Image via Wikipedia

The forerunner to the company was established in the 1880s when the firm’s founder invented a machine that helped the US Census Bureau complete the tabulating task in two rather than ten years and saved the government millions.  In 1911, this firm combined with three others to form the Computing Tabulating Recording Corporation (CTR).

In 1914, Thomas J. Watson joined the company as general manager and became president a year later.  He was innovative and believed in team work as well the motivation and retention of good employees.  Soon after he arrived, the first disabled employee was hired.  He started training programs.  And it was Watson who coined the famous company slogan: “Think.”   Ten years after his arrival, the company changed its name in order to more accurately reflect the company’s mission and goals to International Business Machines (IBM).

Even during the Great Depression, IBM continued to hire people and was among the first companies to provide group life insurance, survivor benefits and paid vacations.  All the while, Watson saw to it that the firm reinvested in its future through research and development activities.  He strongly believed in “world peace through world trade” and had that statement inscribed on the headquarters building in New York.  But, when WWII broke out, he offered his company’s facilities for the production of military ordnances.  It was during the war that the first woman became an IBM vice president.  Immediately after the war ended, the company hired its first black salesman.

As the post war recovery took place, the company was faced with making the transition from mechanical counter devices and systems to the electronic age.  This effort was interrupted with Watson’s death at age 82.  His son, Tom Watson, JR., took over and completely reorganized the company while keeping his father’s philosophies and policies in place.  After his retirement in 1971, IBM continued to flourish.

The shift to PCs and an influx of new technology in the early 1990s had a devastating effect on IBM.  It had to shed old products and seek new areas of opportunities. The firm lost nearly half its workforce, but continued to practices the proven principles for success.  

Today, less than two decades later, IBM is back up to about the same number of employees and revenues have increased to well above previous levels.  This demonstrates that a commitment to excellence at all levels within a company can payoff for everyone involved, in spite of setbacks.  Other companies could learn from IBM’s performance.  And, the government might learn a thing or two as well, if it were so inclined.    

Image via Wikipedia

The new administration in Madison was faced with a multi-billon dollar deficit.  It took steps to address the short-term problem of attracting new business to the state and encourage existing companies to hire by offering them tax incentives.  Concurrently, the long-term issue of public employee salaries, benefits and pensions was also addressed.  Since Wisconsin has one of the country’s most lucrative teacher compensation packages, that’s where the legislators began.

Wisconsin quickly became national news, because it is seen as a battleground state in the 2012 elections and the unions see their power in the public sector being challenged, and  their political influence diminished.  Unions have already been marginalized in the private sector, with less than 7% of workers belonging to these organizations. 

Unions, both private and public, shipped people to the state capital to demonstrate and disrupt the legislation process while state senators from the minority party fled to Illinois to avoid voting on what they believed to be controversial legislation.  They returned to their jobs after the bill was adjusted and passed.  But a judge ruled against the new law and it is on hold as the legislation makes its way through the state’s legal system.

Fearing the legislation will ultimately be decided by the state Supreme Court, currently ruled by a 4-3 majority that may uphold the legislation, unions mounted an effort to oust an incumbent judge and change the balance of power.  This coincided with a statewide election in early April.  There was a record turnout, but only a narrow margin separated the two candidates.  A recount is next.  At the same time, 16 state senators from both parties are facing recall elections.  There is no suggestion of stability in the state, which is not encouraging for business or the residents.

Activists are feeling triumphant though some may not realize their efforts just sabotaged the states future.  This may not bother the unions, because they have kept the anti-government union sentiment from spreading.  Although Ohio has just passed more stringent legislation, Wisconsin has remained in the forefront of the news. 

When Illinois raised taxes this prompted Wisconsin to claim it was the business friendly state.  With the unions showing new-found power, this notion will fade away and companies may consider Indiana, Ohio and others as better places to build plants and hire workers.  So the unions have won the battle but may well lose the war in Wisconsin.  As businesses move on to other parts of the country, the people of the Cheese State will have little to be happy about aside from being the home of this year’s Super Bowl winner.     

Image by kevindooley via Flickr

In childhood the focus was to have fun.  No one said this was my purpose, but early on I discovered that doing the things boys do was most enjoyable.  These things almost always involved other kids such as playing ball, roughhousing and just hanging out together.  These activities, even board games and cards, were all stimulating and usually had one common goal: to win.

As an only child I did things on my own like read, listen to the radio adventure series or later watch TV, practice various sports and, of course, do homework.  But being part of a group and succeeding within that community and competing with other communities is what I liked best.  The team was my family and my support group, yet I wanted to be the star that shined above all others and receive the attention that goes with it.

This self centered, selfish attitude, which I preferred to call ambition, was with me during the growing years to college and beyond.  When I first got into the business world, my eye was not on my peers but on the presidency of the firm.  Being number one was not just a goal, it became an obsession.  I vowed to do whatever it took to reach the top.

Such a strong desire for money, power and recognition was profitable for the companies I worked for and the clients I served; but it did little for my relationships, both in and outside of business.  For a guy who once thrived on belonging to a community and being part of a team this misplaced commitment left me rather lonely.

One would think that these empty feeling lead to a change of spirit.  However, the result was to push harder and win no matter what the cost.  I finally received a degree of success, but it wasn’t enough because chasing after more always meant I wanted more.  After many years this realization finally sunk in, it caused me to rethink my life and the self-imposed goals I placed on myself, which were actually restrictions. 

Admittedly, I wasn’t a particularly good husband, father or friend for my first 50 years or so but have gotten better in all these areas, I believe.  The few business dealings I have now are meaningful, because I try to do what’s right and deliver real value to the other person or company.  And, I get real joy from just being part of whatever community I am in and make whatever contributions I can without expectations.

When it’s all said and done, today I’m pretty much having the fun like I did as a kid.  Now, however, there are no preconceptions of needing to be the best.  I am more than satisfied to be together with others and participate in life’s activities.  The big shift is with my goals.  I no longer strive to do great things; I just want to do good things.  

Image by arbyreed via Flickr

According to a recent Rasmussen Report, the younger age groups were the most overextended, with 45% of those in the 18 to 29 and 30 to 39 year old age groups claiming they were under water.  This is often the result of putting too little down and reaching above their means in hopes that the value of the property would prove to be a profitable investment.  

Interestingly, nearly 40% of those 65+ were up-side-down, which may be due to refinancing to take out money to fund retirement.  Of those claiming their homes were worth less than their mortgage, 32% were white, 60% black and 38% classified as other.  Non-married homeowners are more likely to own more than the home’s value, 39% versus 34% for those who are married. 

As might be expected, the lower the income the more likely it is that a person will be overextended on their mortgage, 53% of those with incomes less than $20,000 which slides to just 18% for $100,000+ earners.  The bump in the middle of this downward trend is for those with incomes of $40,000 to $60,000 having the second highest under water rate at 46%.

When asked what should happen if someone can’t afford to make their mortgage payments, respondents were clear.  An overwhelming 60% said they should sell their home and find a less expensive one, compared to only 26% who felt the government should assist them in making payments.  Two-thirds of whites said sell the home, while a little more than a third of blacks agreed as did half of those classified as other.

The government, after seizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac some two years ago, is poised to extricate itself from future home-financing involvement.  The Administration will soon be offering several options to Congress.  Whatever plans are adopted, a raise in borrowing costs will result.  This will suppress home prices for years to come.

One thing is certain the housing market will continue to flounder.  How long is up for speculation.  This is not good news for the recovering society.  Since homeownership is the major individual asset, those who have positive equity will not be in a hurry to sell and take on a bigger commitment.

Until all the factions involved in the housing market can agree on who guarantees loans there is little likelihood of financial institutions opening their coffers to provide loans to those hoping to buy houses.  If this does not happen, our children and their children will have difficulty in attaining the American dream of owning a home. 

Image by aflcio via Flickr

 “Look for the union label,” was a familiar jingle following WWII.  This ad campaign, paid for with funds from union dues, was heard over the airways for many years after the war was over.  

This public awareness effort was designed to convenience consumers that better quality products, made by Americans, always carried a union logo.  This also had an added side benefit of letting union members know their leaders were working on their behalf, since union membership in the private sector was at its peak back in the 1950s. 

However, there were many products made in America that did not use union labor; and imports were gaining popularity, especially premium products from Europe and cheaper ones from Asia (called the Orient in the days before political correctness).  Along the way European prices came down and Asian quality, primarily Japanese-made, went up.

With manufacturing taking place in emerging nations and Americans looking for lower prices, cheap is considered good.  But we are learning that value is made up of quality and service along with a reasonable price.  How well and how long does a product perform is the first criteria?  Does the manufacturer stand behind the product, and have people you know had a favorable experience using it?  After that, the price compared to other products should be evaluated in order to determine if it represents a true value.

Products made in America do not always win on the three-point scale, but they often rank high.  There are many familiar brands that are owned by companies headquartered in other countries.  Some folks say not to buy these products because the profits end up in the pockets of foreign firms.  But if it’s made here that means jobs for American workers.  Right now, this is of utmost importance.

Floating around the Internet is a letter suggesting we don’t buy some brands that were once owned by US manufacturers and select the private label brands instead.  The writer of the piece may not realize that many of the better-known brands owned by off-shore companies are made here.  They also spend money on advertising, which helps support the communications business while the store brands simply go along for the ride by competing only on price.

Yes, it would be nice to have more American firms providing us with more buying options.  But the consumer must be willing to pay a little more for a better product.  Human nature being what it is, it is unlikely we will buy things just because they are made in the USA.  Although knowing that our favorite brand keeps Americans working may be a factor in staying with that product.

So if the product is American made that’s good for our economy.  Should it be from an American  owned company, too, that’s even better.  Of course, some ingredients or parts may come from other countries and be put together here.  Will we ever know for sure?   

Image via Wikipedia

There’s an old adage that says, “If you don’t know where you’re going any road will get you there.”  This applies to the fixing of government, too.  Across-the-board cuts will be hard to make and even harder to make permanent, so specialized reductions will be the rule.  Part of the problem is the size of government, like the dinosaurs of old it has a huge appetite and moves rather slow. 

How about taking a look at reducing the operating costs and generating increased income by turning to American business to run what are currently failing enterprises?  Every operation should be under scrutiny from the postal service to state liquor stores to local libraries.  And this is just the beginning.

Don’t dismiss this concept too quickly.  Think about your own experiences with these government run services.  Take the post office (United States Postal Service or USPS).  If it were a business it would be in receivership, bankrupt, finished.  It is losing billions of dollars every year, volume is off and the only way to make up for this is to continue to raise rates.  This, coupled with a cut in services, will drive away more business.  What if UPS was allowed to take over the post offices and given a contract to deliver all US mail using some current employees but not all and fold in the packages with their system?  Could they make this profitable for us as well as their stockholders.

There are 18 states with state run liquor stores.  Ever buy booze in one of them?  It’s more like going to an auto parts store than a place for buying alcohol.  Either let a capable retailer take over this operations and merchandise the goods they are trying to sell or close the stores and allow the distillers and wineries to sell their goods through supermarkets, drug stores and convenience outlets.  With no operating costs, the states tax revenue would be pure income.

At the municipal level, the libraries offer a fine service but it usually comes at a very high cost to taxpayers.  With the book publishing and selling business in transition, Barnes and Noble, for instance, is facing serious issues.  They have large stores, expensive rents and don’t need as much floor space because digital and online books are growing in popularity.  So take the community libraries and put their operations into the part of the stores that the chain is not using.  It will bring more people into the store, many of whom will buy books or whatever else they sell.

If these work out, we should look at national parks, state departments of motor vehicles and new locations for issuing building and other local permits.  What do you think?

Social Security benefits are under a two year COLA (Cost Of Living Adjustment) freeze.  Medicare will be slashing $500 billion in the years ahead, which will undoubtedly cut care and the quality of these services.  The possibility of extending the current tax cuts for those earning under $200,000 does nothing new.  But not extending them is, in effect, a tax increase. 

Raising the capital gains tax by 5 percentage points (from 15% to 20%) is not a 5% increase, it’s more than a 33% increase.  New Seniors worked hard to earn this money for our retirements, so such a tax leaves us with less to live on.  Still looming on the horizon are higher energy costs through the cap and trade tax.  Then, there’s the possibility of the VAT (Value Added Tax), which will increase the cost of everything we buy.

The tax hikes are heaped on top of the losses many New Seniors were forced to accept when our investment portfolios tanked a couple of years ago and are yet to recover to previous highs.  Plus home values have dropped.  So our overall net worth is less.  Now the politicians want to eliminate the death tax exemptions; thereby making it almost impossible to leave much to our heirs, especially if you own a small business or a family farm.  When will we get a break?

If you’re still working, you might want to consider holding on to the job, if you can.  Those of us who are retired can’t go back into the workplace at the salary levels of just a few years back.  So if we need additional money just to make ends meet it must come from savings, if we’re lucky enough to have savings; or we may have to take a job paying a lower wage, if we can find one.  No wonder many New Seniors are concerned about outliving their money with the shadow of inflation waiting to come forward.

Have you spoken with your family and others who might be able to advise you about financial matters?  Do you need to make lifestyle changes?  Are you willing to do whatever it takes?  Most folks who have been retired for a few years and don’t have a guaranteed pension are coming to the realization that interest, dividends and Social Security are not enough.  So, it’s time to develop a new plan.

Those who have already created a better way to play the cards we’ve been dealt have something to share with the New Seniors community.  This is the time to tell the people at NewSeniors.com what you’re doing in order to live a comfortable life, whether we’re in a recession or not.  After all, we’ve experienced difficulty in past years and survived, so let’s help each other ride out the current financial storm.      

Image by robnguyen01 via Flickr

It’s ironic that these remarks came at a time when 44% of adults say they are eating out less than they were six months ago, according to Rasmussen Reports.  The research show that 78% of those surveyed eat out never, rarely or less than once a week.  Therefore restrictions, requirements and regulations imposed on the restaurant operators could make eating out less desirable, because customers want foods not normally served at home.  If restaurants don’t provide this, their business will suffer.

Individual restaurants, franchise operators and chains offer entry level jobs to many Americans, particularly young and generally unskilled workers.  Forcing menu change is undoubtedly going to be met with foodservice industry resistance.  The kids fare is pretty standard throughout the country: macaroni and cheese, chicken fingers, burgers,  fries and sodas.  Instead the first lady suggests fruits and vegetables as well as low fat milk.  This won’t do much to get families going out to dinner more often.

When eating at home, only 45% of the nation’s families sit down for dinner together more than three times a week.  So what are the family members eating alone and together?  Chances are the education and the discipline needs to begin at home.  But this would be too difficult to enforce, so the government has selected an easy target to force its will upon.  And, it has the power and the wherewithal to make these rules stick.

No one knows how much this will cost in terms of lost customers and lost jobs in restaurants.   Naturally, more government employees will be needed and there will be other costs to administer this policing effort.  The one possible side benefit is the suggestion to reduce the size of portions being offered.  This could represent a short-term savings in food costs, but smaller sizes without lower prices could have a long-term adverse affect with restaurant patrons.

As a New Senior, I remember being taught about food and nutrition all the way through school.  Growing up during WWII we had rationing, so good food was at a premium.  We grew vegetables and some fruits in our Victory Garden.  Fresh produce was available from truck farmers who made the rounds each week.  Moms had to substitute ingredients in many dishes.  Overall we eat pretty healthy, if not always tasty, foods.  The big difference back then was that kids played hard and did this for sustained periods everyday.  Getting out, getting active and eating right may be the best way to help slim down America’s kids, but do we want the government to mandate and run it? 

Image by Samuraijohnny via Flickr

The so-called health care reform bill that was pushed through Congress – after arm-twisting, backroom deals and out-right lying – won’t be fully implemented until 2014.  By that time, based on a straight line projection of the increase just experienced, my wife’s basic plan will double. 

A call to the insurance company resulted in plenty of non-answers, double-talk and false sympathy.  Not only was this frustrating, it has become just plain scary for a retired couple that has seen nearly a third of our savings and much of our home equity vanish over the past couple of years, with no signs of short-term recovery.

On top of this, our family physician sold his practice to a younger doctor who has raised the rates for office visits, but the insurance company’s allowable charges have not increased.  We can’t be the only ones feeling the squeeze.  Am I wrong to suspect the current administration is turning a blind-eye to increases from health insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and those who do the lab tests, x-rays and other services? 

My wife recently underwent the first surgery of her life.  We could not believe the costs to date and the statements are still coming in.  We have yet to find out what portion of these bills will be covered and what we must pay.  They say it will take a couple of months before we receive all the charges.  I wonder if the fact that she actually used the insurance we’ve been paying for over decades will mean another increase is on the way.

There’s no doubt in my mind that we need health care reform.  But what we got instead was 32 million more people on the insured roles, half of whom will be on Medicaid.  This means the ones who have paid their premiums over the years are expected to bear the load for those unwilling or unable to buy insurance.  And the insurance companies are raising rates to hedge against the added cost they expect to incur. 

This suggests the entire health care system needs to be scrutinized from top to bottom and revamped where needed.  We know something is wrong when $500 billion is going to be cut from Medicare and the administration claims this will be offset by tightening up on waste, fraud and abuse.  Wouldn’t you think the folks in Washington would have fixed these problems long ago instead of hoping to accomplish this sometime in the future?

It’s time to change the existing health care bill and do something to protect the people who have tried to do the right thing but somehow got caught an ongoing political battle.  We should not be the ones to suffer through higher premiums, lower quality care or both.       

Image via Wikipedia

Long before high tech took over our lives and when self-service retailing was the exception rather than the rule, the shopping experience could be a pleasant event.  I’m talking about the post-WWII days that stretched on for a couple of decades.  Department stores and boutique shops employed people who actually knew their job was to help the customer find something that was right for them.  In fact, we could trust their judgment as to whether the fit or color of a piece of clothing, as an example, was right for us.

These “retail clerks,” as they were called back then, also provided us with information designed to aid in the buying decision.  They tended to specialize in a particular area such as clothing, furniture, appliances, hardware, baby apparel and the like.  They could demonstrate products, tell us about how something was made or compare the strengths and weaknesses of various brands.

As retailers tried to cut costs they moved away from service to self-service claiming that we consumers could select the products we wanted and save money in the process.  The manufacturer’s advertising became the main source of product information.  This less-service concept has been stretched to the point where we can walk into a department store and spent a long time searching for someone to help us, only to be disappointed because they know less than we do about a particular product.

In recent years the Internet has in some ways taken on the role of the sales clerk of days gone by.  And, since many of us get the information we need online, we often decide to purchase it online too.  Now some retailers are using this technology to provide product information to people looking for help when they make a trip to the store.   

According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, there “is a device [being tested] that transforms the front window of a store into a giant touch screen.  Instead of looking at a static mannequin, consumers can interact with the screen to select outfits for an avatar.  Meanwhile, kiosks allow a customer to chat with a virtual sales associate who can provide advice on such topics as how to install a new flat-screen television.

Another device is a mirror that enables a shopper to scan a dress and then project that clothing onto her body before going to the dressing room.  She can also tap the mirror to view different colors, find matching shoes and send images to her Facebook profile.”

Very futuristic, but why not invest in hiring and training real people to take on the role of the sales clerk of old and provide human help?  This might be the incentive we need to go back into stores.  And, it certainly would help with the nation’s unemployment problem.