27th Dec2011

International Test Scores, Irrelevant Policies

by iSpit

Perhaps no research finding has influenced education policy more, or been subject to greater misinterpretation, than our ranking on international mathematics and science tests.

Previous critiques of international comparisons have focused largely on flaws in sampling and the limitations of test scores as a measure of the quality of a nation‘s education system. These problems are still relevant. Equally important, however, are the conclusions drawn from the comparisons, even assuming their technical validity.

 

For decades, our rhetoric and education policies have been based on the premise that the ranking of U.S. students on international tests will lead to a decline in our nation‘s economic competitiveness and a shortage of American scientists and engineers.

 

It is ironic, then, that given the rhetoric and policies surrounding international test-score comparisons-much of it unsupported by evidence-little attention is paid to two of the most powerful findings of these comparisons: the strong negative effects on student performance of both family poverty and concentrations of poverty in schools.
Instead, we draw conclusions from the international studies that are not supported either by the findings of these studies or by research more generally.

 

“First, our rhetoric has assumed that test-score rankings are linked to a country’s economic competitiveness, yet the data for industrialized countries consistently show this assumption to be unwarranted. For example, the World Economic Forum’s 2010-2011 global-competitiveness report ranks the United States fourth, exceeded only by Switzerland, Sweden, and Singapore. Many of the countries that ranked high on test scores rank lower than the United States on competitiveness-for example, South Korea, No. 22, and Finland, No. 7.

 

Although we cannot predict future economic trends, we do know that test-score rankings are a poor basis upon which to understand these trends or to know what to do about them. The reason is clear: Other variables, such as outsourcing to gain access to lower-wage employees, the climate and incentives for innovation, tax rates, health-care and retirement costs, the extent of government subsidies or partnerships, protectionism, intellectual-property enforcement, natural resources, and exchange rates overwhelm mathematics and science scores in predicting economic competitiveness.
Second, we assume that U.S. students‘ performance on math and science tests is reflected in a shortage of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. The data, however, give a quite-different picture.

 

The fact is the United States has both a large pool of students with the academic credentials needed to enter science and engineering fields and an ample supply-and sometimes an oversupply (for example, of chemistry Ph.D.s)-to meet labor-market demand. That is the case even though slippage occurs between the number of graduates in science and engineering and the number who work in these fields, often because some graduates choose, for example, careers in finance, investment banking, management, or entrepreneurial activity. When companies claim that they need to hire from other countries because they cannot find qualified U.S. graduates, it is more likely that they cannot find them at the wages they would prefer to pay and find it cheaper to outsource. That is not the fault of our international test-score ranking or the training of U.S. scientists and engineers.

 

Moreover, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projections show large variations in job opportunities among science and engineering fields. For example, employment in computer-software engineering; biological science; and biomedical, civil, and environmental engineering is expected to grow faster than the average for all occupations, while growth in computer programming; chemical and materials science; and electrical, mechanical, and marine engineering is expected to be slow.

 

Although mathematics and physics are expected to have faster-than-average growth, the size of the market for those who seek basic-research positions is quite small.
Of the 30 occupations in the United States with the fastest rate of growth, only nine are in science and engineering fields, and 16 of the 30 do not require a college degree, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics projections. More important, of the 30 occupations expected to provide the largest numerical growth in jobs, only two (both in computer fields) are in science and engineering, and 23 do not require a college degree.

 

If we consider only occupations requiring a college degree or above, 15 of the top 30 fastest-growing occupations are in science and engineering; however, only eight (six in computer fields) of the 30 occupations expected to provide the largest numerical growth in jobs are in science and engineering.

 

At the same time that our rhetoric has linked test scores, economic competitiveness, and shortages of scientists and engineers, our education policies have been dominated by test-based accountability, apparently with the expectation that accountability requirements would close the achievement gap, raise our ranking on international comparisons, and lead to a stronger economy and an increased supply of scientists and engineers. The assumption that accountability requirements are a solution to our education problems is as incongruous as our rhetoric about the economy and scientists and engineers.

 

Bob Dahm Research accumulated over the years, analyzed in a 2011 National Research Council report, shows that accountability policies have not resulted in meaningful improvements in student learning and, in many instances, have created perverse incentives that weaken it. Yet, we continue to mandate accountability requirements that are not used-and in some cases are specifically discouraged-by the very countries whose test scores we most admire, including Finland and Japan.

 

At the same time, we have ignored the strongest evidence emerging from the international tests: the adverse effects of poverty and concentrations of poverty in schools on student performance in all countries.

 

Although countries can exacerbate or mitigate the impact of poverty through their social, fiscal, and education policies, and although some students do overcome the odds, the fact is the gap between high-poverty and more-affluent students remains a fundamental problem in virtually every country.

 

The 2009 Program for International Student Assessment, or PISA, findings for member-countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show that, on average, close to 60 percent of the difference in reading performance between schools is accounted for by the socioeconomic status of the students attending the schools. In the United States, socioeconomic status accounts for close to 80 percent of the difference.

 

That gap is reflected throughout the students‘ lives. It is specifically the low-income populations and regions that are underrepresented in mathematics, science, and engineering fields, and in professions generally-and it is these populations that are at the most severe disadvantage in competing for jobs in a global economy. This is part of a much broader set of problems faced by high-poverty populations. We have one of the largest divides between rich and poor in the industrialized world. One-fifth of our children live in poverty; millions of these children are concentrated in high-poverty schools-a setting that greatly compounds the problems of poverty.

 

Our policy deliberations work at the fringes of these realities, with remedies that are not focused on the basic problem of poverty. The problem will not be addressed by implementing tougher accountability requirements. Nor will it be addressed by rhetoric about mathematics and science scores, economic competitiveness, and generic shortages of scientists and engineers.

 

Poverty, not international test-score comparisons, is the most critical problem to be addressed by our public policies. Unfortunately, our recent political polarization over budgetary priorities does not leave much room for optimism.
 
Iris C. Rotberg is a research professor of education policy at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development, in Washington. She is also the editor of Balancing Change and Tradition in Global Education Reform (Rowman & Littlefield Education, second edition, 2010), which describes education reforms in 16 countries.
18th Dec2011

Great North Korean Leader Kim Jong IL Dies At 69

by iSpit

If you love Kim Jong IL like I do, you must visit this tumblr –> http://kimjongillookingatthings.tumblr.com/

North Korea‘s leader Kim Jong Il has died of apparent heart failure. He was 69.

In a “special broadcast” Monday from the North Korean capital, state media said Kim died on a train due to a “great mental and physical strain” during a “high-intensity field inspection” Saturday. It said an autopsy done Sunday “fully confirmed” the diagnosis.

Kim Jong Il wanted his successor to be his son, Kim Jong Un, who is believed to be in his late 20s. But there was no immediate word on a new leader in North Korea.

Kim Jong Il was maligned by some as a delusional dictator and an eccentric playboy who was responsible for famine at home and terrorism abroad. To others, he was a political survivor who managed to hold his own in a high-stakes game of nuclear poker with big world powers.

A Political Foundation

Kim’s official biographers say he was born on Mount Baekdu, the mythic origin of the Korean race. In fact, he was born in 1942 in the Russian Far East, where his father, Kim Il Sung, was waging guerrilla warfare against the Japanese occupation of Korea.

Given Kim Il Sung‘s stature and charisma as North Korea‘s founding father, Kim Jong Il was at a disadvantage from the start.

Kim Jong Il has been more than a frontman, but less than the totalitarian leader his father was, able to just issue diktats and do whatever he wanted to do,” says Selig Harrison, a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. Harrison met twice with Kim Il Sung. He says Kim Jong Il was not the natural-born political animal his father was.

Kim Jong Il was the son of Kim Il Sung‘s first wife. His second wife wanted her eldest son to be heir, not Kim Jong Il. Many of the old guard within the ruling Workers’ Party, meanwhile, felt a dynastic succession from one Kim to the next was “un-Communist.”

“I think this had a lot to do with making him a very defensive, very manipulative, cunning operator who did eventually get his father’s nod as the heir, who faced tremendous opposition from within the Workers’ Party,” he says.

Replacing His Father

The death of his father in 1994 thrust Kim into the spotlight. The following year, economic collapse plunged the country into roughly three years of famine that killed more than 2 million people.

B.R. Myers, head of the international studies department at Dongseo University in South Korea, says that even with the regime’s many tools of repression, it’s amazing that Kim was able to prevent a massive exodus of starving refugees.

Myers says when Kim took over the country in 1994, the economy was already in free fall, and the country had lost its main benefactor in the Soviet Union.

“When you think that we were all predicting North Korea‘s downfall within one or two years back then, when you think about how well he played that card during his rule, it really is extraordinary,” Myers says.

The late Hwang Jang Yop was Kim’s mentor and a top Workers’ Party official until he defected to South Korea in 1997. After that, he was a harsh critic of his former bosses. But he recalled that even at the height of the famine, Kim commanded intense loyalty from many North Koreans. Hwang recalled visiting a North Korean logistics officer during the crisis; the officer said they were “OK to die of hunger” out of loyalty to Kim.

Kim responded to the famine by launching some limited economic reforms, including the jangmadang, or private markets for food and daily necessities that the state-run economy could no longer adequately provide.

He also stepped up diplomatic engagement, leading to the first inter-Korean summit in 2000.

In a 2009 interview, shortly before his death, former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung recalls that Kim the dictator was abhorrent, but Kim the summit host was a far cry from the foreign media caricature of Kim as Dr. Evil in a leisure suit, platform shoes and bouffant hairdo.

Wendy Sherman, a special adviser to President Clinton on North Korea, accompanied then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to Pyongyang in 2001, and met Kim along with Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson.

“We shared similar impressions of meeting him. He was smart and a quick problem-solver,” Sherman says. “He is also witty and humorous. Our overall impression was very different from the way he was known to the outside world.”

Sherman sat next to Kim at a stadium to watch a huge festival of synchronized dancing. She says she turned to Kim and told him she had the sense that in some other life, he was a “great director.”

“He clearly took such delight in putting these performances together,” she says. “And he says, yes, that he cared about this a great deal and that he owned every Academy Award movie, he had watched them all, and he also had every film of Michael Jordan’s NBA basketball games and had watched them as well.”

A Nuclear North Korea

North Korea announced it tested its first atomic bomb in 2006. Pyongyang then played the nuclear card in a game of brinksmanship. It promised to disarm, but then backtracked if it felt slighted or wanted more political and economic benefits in return.

President George W. Bush maligned Kim as a “moral pygmy” and placed North Korea squarely on his so-called “Axis of Evil” along with Iran and Iraq.

Pyongyang pointed to Washington’s rhetoric as evidence that the U.S. was poised to attack the North or seek regime change. Kim used the threat of U.S. hostility, meanwhile, to divert domestic attention from economic hardships.

Zhang Liangui, a North Korea expert at the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Party School in Beijing, says Kim’s reading of his regional opponents was spot on, and he was effective in exploiting the differences among them.

“North Korea is a small and weak country, yet Kim was able to manipulate so many big countries in its hand,” Zhang says. “Kim made the other countries in the six-party talks dance to his tune, and there was nothing the other parties could do about it.”

In other words, North Korea is a small country shaped by the big powers surrounding it: China, Russia, Japan and the U.S. But North Korea‘s geo-strategic position in Asia is such that a shrewd tactician, perhaps with a little nuclear clout, can turn the peninsula into a tail that wags quite a few dogs.

06th Dec2011

Why The U.S. Shouldn’t Give Up On Solar Technology

by iSpit

Amid all the negative coverage of the Solyndra solar bankruptcy in the past two weeks, three other tidbits might have escaped your notice. But I think they bear highlighting here, because solar technology continues to be an incredibly viable renewable energy option for the United States — not just in terms of an energy source but as a source of American “clean” jobs and new revenue.

The first development was an even bigger loan guarantee by the U.S. Department of Energy, to the tune of $1.2 billion, to finalize a concentrating solar plant in the Mojave Desert. The project is sponsored by Abengoa Solar and it will have a capacity of 250 megawatts when completed. That will increase the nation’s supply of concentrating solar power by 50 percent.

Noted Energy Secretary Steven Chu:

“Investment in solar generation facilities like the Mojave Solar Project are critical to our effort to create good, clean energy jobs in America and compete with countries like China in the global clean energy race. This project will supply local utilities with energy, help drive down the cost of solar power, and fund more than 900 American jobs, all at minimal risk to the taxpayer.”

You can bet this project will be scrutinized very closely, given the Solyndra bankruptcy, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The project will generate enough electricity to power approximately 54,000 homes, and project is being supported through a power purchase agreement with PG&E.

Earlier this month, ABI Research predicted that the United States would become the world’s biggest market for annual solar photovoltaic installations in 2013, edging by the current leader, Germany. (Yes, this is a different sort of solar, I know.)

In 2010, approximately 900 megawatts of photovoltaic capacity was switched on, and that number is expected to double in 2011. One factor that will drive the shift in installations is the anticipated introduction of feed-in tariffs, under a clarified ruling by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Feed-in tariffs provide long-term contracts to renewable energy producers. ABI believes that California will be the first state to introduce the tariffs.

If things go as expected, there could be 5 gigawatts of solar capacity installed during 2013, according to ABI. Among those poised to benefit are three U.S. companies: First Solar of Tempe, Ariz.; SunPower of San Jose, Calif.; and SolarWorld of Camarillo, Calif.

I especially love the third bit of news, which I picked up yesterday from the Solar Foundation, which conducts an annual census of jobs in the solar industry. Warning, the next paragraph includes good news about U.S. employment, which may prove alarming to those of us used to negative numbers.

The latest report, 011: A Review of the U.S. Solar Workforce,” estimates that solar companies added 6,735 new workers across all 50 states. That was a growth rate of about 6.8 percent, compared with 0.7 percent for the economy as a whole. (Yes, even though the unemployment rate seems stuck, there were actually net new jobs created last year.)

I suppose it is human nature for us to focus on the most recent, most sensational news that we have heard about a given topic. Solyndra’s demise — with its layoffs and taxpayer implications — is certainly worth close scrutiny. But sloppiness on the part of the Department of Energy, or whoever is to blame for this misguided investment, isn’t a reason to write off solar in the United States. Despite the politics, the technology still has a bright future in the United States, if we give it a fair chance.

05th Dec2011

Trouble Marker: The Conversationalist – Short Story By: Eric Blair

by Mr. Blair

…I am meeting with agent Renee Morris of the FBI; a beautiful, slender, Latin woman with long reddish brown hair, hazel eyes, and a beauty mole on her right cheek. We are meeting in a coffee shop because she suspects that the C.I.A. haves her home bugged. So, once I’ve seen her come through the door of the café I hit record on my recorder and placed it under a newspaper I was reading. She ordered a small coffee and she greeted me with a big hug and kiss on the cheek as if we were old friends. We both set down as she looked around franticly at anything that’s out of place in and outside of the café. Twenty minutes we spoke about completely nothing, she wanted to make sure the coast was clear. I realized that she has very seductive eyes and also she smells like spring time. She slowly sips her coffee as she gazes into space with an utterly blank look on her face. She swallows her coffee and exhales and then looks me into my eyes as if she was afraid. She utters,

 

 “I’m ready.”

Renee smirks as she moves her finger around the rim of her coffee lid.

Renee says, “Trevor is a mad man but pleasant.”

I say, “How exactly?”

Renee says, “He’s very polite, funny, and charming. If he wasn’t a maniac I would have been rode his pogo stick the moment I met him.”

I say, “How did you catch him? You’re famous for bringing him to justice.”

Renee says, “Funny, me and my partner had been hunting him down for two years and half years, no luck. One day the prick just waltz into FBI headquarters and turns his self in. Every agent in the building pulled their gun on him; his hands were in the air as he smiled from ear to ear. There wasn’t a moment a gun wasn’t on him. Since he was my case I received the privilege to interrogate the most dangerous man in the world. In every hallway in a three floor radius were armed agents, just in case he tried to escape.”

I say, “Where you afraid?”

Renee says, “Damn right I was!”

 

…I entered the interrogation room, Trevor was smiling as both hands were cuffed to the table, and his feet were shackled, and mind you he was barefooted also. This was serious, the U.S. capture one of their escaped boogiemen. He stares into my eyes with his piercing brown eyes and he says, “‘Ello.” I said to him, “Cut the bullshit, what made you turn yourself in?” He smirked and says, “Can ya un-cuff my ‘ands?” I stared at him with such an angry look on my face and told him, “No, fuckin’ talk.” He said to me, “Ah will if Ah could relax. Really, what Barney am Ah gonna cuz? Every floor ‘as an agent on it.” I said to him, “How do you know that.” He smirks and says, “Hm. Ah know things, luv. Ya be boggled if ya only knew the things Ah know. Trust me.” I reached for the key as I yelled at him, “I don’t fuckin’ trust you but if you try anything I will put two in your head if you try anything.” He says to me as he winks his right eye, “Fair ‘nough.” I un-cuffed him and sat back down in my seat. He cracks his back and then leans forward as he folds his hands on the table in front of him. He says to me, “Ah needed a break frum the job.” I say to him, “What does that mean? You’re taking break from what; break from being a pain in my ass? Really, what made you, the infamous Mr. Bigglesworth turn his self in?” He looks me in my eyes with a dark, intense look and says, “Do ya really wanna know the truth?” I said to him, “Give it to me, baby. I had heard it all.” Trevor scratches the back of his head as he smirks and says, “Ah am gonna kill President Bush.” I laughs at first until I see it all over his face, he’s wasn’t joking. My laugh turns into a panicking laughter; I was thinking in my head, I should kill him right here, right now but what if I miss. I wasn’t ready to die if I miss because he would have killed me. He begun talking again, he looked me in my eyes and said, “Now that ya dun wit’ the chucklin’ are ya ready ta ‘ear my Jackie?” My voice quivers, “Shoot.” Trevor leans back in his chair and says to me, “Bush was responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers, too many people died that day and they will never have their justice.—”

I rudely interrupts him by saying, “So, you’re going to be that hero by killing the most power man in the world?” Trevor smirks, “For one, Ah’ve killed the top five “powerful” men in the world already. Two, Yes, Ah am gonna kill Bush for his attempted world domination. Three, I need ta lay low ‘til the rats Ah need kill cums out ta play. If Ah stayed on the run every world Joe Hopper would ‘ave burnt the world ta the ground for me. Spare the innocent lives, Ah give the “good guys” what ya want, me. So, ya blokes nick me, Ah’ll eat that bird, and Ah’m out in a year.” My jaw dropped, not because of his plan but how far gone off this planet this nut job was. He was sitting in front of me telling me he’s going to break out of prison and kill the President. I told him, “You’re not getting out of jail ever! You killed over a hundred people, stole all the money and data from all twelve Federal Reserve Banks, and the remaining gold from Fort Knots. You tried to fuck the U.S. and now we’re going to sodomize you and your offspring for life.” Trevor just laughed really hard, the type of laughs that’s from the belly. He looked over at me with his eyes watering from laughter and uttered to me, “Sure ya right, luv.” I asked him, “Where is the gold and money?”

He wipes a tear from his left eye and says, “5101 Broad Street, on the Navy Yard in Philadelphia in a blue double container.” I was thinking to myself, that was too easy, so I asked him, “Why did you do it?” He says, “Debt. This economy ‘as been robbin’ their own people for hundreds o’ years, the poor stay poor and ya know the rest. No one cares, it’s ‘ow the wheels turn. If Ah steal the U.S. currency cuzin’ the economy debt ta be reduce ta zero. Nothing will be backin’ the dollar bill. Helpin’ the common man ta be on the same level as the rich man. Everyone starts from scratch, the beginning o’ a depression by 2007.” I am sitting across this man thinking, he’s a sociopath but could be a genius? I asked him, “What about the people in this so called “depression” that might get hurt.” He smirked, “Hate ta say, sum ants ‘as ta die for men ta become gods.” The words slipped out of my mind and I yell, “You’re a fucking terrorist!” He slammed his hand on the table and I pulled out my gun. He looked at me with an enraged look in his eyes like mad dog, he screams, “For fuck sake, Ah am not a terrorist! I am a utopian! Si vis pacem, para bellum!” I cocked back the hammer on my gun as it was pointing in his face; I was a bit nervous. I said to him, “Calm down, Bigglesworth or I will put two in your fuckin’ face.” He stared directly into my barrow with no fear. He then said the most chilling words to me, “Everyday I am prepare ta die and freeze in hell.” He noticed the sweat trickling down the side of face. He smirks and says to me, “Ya wanna know sum thing? We live in a world were seconds are forever and minutes are seconds. Ah ‘ave ta think outside o’ time, I ‘ave ta control the elements ‘round me. There isn’t anything called destiny nor fate, there are only seconds and minutes. If you’re too slow ya dead and if ya too late ya lost. All o’ this, 9/11, diseases in Africa, U.S. invadin’ the Middle East, the oil crisis, etc., all this bullocks is a game ta the real world leaders and secret societies. Ah want these big wigs ta know sum thing, Ah don’t play games, Ah fuckin’ win. Ta beat the game Ah will be the one controlin’ the time cuz wit’out time a game is jus’ a after thought. Ah am ‘ere ta save the world by any means necessary.” I lowed my gun and his body language calmed down from a tense, ready to attack position. My legs were shaking under the table, he almost convinced me that he just might be this world’s last hope. His insanity is brilliant, almost perfect. We were silence for several minutes because I was so afraid of him. He looked me into my eyes and winked at me once more. I walked over to the door and banged on it two times for the S.W.A.T. unit to come in. Five men entered the room, Trevor looked up at them and said, “Hm. These buggers can’t ‘old me on a Alan day.” He is completely fearless, he’s so fearless the most bravest men fears him. The team shackled him up and escorted him out of the room to a supermax prison in the middle of no where. Before he left the room he stopped and looked over at me as he was sporting a beautiful smile on his face and said, “Morris, ya a gud Joe Hopper, one o’ the last gud ones. Ah’ll be seein’ ya soon, luv.” The team escorts him out of the room. I just sat in the room for a hour afraid of what he knows and can do to my family. I fear that man more than my government. Ten hours late, the containers were found by my team and all the gold was melted and he blown up the money and data with a C4 timer as soon as the container door opened. All that money blown to kingdom come, he’s a man of his word. He’s one sublime bastard; he has set the United States back for ten to fifteen years.

 

Renee pauses, I am not sure if she’s going to cry or scream; all I know is she can’t live with being the woman who caught the infamous Trevor E. Bigglesworth. She is the Elliot Ness of our time. How can you live with catching the most villainess hero in history?

I ask, “Do you have any more encounters with Trevor?”

Renee says, “Yes, many. Like the time—”

 

Renee phone rings, she answers it; it sounds like she’s talking to her child. She abruptly stands up and looks down at me and say, “I am sorry, Mr. Eli, can we finish the rest of this interview another time? I have to pick up my daughter from dance class. My husband fuckin’ forgot to do it, why did I marry that idiot?! Is next Thursday fine with you?” I smiles at her as she’s franticly storms pass me, I say, “Sure. See you then.”

 

After Renee left the café I sat at our table continuing sipping on my coffee and reading the paper. I gazed outside through the window next to me, I just thinking deep thought to myself but one question hits me. One question that’s repeated over and over in my frontal lobe: “Is Trevor Eames Bigglesworth righteous with his campaign of mayhem and anarchy?” I jots that thought down in my note pad, “Food for thought” and circles it. “Hm…”

 

 

 

 

01st Dec2011

What A Lack Of AIDS Funding Could Mean For Africa

by iSpit

The world’s largest supporter of AIDS programs has made an ominous announcement: Because of the global financial crisis, it is well short of its fundraising goals.

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria pays for more than half of the world’s HIV medicine, and supports hundreds of education and advocacy programs worldwide. With World AIDS Day on Thursday, many are worried about what that means for the future of the war on AIDS.

Keeping Momentum In South Africa

Inside the Ubuntu HIV clinic in South Africa, dozens of people sit on wooden benches. Some wear masks over their mouths, as children chase each other through the aisles. They’re here to collect their monthly supplies of anti-retroviral drugs — the medicine that allows HIV-positive people to stay healthy.

South Africa has more HIV-positive people than any other country in the world. More than 6,000 people collect their medicine at this clinic in Khayelitsha, a sprawling township on the outskirts of Cape Town.

Nompumelelo Montangana, the operational manager, says the clinic has made huge strides in the fight against HIV. It has greatly increased the number of patients it treats and has raised community awareness of the disease.

However, she says, the Global Fund‘s financial shortfall has her worried.

“If the funding is not there, then that means what we have worked [on] over the past 10 years … will be a waste,” Montangana says.

The Global Fund hopes to distribute $20 billion in 2012, primarily to programs in sub-Saharan Africa. Two-thirds of the world’s HIV-positive people live there.

So far, it has raised just half of that amount.

Dr. Christoph Benn, the Global Fund‘s director of external relations, says the nonprofit essentially hit a financial plateau.

“Basically, we are predicting the funding will remain at a similar level, hopefully with some increase,” Benn says, “but it is not currently sufficient to call for a full, new round of funding that would allow countries to scale up their current programs.”

That means people who now have access to anti-retroviral drugs won’t be affected much. Still, roughly half the world’s HIV-positive people live in areas with limited or no access to those drugs, and their situation probably won’t improve.

The ‘Worst-Case Scenario’

Education and advocacy groups are also under threat. The Treatment Action Campaign, one of South Africa‘s most influential AIDS organizations, has said it will be forced to close its doors in January if Global Fund dollars aren’t delivered as promised.

Dr. Eric Goemaere, the director of Doctors Without Borders for Southern Africa, warns that clinics in some countries could run out of anti-retroviral drugs — a situation he calls “stock-outs.”

“Worst-case scenario is stock-outs, and people who are already on treatment will have to be stopped,” he says. “Countries, like certainly Zimbabwe and Mozambique, and probably Malawi, will have extreme difficulties.”

The Global Fund receives 95 percent of its income from European and North American governments. Now, many of those governments are saying they can’t pledge more money in the midst of the global financial crisis. Goemaere, however, says the problem is that there is not the same political will around AIDS that there was a decade ago.

“The real reason is that the political interest has definitely faded away,” he says, “probably because it is not perceived as threatening as it was in that time, for the rich countries — for European and North American countries.”

South Africa, which has the largest economy in Africa and a government that is committed to fighting the disease, is unlikely to see its HIV clinics close. The same may not be true for many of its neighbors.

25th Nov2011

Why Do They Call It Black Friday?

by iSpit

Black Friday as a term has been used in multiple contexts, going back to the nineteenth century, where it was associated with a financial crisis in 1869 in the United States. The earliest known reference to “Black Friday” to refer to the day after Thanksgiving was made in a 1966 publication on the day’s significance in Philadelphia:

JANUARY 1966 — “Black Friday” is the name which the Philadelphia Police Department has given to the Friday following Thanksgiving Day. It is not a term of endearment to them. “Black Friday” officially opens the Christmas shopping season in center city, and it usually brings massive traffic jams and over-crowded sidewalks as the downtown stores are mobbed from opening to closing.

The term Black Friday began to get wider exposure around 1975, as shown by two newspaper articles from November 29, 1975, both datelined Philadelphia. The first reference is in an article entitled “Army vs. Navy: A Dimming Splendor,” in The New York Times:

Philadelphia police and bus drivers call it “Black Friday” – that day each year between Thanksgiving Day and the Army–Navy Game. It is the busiest shopping and traffic day of the year in the Bicentennial City as the Christmas list is checked off and the Eastern college football season nears conclusion.

The derivation is also clear in an Associated Press article entitled “Folks on Buying Spree Despite Down Economy,” which ran in the Titusville Herald on the same day:

Store aisles were jammed. Escalators were nonstop people. It was the first day of the Christmas shopping season and despite the economy, folks here went on a buying spree. … “That’s why the bus drivers and cab drivers call today ‘Black Friday,’” a sales manager at Gimbels said as she watched a traffic cop trying to control a crowd of jaywalkers. “They think in terms of headaches it gives them.”

The term’s spread was gradual, however, and in 1985 the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that retailers in Cincinnati and Los Angeles were still unaware of the term.

Many merchants objected to the use of a negative term to refer to one of the most important shopping days in the year. By the early 1980s, an alternative theory began to be circulated: that retailers traditionally operated at a financial loss for most of the year (January through November) and made their profit during the holiday season, beginning on the day after Thanksgiving. When this would be recorded in the financial records, once-common accounting practices would use red ink to show negative amounts and black ink to show positive amounts. Black Friday, under this theory, is the beginning of the period where retailers would no longer have losses (the red) and instead take in the year’s profits (the black). The earliest known use, which like the 1966 example above was found by Bonnie Taylor-Blake of the American Dialect Society, is from 1981, again from Philadelphia, and presents the “black ink” theory as one of several competing possibilities:

If the day is the year’s biggest for retailers, why is it called Black Friday? Because it is a day retailers make profits — black ink, said Grace McFeeley of Cherry Hill Mall. “I think it came from the media,” said William Timmons of Strawbridge & Clothier. “It’s the employees, we’re the ones who call it Black Friday,” said Belle Stephens of Moorestown Mall. “We work extra hard. It’s a long hard day for the employees.”

The Christmas shopping season is of enormous importance to American retailers and, while most retailers intend to and actually do make profits during every quarter of the year, some retailers are so dependent on the Christmas shopping season that the quarter including Christmas produces all the year’s profits and compensates for losses from other quarters.

That the day after Thanksgiving is the “official” start of the holiday shopping season may be linked together with the idea of Santa Claus parades. Parades celebrating Thanksgiving often include an appearance by Santa at the end of the parade, with the idea that ‘Santa has arrived’ or ‘Santa is just around the corner’.

In the late 19th century and early 20th century, many Santa parades or Thanksgiving Day parades were sponsored by department stores. These include the Toronto Santa Claus Parade, in Canada, sponsored by Eaton’s, and the Macy’s. Department stores would use the parades to launch a big advertising push. Eventually it just became an unwritten rule that no store would try doing Christmas advertising before the parade was over. Therefore, the day after Thanksgiving became the day when the shopping season officially started.

Later on, the fact that this marked the official start of the shopping season led to controversy. In 1939, retail shops would have liked to have a longer shopping season, but no store wanted to break with tradition and be the one to start advertising before Thanksgiving. President Franklin D. Roosevelt moved the date for Thanksgiving one week earlier, leading to much anger by the public who wound up having to change holiday plans. Some even refused the change, resulting in the U.S. citizens celebrating Thanksgiving on two separate days. Some started referring to the change as Franksgiving.

In 2011, inspired by the Occupy Wall Street movement, there is currently a boycott against Black Friday known as Stop Black Friday or Occupy Black Friday. The movement calls for people to boycott publicly traded and large retail stores with a history of political donations to show economic solidarity and to force the lobby to back the candidates that they want.

23rd Nov2011

Why Longer School Days Work for Families

by iSpit

As school districts across the nation have scaled back instructional hours and moved to four-day weeks to balance their budgets, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is forging ahead with his push for a longer school day and year. And, though his plan is stirring controversy on many fronts, if implemented well, it stands to benefit students and another group largely missing from the discussion: their families.

Things have changed a lot in the homes of American schoolchildren over the past 50 years or so. There are more two-income households, more single parents raising families, and more mothers in the paid labor force. The days of June Cleaver waiting to greet the school bus each afternoon with a plate of warm cookies and a nice, cold glass of milk are pretty much over, assuming they ever existed at all.

 

But you wouldn’t know it by taking a glance at a typical school calendar.

 

Once you subtract all the holidays, teacher in-service days, and winter, spring, and summer breaks, you are left with about 180 days, which is the average school year in the United States. Compare that to 245 days, which is a quick back-of-the-envelope approximation of the average number of days a mom or dad has to work in a year (five days a week times 52 weeks, minus 15 holiday and vacation days), and you don’t have to be a 2nd grade math whiz to see we’ve got a problem.

 

And it’s one that is taking a tremendous, albeit quiet, toll on working parents like the mom I met recently at a fundraising training session in Chicago.

 

She had arrived late to the session, which was set to begin at 10 o’clock in the morning, and after we were introduced she explained why. With school out for the summer, she had enrolled both her children in day camp. Because the camp didn’t start until 9:30 a.m., she had orchestrated an elaborate carpooling scheme with other parents. While it was someone else’s turn to drive that particular morning, she wanted to make sure the girls got off safely. So she waited until their ride arrived before embarking on her commute.

 

As she recounted the story (with her supervisor looking on), she appeared exhausted and had a very worried look on her face. Having missed many early-morning business meetings because my daughter didn’t start school until 8, I could relate all too well to the stress I knew she must have been feeling. Especially in these tough economic times, showing up late or having to tell your boss that you can’t come in at all because your children are out of school is something every working parent dreads even if they have the family-friendliest of employers.

 

Yet, in all the discussions about why we need to lengthen the school year, closing the gap between school schedules and the employment realities of 21st-century families is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Dare one raise the issue, and we are swiftly reminded that schools are not day-care centers and that teachers are there to teach, not baby-sit, our children.

 

I couldn’t agree more. Education is-and should be-schools‘ first order of business.

 

However, the inextricable link between school schedules and family economic needs is firmly rooted in history. And, as social scientist Jody Heymann pointed out in her 2002 article “Can Working Families Ever Win?,” it was during the period of rapid industrialization from 1870 to 1930 that the American school year experienced its most dramatic growth-a 30 percent increase from 132 to 173 days.

 

Since then, the length of the school year has remained relatively stagnant, and its failure to keep pace is undermining our children‘s education. Not only are they losing ground in terms of having sufficient time to master the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in the global economy, but the inadequate calendar is also placing undue stress on parents, which can impede their children‘s ability to learn.

 

Countless studies have shown that children whose families are experiencing financial hardship are more likely to struggle academically. And, even if job loss hasn’t hit home, just knowing it’s a real possibility is negatively affecting student achievement, according to a June 2011 paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, titled “Children Left Behind: The Effects of Statewide Job Loss on Student Achievement.”

 

Creating a school calendar more in sync with the needs of today’s working families would not replace the continued need for more supportive employer policies or high-quality, affordable child care. But it would go a long way toward helping those of us who need to earn a living in order to ensure that our children come to school ready to learn and that their classrooms are well stocked with the necessary supplies.
———————————————————————————————–

Rhonda Present is the founder and director of ParentsWork, an Illinois parents’ organization that advocates more family-supportive communities, schools, and workplaces.

14th Nov2011

Mumia Abu Jamal – Interruptus In Iraq

by iSpit

Mumia Abu Jamal – Interruptus In Iraq

With the news of the imminent withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq comes mixed reactions; relief among both military families and anti-war Democrats; a collective weary breath among millions of Americans who’ve tired of the longest war; and fury among most of the madcap politicians running for the Republican presidential nomination, who want to placate religious conservatives on the far right who’ve wanted to view the Iraq War as a titanic spiritual struggle between Christianity and Islam–a kind of new Crusades, if you will. (I said ‘most’ GOP candidates because Rep. Ron Paul (R.-TX.), a noted libertarian, is opposed to Imperialist wars from the right).

In many ways, the draw-down is occasioned by the twin pressures of politics (as in upcoming elections), and the economy–a mood in Washington to pinch every penny.

Lost in most American reporting, however, is the obscene costs borne by Iraqis during this hard decade of war. The nation has been shattered, with millions fleeing into exile, untold numbers have died in the war, and the thin veneer of national unity was broken by inter-communal violence between Sunni and Shi’a that left some parts of Iraq (especially Baghdad) a charnel house of death.

The present U.S.-backed government is remarkable mostly for its corruption, and any rap about democracy in Iraq is mere empty rhetoric.

What the war has done is strengthened Iran and endangered every regional dictator (also ’ally’), for they supported the U.S. invasion–against great domestic opposition.

But the real reason the U.S. pulled the plug is the Iraqi government could not bring itself to sign a Status of Force Agreement (SOFA) between the two governments that would have granted immunity to U.S. soldiers.

 Faced with the possibility of U.S. troops in Iraqi courts, the Americans blinked.

That said, the U.S. still has an embassy there that is the biggest on earth, and more a fortress than a diplomatic site. Also, thousands and thousands of U.S. so-called contractors will stay in Iraq; men who hall mostly from specialized military background who are, in essence, corporate mercenaries.

So, in truth, it ain’t over–by a long shot.

(c) ’11 maj

08th Nov2011

Stepping Up: The Power of a Parent Advocate w/Phillip Jackson (Video)

by iSpit

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Some of the presenters at this education summit included New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Warrren Buffett, Melinda Gates, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Former U.S. President Bill Clinton, LeBron James, Geoffrey Canada, Michelle Rhee, Chicago City Colleges Chanchellor Cheryl Hyman, Randi Weingarten and governors from 10 states.

Across the country, parents are leading the charge for “trigger” laws to overhaul failing schools, to scale back high-stakes testing – and everything in between. Natalie Morales moderates this discussion at the Education Nation Summit.

 

Phillip Jackson talks about a complete and achievable parent revolution, not just “parent trigger laws“, but parents taking over the control of their children’s education by any means necessary!

 

31st Oct2011

Obama Proposes Longer School Days, Extended School Year

by iSpit

For this generation of students to remain competitive with their international peers as adults, they need to start spending more time in school. This week President Obama proposed that American school children extend their time in class, either by lengthening the school day, or spending less time on summer vacation.

“We can no longer afford an academic calendar designed when America was a nation of farmers who needed their children at home plowing the land at the end of each day,” Obama said. He continued to say “That calendar may have once made sense, but today, it puts us at a competitive disadvantage. Our children spend over a month less in school than children in South Korea. That is no way to prepare them for a 21st century economy.”

 

In fact, American children spend the least amount time in the classroom when compared to other countries. Currently, the school year length in the States is 180 days. Advocates are pushing further toward a 200-day school year, which would align with Thailand, Scotland and the Netherlands, and leave us a close second with Israel, South Korea and Japan, who leads with a 243-day school year.

 

This comes as Obama makes it very clear that education is on his hot-list of priorities. He admits the notion of spending more time in school is not “wildly popular”, but necessary.

 

He was applauded for his breadth of knowledge regarding the public education system in the U.S. He cited that one-third of the 13- and 14-year-olds in our country cannot read at an appropriate level for their age, and that the eighth grade curriculum is two years behind competing nations. He says the part of the problem is our “race to the bottom” mindset, wherein states are comfortable with lower standards for students.

 

Obama and his Secretary of Education Arne Duncan are truly advocates for a superior education system than that we’ve previously and currently known. It’s imperative that states use the stimulus package money to rebuild curriculum, increase teacher pay, improve school conditions, offer newer technologies to students and even extend the school year to ensure that this generation can not only keep up with their international peers, but even surpass them in the professional environment of the coming decades.
21st Oct2011

Toure’ On Uncle Herman Cain (Video)

by iSpit

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

10th Oct2011

Mumia Abu Jamal – Why Jobs Bill Ain’t Enough

by iSpit

Mumia Abu Jamal – Why Jobs Bill Ain’t Enough

When Pres. Barack H. Obama made his speech before a joint session of Congress on his jobs bill, he spoke with an intensity that has seemed to be missing since inauguration day, 2009.

The reason is simple: the worsening economy, joined with the gnawing unemployment problem (especially among Black voters) threatens to make the nation’s first Black President, a one-term president.

Falling poll numbers, of course, also played a role. And his bill, if it should pass (and that’s a big ‘if’ given the political complexion of the U.S. House) would seem to have measurable effects on the jobless rate.

But, what poses a problem for this program is that it doesn’t address the 300-lb. gorilla in the room: NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and its inducement to employers to flee U.S. shores for cheaper labor abroad.

Unless and until that contradiction is addressed by both the White House and Congress, jobs bills are but band aids on bullet wounds. Period.

The sad truth is that capitalism is in crisis, and it is cannibalizing every conceivable source of profit.

Thus, unions are whipped into submission, public schools undermined, foreclosures are escalating, and politicians are openly for sale to the highest bidder.

Unless NAFTA is either repealed or severely amended, the siphoning-off of good-paying jobs can only intensify, with direct (and deleterious) consequences for unemployment, falling or stagnant wages, declining taxation–and the further destruction of social service.

In a nutshell, the system is broken.

One bill–even a $400+ billion dollar bill–won’t make it work.

06th Oct2011

The Ten Commandments of Salary Negotiation

by iSpit

Salary Negotiation Tips: Thou Shalt Not Speak Too Soon

There is one, and only one, time to discuss salary in any detail: when they say they’re ready to make you an offer.

What if the employer asks about it before they’ve made you an employment offer?

You’ll want to answer because we are all rewarded in school for answering questions. We eagerly raise our hands and offer whatever information we can. But in salary negotiations, if you give the “right” (factual) answer, you’ll often be giving the “wrong” answer — the answer that costs you money.

Why wrong? The usual outcome of talking too soon about salary is that you get screened out, or you get screened in but lowballed.

Delay disclosing your salary expectations until you know you’re on the short list.

At the start of the interview process you don’t have enough information to know what the job’s worth or what its potential could be. You could agree to a smaller salary than the job is worth.

If you don’t lowball yourself and you aren’t eliminated outright, you may be eliminated later when it comes down to two candidates and it turns out you cost more.

Wait until they’re serious about hiring you. And when are you sure they’re serious? When they make you an offer.

Postponing the answer without upsetting your interviewer requires tact. To put off answering the salary expectation question, you’ll need your own personalized phrase: something you can say with confidence and that sounds like you.

Having that statement well prepared and rehearsed can gain you thousands of dollars.

Thou Shalt Not Regret Salary Disclosure

Oops, I already told the interviewer how much I make. Now what?

All is not lost! Just because she knows your current salary or salary expectations doesn’t mean you can’t negotiate for a fair market value.

Once you’ve broken the sound barrier, so to speak, on your salary, you at least have one advantage: no more tug of war between you and your potential employer about revealing salary.

If salary bumped you out of interviewing, it will be hard to gain re-entry at all, and even if you do, it might be at the price of an informal pre-interview agreement that if chosen, you’ll consider a pay cut.

If you’re still in the running, however, your “disclosed” circumstances make it doubly important to do your research well. In this case, you don’t need to address salary again until there’s an offer. At that point use researched facts about the fair market value for someone with your skill set in a similar job in the region, not your past salary, to substantiate your salary request.

When they’ve decided to hire you, it’s time to make the move away from the number you disclosed to your ideal compensation. Don’t let your past salary be the starting point for negotiations. Let your own satisfaction and joy of receiving great pay be the motivating force behind you at this point.

Remember that what you negotiate now is what you’ll live with for a long time. A minute or two here can engender months and months of satisfaction — or the opposite if you miss this opportunity. Let’s assume they’ve made an offer. What do you say?

Respond with, “I know I’ve discussed my [current] salary/salary expectations. I want to make sure from this point forward that we’re looking for a compensation package that is not just a ‘raise’ from my previous job, but rather a motivating, fair, value-based salary we will both be satisfied with. Can we agree on that principle?”

Once you have your agreement on that, you can return to standard salary negotiation.

Let the Employer Make the First Salary Offer

Employers want to know your most recent salary for one main reason: to screen you out. When faced with many applicants they use the salary as a quick shorthand way of assessing the fit and narrowing down the list. They will want you to “go first” in the compensation discussion and they’ll ask you to reveal your expectations and salary history. Going first is “sacred ground.” Don’t give it up or you can get screened.

Is it ever in your interest to get screened? There are exceptions where your situation would be improved upon by revealing your salary history. But in most scenarios, if you’re qualified for the job (or if you think the job can be altered to fit you), no! Your first objectives are to discern whether this job is a fit for you and to establish what you can do for the employer.

The risk you run by speaking first is that your salary history may scare them off. If you go first, you’ll either be too high, or too low. But since you won’t know ahead of time which of those three numbers applies to you, you can lose the offer by coming in too high or too low.

Instead, wait until you know they’re serious about hiring you — let them make you an offer. That way you lock in an offer and you’ve got the job — and you can negotiate from that place of security. Let them offer you the job and raise the question of salary.

By speaking first, you can also leave money on the table if you’re too low or within the range they are prepared to offer. The best strategy is to let them make the first offer first. That way, you know you have an offer, and you have a solid base from which to negotiate.

There are exceptions to the rule and situations in which it would help your cause to declare your salary history, including when speaking to an executive recruiter, where transparency is beneficial. Try to get their estimate of your market value first, though, so you know where you stand; then fill them in on your salary history and expectations.

Safety or Momentum

Employers use salary as a screening tool. If you have already passed the screening and if you’ve gotten to the point where they definitely want to hire you, not your competitors, you can name a salary figure first. In other words, if you know you have the job locked up, then going first with a high number can act as a magnet and pull their offer up higher without risk of getting them upset and moving to the next candidate in line.

Looked at in another way, choosing who speaks first can offer either safety or momentum. If it’s the safety/security of the offer that’s most important to you, let them go first and establish the offer; it’s secure.

If you speak first, you can provide momentum to the salary offer. Going first with your top number will act like a magnet, pulling up the employer’s offer. If you are secure they will offer you a job, this method puts you in a strong position — it is easier to negotiate down from a high number than to push up from a low number.

Whichever strategy you choose, winning a job offer is the aim. Once you have achieved that you can consider the offer and accept or begin the back and forth of negotiating.

Thou Shalt Not Agree

After months of preparation, getting your resume fine-tuned, answering ads, researching on the Internet, following up leads and networking with numerous people to find the right job, one word can throw away thousands of dollars.

Believe it or not, that word is “OK.” It may be inexperience in dealing with salary negotiations, or just an anxious moment, that makes you say OK. Either way, blurting out OK to the first salary offer can leave money on the table.

Consider what you might do instead. How about memorizing a one-word response that will work in every negotiating scenario?

Think of this as a riddle: What’s a four-letter word that has no vowels, is not in the dictionary and makes money every time you use it with negotiating precision? Give up? The word is “Hmmm” — a single word that buys 30 seconds of silence. A 30-second pause really amps up the pressure on employers to offer more.

Many of my clients have said this is the one technique that has made them the maximum amount of money with the minimum amount of effort. All you need to do is shut up — harder for some than others, eh? But it’s doable by anyone.

The move is called “The Flinch.” It works in salary negotiations, raise negotiations, flea markets, used car sales, the sewer repair bill — just about anywhere financial transactions take place. When you hear the other person’s first offer, don’t say OK. Say Hmmm.

Take some time to really ponder it. Check your gut — are you delighted? Neutral? Disappointed? Worried? Give yourself some time and in the seconds of silence the other person’s offer is more likely to improve in some way.

Don’t blabber. Be quiet. Let silence do its work.

Know How Much Money You’re Worth

Your skills and talents are worth something and you want to get paid the fair-market value when a company makes you a salary offer. But what is your market value? Don’t trust the hiring company. Find out for yourself.

You can easily research the job’s salary range. Your goal is to find typical job salaries for people with similar experience and skills in your industry.

In other words, answer the question, “What range would the company have to pay to find someone like me?” Put another way, “If I don’t take the job what would the company have to offer to find someone as good as me?” Without having this kind of salary data you won’t be able to substantiate your case for the salary you want.

Your fair-market value is not one tidy number, but a range. It is a composite of three components: your objectively researched value, your individual value and your future value.

Once you know the job title and perhaps the job description, you’ll be able to hone in on your objectively researched value or, simply put, the present going rate.

The Internet in general, augmented by your library’s subscriptions to data, should give you enough data to get a fix on the competitive rate.

These sites can help shape your opinion:

  • PayScale.com — collects ongoing salary data directly from visitors.
  • Salary.com — collects salary data from companies and customizes it to location, size of company, etc.
  • CareerJournal.com — has articles about salary trends.
  • Bureau of Labor Statistics — supplies surveys of corporate payroll data and employee questionnaires.

You won’t get one simple numeric answer, but with an hour or so of effort, search and printouts, you can get a range for the pay-level comparison. Once that’s done, the two other factors above should be calculated.

Your individual value accounts for your special training, assets, skills, competencies, etc., that are of value to your employer. Finally, take into account any long-term rewards like profit-sharing, performance bonuses, raises, stock options, etc., that are part of your package to determine your future value.

Blending these three numbers gives you negotiation power. Instead of “Here’s what I’d like,” you can say, “Here’s the range of what others are paid, and why I should be paid the top of the range.”

Thou Shalt Covet Thine Own Benefits and Perks

Geri doubled her salary by negotiating a perk.

The job, as advertised, paid $50,000 to be a full-time librarian. In 40 hours a week, the librarian hire was expected to keep the law library at a corporate office functioning from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Her job was to see that the corporate patrons got the information and guidance they needed all 66 hours a week with some weekend hours. Two clerical employees helped out, 40 hours each, and they covered the 26 hours the main librarian was not there.

Geri, a client whom I advised and whose real name I will withhold, claimed that she could upgrade the two clerical staff member’s capabilities so that they could give much better service all 66 hours the library was open. She claimed she could develop their skills to the point where the three of them could meet the firm’s requirements and Geri would only be needed 20 hours a week. This effectively doubled her hourly rate by negotiating a perk: time off.

Many compensation packages can be substantially increased by negotiating benefits like Geri’s.

Here’s a starter list of possible benefits and perks: medical and dental coverage, disability and life insurance, wellness days, training, deferred compensation, tuition reimbursement, paid holidays, vacation, general education, specific training, certification reimbursement, paid sick leave, child day care, 401(k) contributions. In addition, there’s gym, health club or fitness membership; transportation, travel per diem, laptop, cell phone, Internet access and company car; casual dress, flextime and corporate housing. Consider also stock options, stock grants and profit-sharing. You could negotiate for first-class travel and, for attendance at conventions, comp time off around conventions and other long-hour days. See if you can land office (vs. cubicle) space, administrative assistants and certain software to make your job easier. And potential benefits having to do with if relocation have at least 10 components alone.

Remember that money decisions are best made in the cool climate of logic and impartiality. Give yourself time to think. When you’ve finished your salary negotiations, put all your enthusiasm back in gear and say, “This sounds terrific! I think we have a match here. I’ll get back to you as soon as you need to know. When do you need to know?”

This Is the Job Thou Coveteth

Don’t play it cool.

Most people have the erroneous assumption that in job interviews and negotiations they should “not appear too eager.” “I don’t want to look desperate,” they say. In some types of negotiations, purchasing a car for instance, “playing it cool” pays off. Showing how much you really want those wheels costs you some negotiating leverage.

In a job search, however, people hire enthusiasm over cool.

Does it motivate an employer to offer you less if he knows that you’re eager to take the job? It could, but mostly it doesn’t. The fact that an employer knows that you really want a job can even make him increase the offer in hopes of attracting and retaining such enthusiastic help.

Similarly, knowing an employer is sold on you gives you leverage. It’s important that your attitude is well matched to your natural personality and that it is expressed in a manner consistent with that personality.

Some people are lovable. Some people are funny. Some are quiet as a mouse. Any type can be “just the right” style for a given hiring-decision maker. Hiring is a haphazard, prejudiced, imprecise art — certainly not a science. Hardly anyone is actually trained in how to do it.

This means that emotions will play a big part in getting hired and getting paid well.

This short, real-life story illustrates the point: Bret noticed three telltale signs his currency ran high with the hiring-decision maker. He spoke as if Bret was already a part of the company; he returned a couple of times in the interview to talk about their common alma mater; he said that the combination of graphics and teaching was rare and a great fit. Bret joined in and shared how excited he was about the fit, too. Then he used the “What’s the best you can do?” strategy to capitalize on that personal chemistry and pushed the hiring-decision maker another $4,800 to the top of his range.

Thou Shalt Not Worry about Earthly Economy

A lot of people wonder whether they should negotiate at all when the economy is slow and companies are feeling the pinch.

Unemployed job seekers are especially prone to such doubts; after they’ve been out of work for many months, they are relieved to have an offer — any offer. They fear that if they negotiate, they can upset the trust they’ve built up over the interview process. They cringe at the thought of being told, “There’s a long line of people who’d love to have this job. If you don’t like my offer, we can always hire another.”

It feels like groveling is the order of the day. But fear not: You’re not negotiating with the economy, you’re dealing with a hiring decision maker who needs you.

Of course, the extent to which “needs you” applies has changed dramatically over recent years. For example, in the heyday of the dot-com ‘90s, fresh college grads were negotiating hefty comp packages. Companies were so desperate to get “techies” on board, they would agree to practically anything. Negotiations sounded like this: “You want a masseuse to give you a rubdown twice a week? No problem. You want to bring your parrot to work? Sure, how does the bird like his steak cooked?”

Today, even people with years of experience and sterling track records may face obstacles getting back in the race. Still, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t negotiate. Just because the playing field has changed, doesn’t mean that you should meekly accept whatever they offer. Negotiations are part of the hiring game. If you agree to whatever they offer, it will hurt your paycheck (obviously), and it may also make the employer value you less.

Think of what happens in another setting where negotiations are expected: the garage sale. Suppose you’re selling an item that isn’t hard to find — say, a clock. It works. It’s not a bad-looking clock, but it’s a common item. That’s like the low-demand job market. You put a low price tag on it, you don’t negotiate, and maybe even offer to throw it in for free with another purchase. Your communication affects the potential buyer’s feelings about the clock, and the buyer may even refuse to take it if you offer it for free.

On the other hand, if you’re selling that great-looking, expensive leather jacket that’s in mint condition but doesn’t fit you any more, you will be a tough negotiator. You’ll pad the price a bit to give you a little wiggle room because you know people like to bargain at garage sales. By tough negotiating, you communicate that the item has high value. If you set your price too low or come down in price too easily, the buyer may wonder if there’s something wrong with the jacket.

Likewise, by tough negotiating, you communicate your own worth. Good companies expect you to negotiate for your value. Far from hindering your job search, the ability to negotiate helps you get the respect you need to get hired for good positions or to get better raises.

Now, in flush times, you’re more likely to get what you ask for than lean ones. It’s probably true that in a tight economy you won’t get everything you ask for. But you can count on one thing being the same in both good times and in bad: If you don’t ask, you won’t receive. It’s never improper to ask. The employer may cry “poor” and decline, but that doesn’t mean don’t ask.

Sometimes asking now will pay off later. I coached a particularly energetic entry-level bank branch manager named Victor to ask for $5,000 more than the average salary for that position. The president said he couldn’t go that high but said that he pays for performance. Three months later, the boss was impressed with Victor’s results and added five grand to his salary. Would that have happened if Victor had just said, “OK” to the first offer?

So you’re not negotiating with an economy, you are talking to a human being who’s trying to get ahead in his/her own career. If you can do the job, you deserve to be compensated. Ask for what you deserve.

Thou Shalt Not Take the Name of Thy Salary in Vain

When you arrive for a final job interview, come armed with three numbers that I refer to by the initials I.S.N.:

  • Ideal
  • Satisfactory
  • No-Go

These “name” your salary and frame your negotiation. Your employer probably has his/her own three numbers as well. Good negotiations will find the common ground between you. Excellent negotiations on your part will be at the highest possible point of that common ground.

Let’s say you’re a convention coordinator, and in your present job you’re underpaid at $85,000. And let’s say you’d be ecstatic at $135,000 — a number bigger than you think you’d ever get, but it’s not a complete fantasy — it passes the “laugh test.”

At the other end of the spectrum, there’s no point in moving jobs for less than, say, $95,000. We’ve named the Ideal (top) and the No-go (bottom) numbers.

Now, consider the employer. She is pulling her hair out with the complaints she’s getting with her current coordinator. She’s in danger of losing an entire $290,000 account if she doesn’t get someone [like you] who’s good with attention to detail. She knows that the average salary for a coordinator is $75,000 for a plodder, up to $105,000 for a self-starter. The top of her range is $115,000.

Your common ground, then, is $95,000 to $115,000. That’s $95K for your lowest, and $115K for her highest. Neither of you know that common ground when you start negotiating. All you know is your own range.

To reach some agreement requires a whole negotiating dance. The step I want to emphasize in this commandment is your clarity. Before you begin serious money talk, think through your top, bottom and mid-ground numbers. If they are fuzzy, your negotiations will be fuzzy. If you’re not clear that $95,000 is as low as you’ll go, you might waffle. In the heat of the interview, experiencing great rapport, imagining friendly co-workers (not the grouches you work with now) you will be tempted to say, “OK. I’ll start there and work up.”

No! Do not take the name of your salary in vain! “I’m sorry, Ms. Employer. I would love to work here. I feel a great connection. I love your accounts, but somehow we have to reach a minimum of $95,000 and preferably $105. Let’s put our heads together and find a way, shall we?”

“00 a Minute” has more information about the ISN numbers.

Honor Thy Wealth and Prosperity

When shopping for a house once, I was told by a realtor that if I wasn’t at least a little embarrassed at how low my offer was, it was not low enough. Similarly, negotiating a salary or raise, if you’re not just a little red-faced at your ideal number, you’re not thinking high enough.

It has to pass the “laugh test,” however. If it’s ridiculously high, they’ll just laugh. Likewise, an employer’s offer must pass yours, lest you laugh because it’s ridiculously low.

Once, my daughter asked for my negotiation advice and (surprisingly) followed it. She had been a star document organizer in a nationwide class action lawsuit with 800 trials pending and mountains of e-paperwork to track, file and retrieve at a moment’s notice. She lived in Manhattan on her $35,000 [= $17.50-per-hour] annual salary. After she left the firm, for reasons other than salary, they ran into trouble. They called her back and asked her to consult with the remaining paralegals to show them her organization and retrieval system.

My daughter and I figured that $150 per hour would be fair. Once they had agreed on her consulting role, timing, independent contractor status and the other details, her old boss said, “I suppose we can start at the usual $35,000.”

She laughed.

They flunked her laugh test.

When you present your number, don’t share a small number; share your ideal. Your “Wow!” number. (Quick reminder, though. Remember Commandment 1. Wait until you’re sure they’re ready to make you an offer.) Your ideal number should make you blush a little (or it’s not high enough).

Make sure, of course, it’s bolstered by a solid value proposition. (See Commandment 5.) Let them know the rationale behind the numbers, and you can soften the economic blow by saying, “This may be just a bit out of reach, but I think I owe it to you to tell you what would really excite me. It’s [_].”

Think about it. Why would you start negotiations any lower?

There’s a curious phenomenon. In negotiations, the first number you put out will act as a magnet and pull their number toward it: the higher your number [assuming it passes the laugh test], the stronger the magnet.

The only worry in going first and going high is that you might catch your employer off guard and the ideal number has such strong magnetism that s/he agrees to overpay you. However, if you feel bad/guilty for taking advantage of his/her poor negotiation skills, you can always give it back! You can always say, “You know, I think I was a little too demanding in the negotiations, and while I expect to be your star employee, I want you to feel good about my earnings. Why don’t we take 10 percent of my earnings and give them to a charity we can both agree on?”

To the best of my knowledge, no one’s ever done that, but just in case you’re too timid or embarrassed to go for the gold, remembering this might help you engage that last little bit of motivation to “Honor Thy Wealth and Prosperity.”

06th Oct2011

The Food Stamp Monopoly: JP Morgan Profits From Food Stamp Processing Business

by iSpit


Download Video or MP3 -Iamnotarapperispit.com

JP Morgan (JPM) is the largest processor of food stamp benefits in the United States. JP Morgan has contracted to provide food stamp debit cards in 26 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. JP Morgan is paid for each case that it handles, so that means that the more Americans that go on food stamps, the more profits JP Morgan makes. Yes, you read that correctly. When the number of Americans on food stamps goes up, JP Morgan makes more money. In the video posted below, JP Morgan executive Christopher Paton

admits that this is “a very important business to JP Morgan” and that it is doing very well. Considering the fact that the number of Americans on food stamps has exploded from 26 million in 2007 to 43 million today, one can only imagine how much JP Morgan’s profits in this area have soared. But doesn’t this give JP Morgan an incentive to keep the number of Americans enrolled in the food stamp program as high as possible?

There are just some things that are a little too “creepy” to be “outsourced” to private corporations. The JP Morgan executive in the interview above does his best to put a positive spin on all this, but it just seems really unsavory for a big Wall Street bank to be making so much money off of the suffering of tens of millions of Americans.

So if unemployment goes down will this ruin JP Morgan’s food stamp business?

Well, apparently not. In the interview Paton says that 40% of food stamp recipients are currently working, and he seems convinced that there could be further “growth” in that segment.

So is this what America is turning into?

A place where tens of millions of the unemployed and the working poor crawl over to Wal-Mart and the dollar store every month to use the food stamp debit cards provided to them by JP Morgan?

It turns out that JP Morgan also provides child support debit cards in 15 U.S. states and they also provide unemployment insurance benefit debit cards in seven states.

Apparently states have found that they can save millions of dollars by “outsourcing” the provision of these benefits to big financial firms like JP Morgan.

So what happens if you have a problem with your food stamp debit card?

Well, you call up a JP Morgan service center. When you do this, there is a very good chance that you are going to be helped by a JP Morgan call center employee in India.

That’s right – it turns out that JP Morgan is saving money by “outsourcing” food stamp customer service calls to India.

When ABC News asked JP Morgan about this, the company would not tell ABC News which states have customer service calls sent to India and which states have them handled inside the United States….

JP Morgan is the only one today still operating public-assistance call centers overseas. The company refused to say which states had calls routed to India and which ones had calls stay domestically. That decision, the company said, was often left up to the individual states.

JP Morgan has been moving some of these call center jobs back inside the United States due to political pressure, but this whole situation is a really good example of what the “global economy” is doing to middle class Americans.

Just try to imagine the irony – a formerly middle class American that has lost a job to outsourcing calls up to get help with food stamp benefits only to be answered by a call center employee in India.

Welcome to the global economy, eh?

But wait, there is more.

It has just been announced that JP Morgan has admitted that they wrongly foreclosed on over a dozen military families and that they have been overcharging “thousands” of other military families on their mortgages.

Ouch.

It is a really bad public relations move to mess with military families.

Is anyone over at JP Morgan even paying attention?

JP Morgan has also been one of the primary financial institutions involved in the foreclosure “robo-signing” scandal.

They just seem to be having all kinds of problems lately. But they are not alone.

The truth is that we have gotten to the point where big Wall Street banks such as JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs (GS), Citibank (C) and Morgan Stanley (MS) just have way, way too much power.

The biggest Wall Street financial institutions had no trouble begging for bailouts from the U.S. government during the financial crisis, but when the American people have needed a little grace and mercy from them they have been less than helpful.


Download Video or MP3 -Iamnotarapperispit.com

So what do you think about how the big Wall Street banks have been behaving? Feel free to post a comment with your opinion below… How J.P. Morgan gets rich with increased food stamp usage.

 

30th Sep2011

Why African Americans Earn Far Less Than Other Americans

by iSpit

By: Abdul-Kareem Johnson

Statistics constantly point out that the black income median is so much below the white. Less attention is paid to how much wealth is owned by blacks as compared to how much whites own in the country. The reasons for the disparity, of course, are clear and need not be belabored here. One main reason can be summarized practically. When this nation was being developed—carved up and raped—blacks were a major item of wealth as slaves. We were a form of wealth. Historically, this attitude toward blacks has been carried down. When the country was being divided up, the society did not permit us to be on the receiving end. Mr. Astor’s ancestors happened to get the piece of property now called Times Square for a song and, by doing nothing, his heirs a few hundred years later are fabulously wealthy. Blacks could never participate in that kind of thing. The country was parceled out before we were legal individuals; and to the extent that anything was left—and a good deal was—in 1863 when the Emancipation Proclamation was signed, we were still excluded. All the rumors of forty acres and a mule came to nothing. The country was divided, and little titles were drawn up and given to lots of people for whatever reason, but we had no opportunity to take part in the process.

The facts of American history effectively preclude blacks from being among the 153 wealthiest American families which, according to Fortune magazine, each have assets in excess of $2 billion and which, together with the 200 largest corporations, virtually run the country’s economy. We started too late and had too many handicaps against us when the game began.

Pages:12»
  • I Am Not A Quote Of The Day

    Quotes and sayings
  • Authors

  • Pages

  • Facebook

    I Am Not A Rapper on Facebook

Switch to our mobile site