking spaces for the handicapped. You wouldn't even notice the difference.
You could imagine a host of ways the government could trade time for money. Suppose all government agencies had a mandate to handle the affairs of the rich before everyone else. You wouldn't even notice that your wait at the Department of Motor Vehicles was 2% longer.
As a bonus, what happens to the economy when the people who are most skilled at making money suddenly have extra time? My bet is that they stimulate the economy by spending more or by earning more.
Gratitude. Imagine that the government arranges to provide genuine person-to-person gratitude to the rich in exchange for higher tax rates. Suppose (bad idea alert) the government makes it a condition that anyone applying for social services has to write a personal thank-you note to a nearby rich person who, according to a central database, hasn't lately received one. Gratitude goes a long way. It's easy to hate the generic overspending of the government. It's harder to begrudge medical care to someone who thanks you personally. It's a bad idea, I know. Don't judge it. Just let it nudge your imagination to someplace better.
Incentives. Another approach, also a bad idea, might be to treat the rich more like venture capitalists than sources of free money. Suppose the tax code is redesigned so that the rich only pay taxes to fund social services, such as health care and social security. This gives the rich an incentive to find ways to reduce the need for those services, which would in turn keep their taxes under control. Perhaps you'd see an explosion of private investment in technologies that make it less expensive to provide health care. You might see rapid advances in bringing down the cost of housing for seniors.
Meanwhile, the middle class would be in charge of funding the military. That feels right. The country generally doesn't go to war unless the middle-class majority is on board.
Shared Pain. Happiness is a relative thing. That's how humans are wired. And we're just screwed up enough to feel comfort when our pain is shared. So how can we make the overtaxed rich feel as if the rest of society is feeling a little extra pain?
I doubt that the rich will agree to higher taxes until some serious budget cutting is happening at the same time. That makes the sacrifice seem shared. The rich will feel unfairly singled out unless everyone is taking a hit. And budget cuts make the government seem better managed. That matters.
The bad idea here is to change the debate from arguing about which programs and how much to cut, and instead to do what the private sector has been doing for decades: Pull a random yet round number out of your ear, let's say a 10% cut, just for argument's sake, and apply it across the board. No exceptions. Everything from the military to welfare to federal pensions to government salaries would take the same hit. Managers in the private sector have been handling budget cuts this way for years. They know that their subordinates are all professional liars, so there is no reliable information for making cuts in a more reasoned way. They also know that any project can get by with 10% less money if there is no alternative.
Power. Everyone loves power. I'm guessing that the rich like it more than most people, on average. Another bad idea is to give the rich two votes apiece in any election. That's double the power of other citizens. But don't worry that it will distort election results. There aren't that many rich people, and they are somewhat divided in their opinions, just like the rest of the world. And realistically, is the candidate who gets 51% of the vote always better than the one who gets only 49%? That's a risk I'll take.
I think I've given you enough bad ideas to prime your imagination. Now it's your turn. If you think that solving the nation's fiscal problems is the job of elected officials, you have to ask yourself how that's working so far. The solution, if it exists, won't be anything that looks like normal business. The rich have the money, and they aren't going to give it up for nothing. I know because I am one, and yes, we do hold meetings.
The way our political system is designed, politicians are not free to float bad ideas. Doing so is a sure way to lose an election. Politicians aren't even free to support good ideas if they are too far from the norm. But as citizens, we're free to speculate all we want. And if some new and better idea gains popularity at the grassroots level, our elected leaders would then be able to embrace it. In other words, it's literally your job to fix the budget problem because your government isn't equipped to handle it. The ideas I've mentioned here are bad by design. But if a few million people start brainstorming their own ideas for solving the debt problem, someone might come up with a winner. And if that idea gains popular support on the Internet, it frees politicians to consider it. I have no problem imagining that something along those lines can happen, and the thought feels delightful.
—Mr. Adams is the creator of "Dilbert."
The Saturday Essay - July 29, 2011
How to Tax the Rich
By SCOTT ADAMS
If the rich can be taxed at a different rate, why not other differences in how they are taxed?
The president was too polite to mention it during his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, but here's a quick summary of the problem: The U.S. is broke. The hole is too big to plug with cost cutting or economic growth alone. Rich people have money. No one else does. Rich people have enough clout to block higher taxes on themselves, and they will.
Likely outcome: Your next home will be the box that your laser printer came in. I hope that you kept it.
Whenever I feel as if I'm on a path toward certain doom, which happens every time I pay attention to the news, I like to imagine that some lonely genius will come up with a clever solution to save the world. Imagination is a wonderful thing. I don't have much control over the big realities, such as the economy, but I'm an expert at programming my own delusions. I make no apology for that. A well-crafted delusion can be a delicious guilty pleasure. And best of all, it's totally free. As a public service, today I will teach you how to wrap yourself in a warm blanket of imagined solutions for the government's fiscal dilemma.
To begin, assume that as the fiscal meltdown becomes more perilous, everyone will become more flexible and perhaps a bit more open-minded. That seems reasonable enough. A good crisis has a way of changing people. Now imagine that the world needs just one great idea to put things back on the right track. Great ideas have often changed history. It's not hard to imagine it can happen again.
Try to imagine that the idea that saves the country is an entirely new one. It's too much of a stretch to imagine that a stale idea would suddenly become acceptable. In fact, that's the dividing line between imagination and insanity. Only crazy people imagine that bad ideas can suddenly become good if you keep trying them. So let's assume that our imagined solution is a brand new idea. That feels less crazy and more optimistic. Another advantage is that no one has an entrenched view about an idea that has never been heard.
For those of you with healthy egos—and that would be every reader of The Wall Street Journal—you can make this fantasy extra delicious by imagining that you are the person who comes up with the idea that saves the world. I'll show you how to imagine that. I think you'll be surprised at how easy it is.
I spent some time working in the television industry, and I learned a technique that writers use. It's called "the bad version." When you feel that a plot solution exists, but you can't yet imagine it, you describe instead a bad version that has no purpose other than stimulating the other writers to imagine a better version.
For example, if your character is stuck on an island, the bad version of his escape might involve monkeys crafting a helicopter out of palm fronds and coconuts. That story idea is obviously bad, but it might stimulate you to think in terms of other engineering solutions, or other monkey-related solutions. The first step in thinking of an idea that will work is to stop fixating on ideas that won't. The bad version of an idea moves your mind to a new vantage point.
With that technique in mind, I will describe some bad versions of how society might go about the job of convincing the rich to accept higher taxes on themselves. But first I need to address the illusion of fairness.
We like to think that fairness is an objective condition. If you and a friend simultaneously find a dollar on the street, fairness suggests that you split it. But what if your friend is a billionaire and you are starving? Is it still fair to split the dollar? And what if you and your friend noticed the dollar at the same time but your friend was quicker to pick it up? Does that count for anything?
In reality, fairness is not so much about the actual distribution of loot as it is about the psychology of how you feel about it. That's important to understand because the rich won't give up their cash unless they feel they are getting something in return. And so far, saving the country doesn't seem to be enough of a payoff.
If we accept that the rich can be taxed at a different rate than everyone else, we can also imagine that there could be other differences in how the rich are taxed. That's the part we can tinker with, and that's where the bad version comes in. In a minute, I'll float some bad ideas about how the rich can feel good while the rest of society is rifling through their pockets.
I can think of five benefits that the country could offer to the rich in return for higher taxes: time, gratitude, incentives, shared pain and power.
Time. It's useful to keep in mind how the rich are different. When you are poor, you are willing to trade your time to earn money. When you are rich, you trade your money to get more time. For example, the rich hire people to clean their homes, and they don't waste time shopping for bargains. In business school I learned that when people have different preferences, you can usually find a way to engineer a deal.
Suppose we change the tax code so that in return for higher taxes on the rich, we figure out a way to give the rich some form of extra time. The bad version is that anyone who pays taxes at a rate above some set amount gets to use the car pool lane without a passenger. Or perhaps the rich are allowed to park in handicapped-only spaces.
Ridiculous, you cry! Remember, this is the bad version. And if the rich are only a tiny percentage of the population, they would have almost no impact on the traffic in car pool lanes or the availability of parking spaces for the handicapped. You wouldn't even notice the difference.
You could imagine a host of ways the government could trade time for money. Suppose all government agencies had a mandate to handle the affairs of the rich before everyone else. You wouldn't even notice that your wait at the Department of Motor Vehicles was 2% longer.
As a bonus, what happens to the economy when the people who are most skilled at making money suddenly have extra time? My bet is that they stimulate the economy by spending more or by earning more.
Gratitude. Imagine that the government arranges to provide genuine person-to-person gratitude to the rich in exchange for higher tax rates. Suppose (bad idea alert) the government makes it a condition that anyone applying for social services has to write a personal thank-you note to a nearby rich person who, according to a central database, hasn't lately received one. Gratitude goes a long way. It's easy to hate the generic overspending of the government. It's harder to begrudge medical care to someone who thanks you personally. It's a bad idea, I know. Don't judge it. Just let it nudge your imagination to someplace better.
Incentives. Another approach, also a bad idea, might be to treat the rich more like venture capitalists than sources of free money. Suppose the tax code is redesigned so that the rich only pay taxes to fund social services, such as health care and social security. This gives the rich an incentive to find ways to reduce the need for those services, which would in turn keep their taxes under control. Perhaps you'd see an explosion of private investment in technologies that make it less expensive to provide health care. You might see rapid advances in bringing down the cost of housing for seniors.
Meanwhile, the middle class would be in charge of funding the military. That feels right. The country generally doesn't go to war unless the middle-class majority is on board.
Shared Pain. Happiness is a relative thing. That's how humans are wired. And we're just screwed up enough to feel comfort when our pain is shared. So how can we make the overtaxed rich feel as if the rest of society is feeling a little extra pain?
I doubt that the rich will agree to higher taxes until some serious budget cutting is happening at the same time. That makes the sacrifice seem shared. The rich will feel unfairly singled out unless everyone is taking a hit. And budget cuts make the government seem better managed. That matters.
The bad idea here is to change the debate from arguing about which programs and how much to cut, and instead to do what the private sector has been doing for decades: Pull a random yet round number out of your ear, let's say a 10% cut, just for argument's sake, and apply it across the board. No exceptions. Everything from the military to welfare to federal pensions to government salaries would take the same hit. Managers in the private sector have been handling budget cuts this way for years. They know that their subordinates are all professional liars, so there is no reliable information for making cuts in a more reasoned way. They also know that any project can get by with 10% less money if there is no alternative.
Power. Everyone loves power. I'm guessing that the rich like it more than most people, on average. Another bad idea is to give the rich two votes apiece in any election. That's double the power of other citizens. But don't worry that it will distort election results. There aren't that many rich people, and they are somewhat divided in their opinions, just like the rest of the world. And realistically, is the candidate who gets 51% of the vote always better than the one who gets only 49%? That's a risk I'll take.
I think I've given you enough bad ideas to prime your imagination. Now it's your turn. If you think that solving the nation's fiscal problems is the job of elected officials, you have to ask yourself how that's working so far. The solution, if it exists, won't be anything that looks like normal business. The rich have the money, and they aren't going to give it up for nothing. I know because I am one, and yes, we do hold meetings.
The way our political system is designed, politicians are not free to float bad ideas. Doing so is a sure way to lose an election. Politicians aren't even free to support good ideas if they are too far from the norm. But as citizens, we're free to speculate all we want. And if some new and better idea gains popularity at the grassroots level, our elected leaders would then be able to embrace it. In other words, it's literally your job to fix the budget problem because your government isn't equipped to handle it. The ideas I've mentioned here are bad by design. But if a few million people start brainstorming their own ideas for solving the debt problem, someone might come up with a winner. And if that idea gains popular support on the Internet, it frees politicians to consider it. I have no problem imagining that something along those lines can happen, and the thought feels delightful.
—Mr. Adams is the creator of "Dilbert."
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
What I Read Today - Tuesday August 2, 2011
From: The Wall Street Journal - Tuesday August 2, 2011
Oshkosh, Wis.
With so many historic planes on display, from the Curtiss Jenny to the Predator drone, the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force is perhaps the best aircraft museum in the world. But if you want to see many of these machines actually fly, you have to come to this small town an hour's drive north of Milwaukee during the last week of July. That's when the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) hosts its annual AirVenture, which draws some 500,000 spectators from 60 countries, about 10,000 of whom fly their own planes here and pitch tents next to them for the week. Between the daily air show, flight demonstrations and other fly-ins, tiny Wittman Regional Airport becomes the busiest air space in the world, and the top air-traffic controllers vie to come here and direct the traffic that's constantly overhead—from run-of-the-mill Cessnas to World War II bombers. As one longtime attendee remarked: "This is Disney World for airplane junkies."
Indeed, imagine your state fairgrounds turned over to airplane enthusiasts for a week. Instead of rides and games of chance, the midways and exhibition halls teem with anything and everything you could ever want for your airplane. Need spare parts for your World War I-era biplane, or the newest navigation equipment for your ultralight? It's all here. There are also bulletin boards throughout the grounds covered with "for sale" and "wanted" signs—for new and used avionics, do-it-yourself kits, fly-in fishing lodges and, of course, airplanes.
The key word in the EAA's name is "experimental"—much of the show is dedicated to the latest and greatest innovations and designs—and one big theme this year was the push for more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly aircraft.
HondaJet is a new plane from the Japanese auto manufacturer that has, among other things, a radical new over-the-wing engine-mount design and an all-composite fuselage. German engine-maker Centurion displayed its line of diesel aircraft engines, which perform as well as traditional aviation gas and jet engines but give off fewer emissions and have better fuel economy. And Pipistrel, a Slovenian aircraft manufacturer, turned heads with its line of Light Sport Aircraft, the market for which is relatively new but rapidly growing. LSAs are smaller, lighter planes that require less-extensive certification to fly. Many here see LSAs as the next big opportunity to make flying more widespread and affordable for a larger audience.
As at the Indy 500 and the Kentucky Derby, many of the manufacturers here had white-tablecloth private hospitality tents set up along the flight line to catch the main attraction, in this case the daily 3 p.m. air show. The mood was especially ebullient during this year's events, which were part of the Centennial of Naval Aviation—a yearlong celebration of the January 1911 flight by Eugene Ely, who took off and landed aboard the cruiser USS Pennsylvania in San Francisco Bay. While there are commemorative events across the country marking this important anniversary, none quite compare to Oshkosh: Museums may have replicas of the Curtiss-Ely Pusher that landed on the USS Pennsylvania, but here you could actually see one fly.
Other historic naval aircraft on hand this year included the only flying SB2C Helldiver Navy dive bomber in the world; one of two airworthy PV-2 Harpoons; an OY1/L-5B Marine Corps Observation aircraft that saw combat during the Battle of Iwo Jima; a TBM Navy torpedo bomber in the same paint scheme of the aircraft flown by President George H.W. Bush; and a squad of F4U Corsairs, one of the most revered carrier-based fighter-bombers of World War II.
Spectators got to stand 30 feet away as a Corsair prepared for the day's air show. You may have heard these planes start their engines in countless movies, but nothing compares to standing right there, actually feeling the ground shake and the air move as the pilot cranks up the 2,000-horsepower, 18-cylinder Pratt & Whitney Double Wasp radial engine. When the plane made the 180-degree turn to head toward the runway, hats blew off and small children fell to the ground. Everyone loved it.
The audience lined the runway for the air show, sitting in folding chairs or on blankets with picnic lunches, watching the planes make multiple passes in front of them. An emcee provided running commentary with pertinent facts and specific histories of the planes and the men flying them. As the first of the naval aircraft went by, a trumpeter played the "Navy Hymn," followed by a recording of "The Star Spangled Banner." Shortly afterward, an F/A-18, a modern Navy jet fighter, flew low at one end of the runway, punched its afterburners and treated the crowd to a thunderous sonic boom as it passed.
Most impressive, though, was a formation of four World War II-era Corsairs, some 500 feet in the air. They banked in unison on the far side of the runway and flew directly toward the crowd. It was a magnificent sight, one that you'll likely never tire of, and will keep you coming back for more.
Mr. Yost is a writer in Chicago.
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Oshkosh, Wis.
With so many historic planes on display, from the Curtiss Jenny to the Predator drone, the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force is perhaps the best aircraft museum in the world. But if you want to see many of these machines actually fly, you have to come to this small town an hour's drive north of Milwaukee during the last week of July. That's when the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) hosts its annual AirVenture, which draws some 500,000 spectators from 60 countries, about 10,000 of whom fly their own planes here and pitch tents next to them for the week. Between the daily air show, flight demonstrations and other fly-ins, tiny Wittman Regional Airport becomes the busiest air space in the world, and the top air-traffic controllers vie to come here and direct the traffic that's constantly overhead—from run-of-the-mill Cessnas to World War II bombers. As one longtime attendee remarked: "This is Disney World for airplane junkies."
Indeed, imagine your state fairgrounds turned over to airplane enthusiasts for a week. Instead of rides and games of chance, the midways and exhibition halls teem with anything and everything you could ever want for your airplane. Need spare parts for your World War I-era biplane, or the newest navigation equipment for your ultralight? It's all here. There are also bulletin boards throughout the grounds covered with "for sale" and "wanted" signs—for new and used avionics, do-it-yourself kits, fly-in fishing lodges and, of course, airplanes.
The key word in the EAA's name is "experimental"—much of the show is dedicated to the latest and greatest innovations and designs—and one big theme this year was the push for more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly aircraft.
HondaJet is a new plane from the Japanese auto manufacturer that has, among other things, a radical new over-the-wing engine-mount design and an all-composite fuselage. German engine-maker Centurion displayed its line of diesel aircraft engines, which perform as well as traditional aviation gas and jet engines but give off fewer emissions and have better fuel economy. And Pipistrel, a Slovenian aircraft manufacturer, turned heads with its line of Light Sport Aircraft, the market for which is relatively new but rapidly growing. LSAs are smaller, lighter planes that require less-extensive certification to fly. Many here see LSAs as the next big opportunity to make flying more widespread and affordable for a larger audience.
As at the Indy 500 and the Kentucky Derby, many of the manufacturers here had white-tablecloth private hospitality tents set up along the flight line to catch the main attraction, in this case the daily 3 p.m. air show. The mood was especially ebullient during this year's events, which were part of the Centennial of Naval Aviation—a yearlong celebration of the January 1911 flight by Eugene Ely, who took off and landed aboard the cruiser USS Pennsylvania in San Francisco Bay. While there are commemorative events across the country marking this important anniversary, none quite compare to Oshkosh: Museums may have replicas of the Curtiss-Ely Pusher that landed on the USS Pennsylvania, but here you could actually see one fly.
Other historic naval aircraft on hand this year included the only flying SB2C Helldiver Navy dive bomber in the world; one of two airworthy PV-2 Harpoons; an OY1/L-5B Marine Corps Observation aircraft that saw combat during the Battle of Iwo Jima; a TBM Navy torpedo bomber in the same paint scheme of the aircraft flown by President George H.W. Bush; and a squad of F4U Corsairs, one of the most revered carrier-based fighter-bombers of World War II.
Spectators got to stand 30 feet away as a Corsair prepared for the day's air show. You may have heard these planes start their engines in countless movies, but nothing compares to standing right there, actually feeling the ground shake and the air move as the pilot cranks up the 2,000-horsepower, 18-cylinder Pratt & Whitney Double Wasp radial engine. When the plane made the 180-degree turn to head toward the runway, hats blew off and small children fell to the ground. Everyone loved it.
The audience lined the runway for the air show, sitting in folding chairs or on blankets with picnic lunches, watching the planes make multiple passes in front of them. An emcee provided running commentary with pertinent facts and specific histories of the planes and the men flying them. As the first of the naval aircraft went by, a trumpeter played the "Navy Hymn," followed by a recording of "The Star Spangled Banner." Shortly afterward, an F/A-18, a modern Navy jet fighter, flew low at one end of the runway, punched its afterburners and treated the crowd to a thunderous sonic boom as it passed.
Most impressive, though, was a formation of four World War II-era Corsairs, some 500 feet in the air. They banked in unison on the far side of the runway and flew directly toward the crowd. It was a magnificent sight, one that you'll likely never tire of, and will keep you coming back for more.
Mr. Yost is a writer in Chicago.
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)