- RT @kristinbrianne: Get Talk and Txt Unlimited Cell Svc w/ Free Phone for $10 per month by joining DNA for Free. http://tinyurl.com/yyg5ohn #
- RT: @ChristianPF is giving away an iPod Touch! – RT to enter to win… http://su.pr/2LS3p5 #
- 74 inch armspan and forearms bigger than my biceps. No, I don't button my shirt cuffs. #
- RT @deliverawaydebt Money Hackers Network Carnival #111 – Don't Hassel the Hoff Edition http://bit.ly/9BIAvE #
- @bargainr What would it take to get you to include me in the personal-finance-bloggers list? #
- Working on a Penfed application to transform my worst interest rate into my best. #
- Gave the 1 year old pop rocks for the first time. Big smiles. #
- @Netflix @Wii disc works well and loads fast. Go, go gadget movie! #
Charity is Selfish
I try to give 10% of my income to charity. I don’t succeed every year, but I do try.
I don’t give because I’m generous. I give because I’m selfish.
If you give to charity, you are too.
I’m not talking about people who give to charity strictly for the tax deduction, though that is selfish too. I’m referring specifically to the people who give to charity out of the goodness of their hearts.
If I give a thousand dollars worth of clothes to a homeless shelter, I get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that I helped people stay warm.
If I send $100 to the Red Cross for whatever terrible disaster happened shortly before I made the donation, it makes me feel good to have contributed to saving those lives.
The put-the-inner-city-kids-on-a-horse thing we do? Makes me happy to get those kids into a positive situation.
Donating blood? Yay, me! I’m saving lives!
While it’s nice to help other people, that’s not the ultimate reason I’m doing it. I do it because it makes me feel good about myself to help other people, particularly people who–for whatever reason–can’t help themselves.
That’s the basis of altruism. It’s not about helping others, it’s about feeling good about helping others.
The truly selfish, the evil dogooders, are the ones who want to raise taxes to give it away as “charity”. They get to feel like they are doing something and helping others while not actually contributing themselves and, at the same time, stealing that warm fuzzy feeling from the people who are providing the money to start with.
Evil.
Charity has to be done at a personal, local level or the benefits to the giver are eliminated while the benefits to the receiver are lessened. Bureaucracy doesn’t create efficiency.
For the record, if it’s taken by force, by tax, it isn’t charity. Charity cannot be forced. Forcing charity is, at best, a fraudulent way for petty politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and activists to feel they have power over others.
Again, evil.
Twinkies: A Failure of Unionization
Twinkies may survive nuclear warfare, but the iconic sweet treat ultimately couldn’t withstand the might of the unionized workforce. Faced with mounting losses and overwhelming debt, due in no small part to the relentless demands of the various unions representing the nearly 19,000 employees, Hostess Brands filed bankruptcy for the second time in January 2012 and ultimately requested permission to liquidate it’s assets in November of last year when a buyer failed to materialize. While many factors played a part in the demise of the maker of such all-American snacks as Ding Dongs and Ring Dings, as well as childhood favorite Wonderbread, there is no denying the fact that costs imposed by union contracts were a major factor in the shuttering of this once-beloved company.
While there is certainly plenty of blame to go around, the simple fact is that nearly 97 percent of the company’s unsecured claims were from employee pension funds, according to the Chapter 11 filing. How did those claims arise? Simply put, the skyrocketing pension expenses were caused by the unions continuing to push for overly generous retirement rewards despite overwhelming evidence that the company could never sustain those costs. True, the unions did agree to considerable concessions prior to and even following the first bankruptcy filing in 2004. However, that was only after union officials had pushed wages and other benefits into the stratosphere, even though Hostess has been struggling for years to remain competitive.
Certainly America’s changing eating habits, increased competition from such companies as McKee Foods, makers of Little Debbie snack cakes, and rising commodity costs all contributed to the ultimate demise of Twinkies. There is no doubt, though, that union contracts inhibited the company’s ability to adapt and make the necessary changes to remain profitable. Not only were employee costs out of control, ridiculous union rules made it nearly impossible for the company to make money. These are just a few of the rules that hampered Hostess’ management:
- Twinkies and Wonder Bread could not be delivered on the same truck.
- Drivers could only deliver one product, even if they did not have a load and a load of another product was waiting to go out.
- Drivers could only drive. They had to wait for loaders to fill their trucks.
- Likewise, loaders could only handle one product. Their contract prohibited a Twinkie loader from helping out if the Wonder Bread loaders were shorthanded.
Yes, management agreed to these terms, but often they were forced to do so in order to prevent a costly strike. In fact, it was a labor strike that lead to the decision to liquidate.
Unions are meant to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, overbearing management and unfair labor practices. Ensuring a living wage and decent benefits is another of their responsibilities. However, it is evident that in this case, the unions became as much an enemy of the Hostess employees as of the company’s management. As a result of their unwillingness to compromise and make wage and benefit concessions, almost 20,000 people no longer have a job that needs to be protected. In the end, the unions drove not only the company but themselves out of business.
Not to fear, however. Two private equity firms acquired Hostess’ assets last fall and are beginning to turn the company around. Production of Twinkies began again in June, and the gooey sponge cakes returned to store shelves on July 15. The workforce has been dramatically reduced and will not be unionized. In the end, probably the only winner in this battle is America’s sweet tooth.
Related articles
Beat the Check
- Image via Wikipedia
Have you ever played a game of “Beat the Check”? Your rent is due tomorrow, but you don’t get paid until Friday, so you write the check today an, on payday, you run to the bank to get your paycheck deposited before it has a chance to clear. To stretch out the time, you write yourself a check from another account to cover the deficit, knowing that will take a few more days to clear. This is called “floating” a check.
Sound familiar?
I think most people who write checks have tried to rush a deposit in before a check clears.
In 2004, the Check 21 act went into effect, which turned the game on its head. This law gave check recipients an option to make a digital copy of a check, slashing processing time. Instead of boxes of checks being transported around the country, the check began getting scanned and instantly transferred, along with all of the encoding necessary to keep the digital checks organized. This dramatically cut the amount of time it took to clear a check. What was once a week was reduced to as little as 48 hours.
Now, as technology improves and banks update their infrastructure to match, the “float” time has been reduced even further. Many banks are using image control systems to instantly convert all incoming checks to digital format. Within a couple of hours, these images can be transmitted to the Federal Reserve, to be transmitted nearly instantly to the issuing bank. If both the issuing and the receiving banks are using modern image control systems, it is impossible to float a check. “Beat the Check” is a thing of the past. It’s like betting on purple at the roulette wheel.
Of course, this doesn’t mean that the funds are instantly available. That would eliminate the banks being able make use of the funds during that time. Don’t expect the banks to make a habit of allowing you the use of your money before the federal regulations demand it.
Work at Home Scams
The idea of working from home is certainly appealing. You get to set your own hours, sleep in some days, and be there when the kids get home from school. You can be there when the packages get delivered and let the dog out before it’s too late. Who doesn’t see the attraction?
Unfortunately, when something is so enticing, there will always be predators looking to take advantage of the dreams of others. They dangle the “be your own boss” bait and reel in the people who their wishes overrule their judgment.
The ads are hard to resist. “Make $2800 per month without leaving your home!” or “Stuff envelopes in your home for $1 per envelopes.” I cases like these, the old saw tends to hold true: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Common work-at-home scams include:
Medical Billing
For only $499.99, you can purchase a “business opportunity”. A lot of medical bill is actually done on paper so there is very real market for medical billing and processing. Unfortunately for the respondents to these ads, the vast majority of this market is already taken by large companies with huge marketing budgets. Finding enough customer to generate enough revenue to recover your investment is almost impossible, but you’ll never see that in an ad.
Envelope Stuffing
You answer an ad in the paper, sending $29.95 for a packet that will instruct you in the fine art of stuffing envelopes for $1 each. When you get the information, you find out it is a letter instructing you to place an ad in the papers stating “Stuff Envelopes for $1 Each. $29.95 for Information.” This forces you to become the scammer, just to recover your costs. Bad you.
Assembly or Craft Work
This one actually sounds like a business. You invest in–for example–a sign-making machine for $1500. The selling company promises to buy a quota of signs from you each month. After you buy the equipment and materials you spend countless hours making the product only to find out that either a) the company has disappeared or b) their undefined “Quality Standards” has rejected the work. Nothing is ever up to standards.
That’s not to say there aren’t legitimate opportunities to make money at home. Bob at Christian Personal Finance recently listed 24 legitimate home-based businesses, including blogging, eBay selling, wedding planning, car mechanic, and mobile oil changes.
Are you exploring any home-based business opportunities?
