POWIP Piece of Work In Progress

Thanks!

We just got the news that Mr. KT did get the job trade we've been waiting for, in large part due to the fervent prayers and bead maneuvers of my friends here.

So I wanted to let you guys know, and say thanks, for your support through this and everything else.

Here's my post about this at my home site.

Kill Truck

KillTruck is a wife, mother, blogger and native midwesterner now living in Eastern Washington state. She writes about politics, pop culture, parenting, wifing and a few other subjects she has no authority to write about. She has macabre fascinations with prostitution and/or cannibalism. In her free time she enjoys eating and/or drinking her feelings, liveblogging Lifetime movies, thinking about Scott Brown and mocking things she doesn’t understand.

Website - More Posts

Charity Begins at Home, and Sometimes Stays There

Highest administrative fee percentage charities, top (or bottom) three:

3. National Council of Negro Women (NCNW)

Administrative expenses: 64%

Serving as an umbrella organization for 39 national and local advocacy groups for women of African descent both in the U.S. and abroad, the National Council of Negro Women coordinates its activities with partners in 34 states. The Council also runs four research and policy centers in its efforts to develop best practices in addressing the health, educational, and economic needs of African-American women. Unfortunately, all of these centers take a lot of resources to run, and with administrative costs upwards of $4 million in 2007, there is comparatively little left over in the group’s approximately $6 million budget for programs.

2. Boys Choir of Harlem

Administrative expenses: 66.3%

Long-respected for its role in improving the lives of disadvantaged and impoverished young people in Harlem, New York, the Boys Choir of Harlem went all the way to the White House, performing for sitting presidents since Lyndon Johnson. The group, which for 30 years turned neighborhood kids into performing singers, ended in disgrace last year after a child abuse accusation and the death of its founder in 2007. Drowning in debt with high administrative costs soaking up much of its ever-decreasing budget, the Harlem Boys Choir suffered the most dramatic fall from grace of any group on the list.

1. American Tract Society

Administrative expenses: 68.0%

Topping the list of America’s worst charities is an organization that spent more than $1.6 million dollars on its administrative expenses in 2007, over twice what it spent the previous year. The American Tract Society, based in Texas, distributes religious literature to spread its message around the world. With a history of low ratings from Charity Navigator, the group’s administrative expenses have consistently outpaced the amount of donations coming in. While the group receives income from other sources than contributions, donors to the American Tract Society may be surprised to know that the recipient is the most inefficient in the country at maximizing the impact of its donations.

Check out MainStreet's recent story about lining up tax deductions through charitable giving.

I'm not saying don't be charitable. I'm saying, be intelligently charitable. The same rules that apply to planning a wedding should apply to your charitable giving. Whatever you do, don't be "guilted into" showing that you care by giving your limited resources to people and causes that don't deserve them.

Yeah, I'm probably raaaaacist, but I would rather have seen the people who actually were affected by institutional racism at the USDA loan program receive the entire insane sum set aside than see frauds benefitted, and shyster lawyers. When families of four earning 60k/annum have less discretionary spending money than unemployment recipients with benefits, you can say without hesitation that our society's gephucked. Give wisely.

God bless you, and God bless Herbert White.

Help capture these monsters.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Ethical Profitability [With comment from Dan]

During the last year, I was asked to write a Business Plan for our small business. I can tell you that if I weren't given to being so long-winded the chore of doing so would have been insufferable. Nevertheless, like a "mission statement," what may appear (and often is) worthless can actually provide a good reason to do some introspection. So was the case when forced to write about the Partners' objectives. This is an excerpt:

• Continue to do excellent work in an Ethical Manner
  • Everything above boards at all times
  • Never sell any Client anything they don't need - treat Clients' money prudently - as our own
  • Never over-promise, no matter the cost in the short-run
  • Remain opinionated in our areas of expertise - that's what people pay us for
  • Do everything possible to promote the development of our employees - even if it means they need to "go to greener pastures" to achieve their personal and professional goals
  • Provide a fun workplace environment
  • Promote rugged individualism
  • Promote peace

Upon reflection, one of my partners (a Left-Winger) was a little surprised that a Conservative like me - though he knows me well - would use words like Ethical Profitability and the Promotion of Peace in a business document we planned to submit to banks for to secure a line of credit.

His being stunned kind of stunned me - as I know him well, too.

But it made me think.

What I thought about primarily was why I keep tending back to entrepreneurship. Part of me knows there are obvious reasons: I do not translate well into Corporate Environs. More specifically, I am a great at what I do. I am an outstanding manager. I don't say this in a conceited way, but rather because most managers really do suck bilge water. But I am a miserable report. That is, I always do well managing a crew. I am great at hiring and developing. But I am a horrible report. It is safe to say, I am perhaps unmanageable.

But I also know that while I may be the common denominator for my woes in Corporate America (re: working for someone else - whether owner or executive board), I am keen to also recognize that my woes have not been battles for conflict-sake. Not at all. Rather, it is impossible for me to look away. To go along to get along. If something even appears askew, I can't help myself - I ask questions.

Dan and Fishman can tell you exactly how far I am willing to go to see justice had. To see corruption thrown into the light of day. It is expensive to do so, to be sure. But I can't help myself.

What this means is that I am not a good "team player." I am a "troublemaker" who cannot "leave well enough alone."

This is all well and good, I suppose, from a theoretical standpoint. But as I said, it is expensive. And I don't mean simply monetarily.

So here is the crux of the question each of us in the private sector needs to continue to ask: When someone buys your time and talent, do they lay claim to your soul?

I don't simply ask that question as a matter of the hypothetical. There are many who will say that if push came to shove in a matter of Significance (say extensive embezzlement) they could be counted on to do something about it. But I tell you from first hand experience this is not true at all. I have witnessed with my own eyes otherwise principled employees and managers and executives shy away from their fiduciary responsibilities. I understand full well why this is the case.

Corruption is a grave offense in that it is offensive. But corruption needn't always involve an Enron or a massive con. Corruption occurs at the margins, too. In the things sold to clients that they do not need. In things sold under the auspices of a "must-have" that really aren't must haves at all. The offense is compounded when the client is led to believe that they are being looked out for by the very same thief robbing them blind. In some cases, it comes down to over-promising the likely ROI of this or that initiative. In other cases, corruption rears its head when an hourly rate is assessed based on the perceived profits of the prospective client: they can afford it... right?

Business really comes down to profit. And I have no problem with profit. A lot of good stuff comes from profit. In fact, while we are asked to give beyond our surplus, most giving occurs because of surplus.

In my line of work, Interactive/Web Development and Marketing, there are plenty of charlatans. I could tell you stories. I really could. Suffice to say that there are more "experts" in my field than perhaps any other. And experts of the kind I am talking about are "masters" of very "mysterious" disciplines... having to do with that crazy webbertube...  And most of the check-writers are experts in very different industries. Meaning they rely on Mr. and Mrs. Expert to do them a solid. To look after their interests as it relates to all things web. This creates a good deal of opportunity for so-called soft corruption (as if there is such a thing).

Oh, sure, this low-level corruption masquerades itself as legitimate business. But there are souls at stake. When you hear "buyer beware," do you buy it? I don't.

Maybe I'll add "bad businessman" to the list of my strengths and weaknesses. But if it turns out that we can't "make it" doing business the right way, then maybe "making it" is something I'd rather not do.

In the end analysis, one can no more separate business from personal than psyche form soma.

Support Ethical Business. Support small business owners. Support your neighbor. It does make a difference in the world.

As a final note, I am reminded of something my Grandfather said when offered an inside deal on a beer company about to go public. Perhaps we would still be living off of the trust he could have set up from the proceeds. Perhaps not. It's been 2 Generations, and I didn't know him (I was 4 when he died)... nevertheless, I repeat what he said when he decided not to participate in the shady deal that would have made that poor man rich.

"I could never make money on another man's weakness."

"WTF? Dude! Mellow out! What's your damage?"

Enoch_Root

AKA. Bobby Donn Brubaker (the most popular man in Mesa, AZ), the Umbrella of Terror, Jack Ketch.

Website - More Posts

Feller Felled

Later today, I think, I've got a post going up at RightNetwork about Bob Feller. He was a Great American, and not just in the Hannity sense. If you're not familiar with him, he was also an incredible Cleveland Indians pitcher back in the day, but that's not what makes him great.

Yesterday, I posted a photograph of TRON pr0n. Today, Andrew O'Hehir takes up TRON pr0n (and yes, it must be spelled with the zero, newb *eye roll*) at Sal0n. It displays what Keats meant when he advised Shelley to "load every rift with ore." In other words, I'm promoting it as an example of internet writing at its best. You'll be glad you read the review rather than saw the movie.

ZOMG! Incoming fire! Teh bulletz r everywhere! :-(

Kwame Kilpatrick: Not a Great American

Rangel gets wrist slap for falsifying tax returns, Minnesota mom fined $1.5 million for sharing 24 crap songs. I mentioned this yesterday during my somewhat inaudible performance on The Needle with Lori Ziganto and Caleb Howe. Call me Mushmouth.

Ric Locke has some trenchant observations on the TSA's strategies and related matters.

Until I can think of something else to say, I'll probably just add stuff to this post, so have at it, co-bloggers!

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Iowa, Blue Chicks and Other Stuff

Working on the Ph.D., I lived in Iowa awhile. My brother Enoch went to school at Cornell College down the road. All of the Monsterlings were born there, which is cool, because Mary's a big Star Trek fan.

Iowahawk, whom I adore just this side of idolatry, has connections, obviously, and my very good Romanian friend Mircea lives and teaches there.

I've got something to say, though: Dudes.

Perennial welfare child Mississippi leads the pack with two GOP Senators asking for 230 and (coincidentally) 199 earmarks. Then there's shameless Washington state, and then . . . Iowa. Harkin.

Republican Grassley rounds out the Top Twenty.

The Iowa I know is full of hardworking people who make the most of what they earn. They're not afraid to sweat. Somehow, though, you all have become addicted to the ethanol dollars and the subsidies, and it's got to stop. You've got more pride than that, don't you?

We've all been paying to put corn crap into our engines for a couple of decades, now. It's reduced their efficiency, and their function. You used to be able to take pride in a bumper crop, knowing that the surplus was going to feed the hungry in less fortunate parts of the world. Now, you earn money so that Monsanto can make people with money to burn feel good about making other people burn money. Bet it makes you all warm and fuzzy.

I'll tell you what: if Wisconsin can get rid of Feingold, and (God willing) family money retard Herb Kohl, you can get rid of those guys. I'd love to be able to respect you, again.

This guy? WTF? Are you ball busted, or something? Cat got your tongue? Needs painted? Wherefore fuckest thou me?

I'm telling you, you're more embarrassing than blue internet pTrOn.

The less realistic chicks are, the hotter.

Not that blue chicks are hotter than this Netherlander, but at least she's got blue highlights in her P-shopped hair (NSFW).

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

But Then Again, Too Few To Mention: Milbank Boots Larry Summers Out the Door

Dhimmi Crater today is quoted as saying his greatest failure was to win a second presidential term during which to demonstrate his amazing foreign and domestic political chops, because he was just getting warmed up, or something. That in turn was due to his having neglected the Democratic Party. Also, Ted Kennedy.

At his final press conference as chief economic advisory to President Obama, Larry Summers was also asked to get a little retrospective. He responded more in snark than in . . . well, in snark and anger, stating that if it weren't for him and Obama, the world economy would have fallen over a cliff, but, yeah, sure, he wishes the American economy were showing the signs of the really fundamental soundness that they'd imparted to it.

Really. Read the whole thing.

You can lead a former Harvard President to reality, but you can't make him acknowledge it. In that respect, Summers is not unlike the British schoolchildren who are challenging Zeus with self-regardingly "clever" flippancy.

At the same time, Dana wants the Tea Party to share in his disillusionment, because sniveling heartbreak loves company.

I said no labels, you feckin' idiot.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Monsters-in-Law at the Holidays

If there's a better sure-fire way of earning a woman's eternal enmity than negatively to criticize the way she raises her children, I'd like to hear it (for informational purposes, only). A distant second is to be her husband's mother, and imply by word or deed that she doesn't adequately provide what he needs.

At ABC news, Susan Donaldson James inspects all of that, in the pressure-cooker context of the holidays, when extended families tend to spend more time with each other as a matter of caring and/or obligation. Here in the States, we do things a little differently. As I've mentioned before, it's not uncommon for siblings, adult children and their parents, and other relations or ex-relations to get in a snit and decide not to speak to each other for years on end. In Italy, for example, such a blackballing would be unthinkable. You and your brother may fight every time you meet, but you're still going to show up at the family domus every Sunday to spend the better part of the day, eating and drinking . . .and fighting. The idea that you wouldn't is simply inconceivable.

Italian mothers aren't exactly known for their willingness to untie the apron strings to their sons, and I suppose that they may be as frosty toward their daughters-in-law as American mothers can be, but I doubt that they'd dare to be as outright rude as some of the Monsters-in-Law referenced in the article, which is hair-raising in the extreme. I am fortunate to get along well with my mum-in-law, but, gentlemen, if your mother does any of the things listed there to your wife, I've got to tell you to grow a pair. Ridiculous, petty and sad hardly covers it.

I earnestly hope that Monsters-in-Law are as rare as or rarer than Brideszilla. Likely, they are the same people.

The saddest part is that Monsters-in-Law have themselves been daughters-in-law, as a general rule. They married men who were sons, with all their faults, and it's doubtful that their own sons are much better than their husbands, if at all.

Ladies, if the son doesn't prefer you to his mother, run away. You deserve a man. That is all.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts