TNNWC ENTREPRENEURIAL PUBLICATIONS

TNNWC Publications And Informational Products Division publishes The National Networker (TNNWC) Weekly Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report especially for entrepreneurs and early-stage venturers; free weekly subscriptions to these informative publications are available online to all entrepreneurial Members of TNNWC.

Membership in TNNWC is free (it's automatic for any subscriber to any TNNWC Publication) and available at our website. When you arrive there, just click on any of the JOIN US or BECOME a MEMBER buttons or links.

Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

BALANCING HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICS: Which Candidates are the Real Deal -- And Which are Counterfeit?

Balancing Healthcare, Public Policy and Politics with Linda de Seife


Tuesday, May 18th was Super Tuesday 2010, and pundits of all political stripes have analyzed the results of primaries and special elections held that day. Most seem to agree that there is a rebellion growing amongst American voters.

Basically, the poll numbers discussed in previous columns haven’t changed much, and if anything, have trended more negative toward incumbents. So, here I want to discuss one race in particular that Republicans need to learn from for the fall 2010. That race is the special election in PA-12 (Pennsylvania) to replace the late John Murtha.

The situation is that the district has an overwhelming Democratic registration majority. John Murtha represented the district and “brought home the bacon” for decades. The Democratic candidate, Mark Critz, was a Murtha staffer, and is therefore well known in the district. Despite all these factors, right up to election day, most major polls had the race a dead heat. Yet, Critz went on to defeat Republican Tim Burns by an unexpectedly large 8-point margin.

Republicans were understandably disappointed, but they need to learn from this. Critz ran as pro-gun and pro-life, said he would have voted against health care reform, and is opposed to cap-and-tax. These are Republican issue positions, yet Critz was able to co-opt them. Thus the question: Who is the real deal and who just talks the talk? Will Critz go back to Washington as a Member and vote with Nancy Pelosi as his mentor did, or will he truly vote based on what he told his constituents in order to get elected?

The Republicans need to know that this is a tactic that Democrats will use in November, and they need to nip it in the bud. PA-12 showed that simply running against the national Democratic establishment doesn’t work. Candidates need to know their district and know the folks and what they’re thinking. As this column has mentioned several times, all politics is local; that hasn’t changed. The Republican positions are in tune with the majority of Americans’ views, but they need to take it district by district. PA-12 gave Democrats a blueprint for November, which is basically, if you need to run to the right to get elected, do it. At the end of the day, if they do that, they could still end up with the majority. The question then will be, will they still try to govern from the left, or will Nancy Pelosi no longer be able to control her members?

For the Republicans, they need to stop a repeat of PA-12 by challenging Democrats who attempt to outflank them. They need to challenge the voters to choose between “the real deal” and a counterfeit. In 2008, and today, Barack Obama continues to say one thing that people want to hear and to reel them in, and then do another. The American people cannot fall for this again.

So, before you vote in November think: Real deal or counterfeit?

The Center for Health Transformation (www.healthtransformation.net) has a daily “news you can use” post relating to the implementation of the health care reform law. On May 23rd, they published an article from thehill.com (http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/99387-study-healthcare-law-encourages-small-businesses-to-stay-small) which reports on a study by the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) showing that tax credits in the new law could negatively impact small business hiring.

The new law provides a 50% tax credit to companies with fewer than ten employees who offer health insurance and whose employees’ average annual wages are $25,000. The tax credit is reduced as more employees are added to the payroll.

Pamela Villarreal, a senior NCPA analyst says, “If a business can make a decision to substitute capital for labor – say, contract the procedure out or automate it – I believe (losing the tax credit) will play an important part in the reluctance to hire. It’s puzzling that we have this perverse incentive not to have business grow by not encouraging them to hire additional workers.”

This column will continue to provide updates on the implementation of the law and their impact. Stay tuned.

Quote of the Month: “Society is infested by persons who, seeing that the sentiments please, counterfeit the expression of them. These we call sentimentalists – talkers who mistake the description for the thing, saying for having.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson


For more information, please visit Linda's TNNWC Bio.




COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE; CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...
The National Networker Companies™ and TNNWC Group, LLC
Empowering Emerging Enterprises”
Membership in TNNWC’s Global Interactive Cooperative Business Community is free of charge and entitles you to receive both The National Networker Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report, as well as access to our unparalleled Suite of Business Services.
Join Us! Simply click on http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC
Visit our website at http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Sunday, April 25, 2010

BALANCING HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICS: Why the Tea Party Movement Makes the Left Nervous

Balancing Healthcare, Public Policy and Politics with Linda de Seife

On April 15th, tax day, I attended my first Tea Party in front of Town Hall in my community of about 60,000 residents. All in all, it was a pretty sedate affair. It drew about 200 people, some from neighboring towns. Mostly, it was comprised of known Republican activists. Many of the speakers were Republican candidates for statewide office. We were welcomed by our First Selectman (the New England equivalent of mayor). Both my friend and I were surprised that he would publicly support the tea party movement. And, there were a couple of known Democratic leaders who quietly listened, but were subsequently quoted in the local paper, defending their President’s policies.

Prior to rally day, the national tea party movement sent e-mails containing instructions on behavior and warning about potential rowdy infiltrators seeking to paint the movement in an unfavorable light. By preparing, and outing these hooligans, the tea party organizers almost guaranteed that they would not show up. Good for them!

Whether through infiltrating rallies or trying to marginalize the movement, as the President and his supporters have, my question is, “why do they feel it necessary?” What are they afraid of?
Maybe they’re afraid of these statistics:

  • An April 13th Rasmussen poll indicates that 24% of U.S. voters say they consider themselves part of the Tea Party movement. Another 10% say they have close friends and family who are.

  • 48% of voters now say that the average tea party member is closer to their views on major issues than President Obama. 52% believe that the average tea partier has a better understanding of the issues facing America than the average Member of Congress.

  • Just 21% of voters nationwide believe that the federal government now enjoys the consent of the governed.

Add to this the results of a new Pew poll which finds historic levels of unhappiness about the federal government and its role in Americans’ lives. Only 22% said that they can trust the federal government always or almost always, the lowest level in 50 years.

While this level of discontent is a worry for all incumbents, two factors should cause more worry for Democrats: first, they have the most to lose; and, second, the Pew poll also found that the discontent runs more deeply among Independents and Republicans. Those who are highly dissatisfied say they are absolutely certain to vote. Historically, passion and intensity are strongly correlated to turnout and results, especially in mid-term elections.

What else are the tea party bashers afraid of? Maybe what they’re afraid of is that a majority of the American people is not buying in to their culture of dependence. Michael Barone’s April 19th commentary in the Rasmussen Report nailed it. “The Obama Democrats’ vast expansion of the size and scope of government is really not just about economics. It is really a battle about culture… (they) see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for themselves. They are trying to permanently enlarge government and increase citizens’ dependence on it.”

The tea partiers, on the other hand, believe in the culture of independence which motivated the Founding Fathers and which has enabled America to become the most productive and prosperous nation. We believe in American exceptionalism, Ronald Reagan’s “shining city on the hill.”

Barone further points out that Obama won election in 2008 with a “top-and-bottom” coalition – those dependent on government transfers and benefits, and those in what David Brooks calls “the educated class.” Obama barely exceeded 50% among those between the two extremes. These are the believers in the culture of independence who are fueling the tea party movement.

Although the tea party movement is a grass roots, decentralized one, their message comes together in the “Contract from America” (See www.thecontract.org for more details.) The #1 plank in the contract is protect the Constitution. This is followed by: reject cap and trade, demand a balanced budget, enact fundamental tax reform, and restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington.

George McGovern learned the power of the “silent majority” in 1972. When almost half of voters say that the average tea party member is closer to their views than the President is, today we are a not-so-silent majority who support the moral values of the culture of independence and the constitutional values of limited government based on the consent of the governed.

Archibald Mac Leish said, “Criticism in a free man’s country is made on certain assumptions, one of which is the assumption that the government belongs to the people and is at all times subject to the people’s correction and criticism.” The criticism has been loud and clear. November should bring the correction.


Quote of the Month: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
-- Ronald Reagan


For more information, please visit Linda's TNNW Bio.




COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE; CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies™

Empowering Emerging Enterprises”

Membership in TNNWC’s Global Interactive Cooperative Business Community is free of charge and entitles you to receive both The National Networker Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report, as well as access to our unparalleled Suite of Business Services.

Join Us! Simply click on http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC

Visit our website at http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com


Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, April 19, 2010

THE POINT: It’s in the American DNA to Speak Our Mind – And, Today’s Political Debate is On!

The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


Our founding fathers started it all with the first cries for liberty in the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution, to ensure American citizens the right of free speech with the 1st Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. It’s in the DNA of the American culture and the American people to speak our mind politically.

Today’s political debate is on in America from the Internet to family dining room tables. President Obama and Congress have sparked a passion in the American people on all sides of every issue and within all political parties. Americans are engaged and debating their political positions with passion fully exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Voters are joining Facebook political fan pages, following politicians on Twitter, posting political commentary on blogs, writing editorials to traditional newspapers to express their views, and sending politicians emails and letters directly.

They are watching political programs on television or the Internet. They are buying and reading political-themed books, as evidenced by how many of these books are on numerous best-seller lists. Political speakers are the biggest draw on college campuses. Americans are attending rallies, protests, and town hall meetings in record numbers and speaking their mind. With a great following, political blogs and news articles abound on the Internet. This mid-term election year everyone is talking politics with cab drivers, bartenders, hair stylists, fellow employees, friends, family, and just about everyone. Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams would be proud.

Americans question their government and its policies, simply because they can and they care. Voters express their positive and negatives opinions of President Obama, and members of Congress without fear of censorship or reprisal. They debate specific legislation and the way in which their tax dollars are being spent by Congress. As was the debate with the framers of the U.S. Constitution, Americans are discussing what role government, through constitutional law, can and should have in their lives and businesses. This year voters are exploring the benefits of our Christian founding and our capitalist roots. Many today know the definitions of capitalism, socialism, Marxism, and communism which they may not have thought about or discussed a year ago. They are discussing the differences between these political philosophies from an American perspective. They are discussing whether or not America is in fact being fundamentally transformed by this President and Congress with a legislative agenda, and if so, what this change really means in America and for Americans. They are discussing the difference between a democracy and a republic. This all makes for a passionate and sometimes heated debate no matter with which political party and policies you are aligned.

Americans are getting back in touch with the U.S. Constitution. For the first time since high school, many Americans are reading the Constitution again. And many are specifically looking up the 10th Amendment and the Commerce Clause. In today’s world of 2,000+-page legislative health care bills coming out of Congress, a 48-page Pocket United States Constitution that also includes the Bill of Rights, Amendments 11-27, the Declaration of Independence, and a complete index of the Constitution is a big seller, and is even being sold on eBay and other sources online in volume packages. Americans are questioning if the various federal legislation that is being considered, or has passed, is constitutional. They are debating their beliefs and positions on the original framers’ intent of the specific rights given to the people, states, and the federal government in the U.S. Constitution.

Approximately half of all Americans use social media, and political comments and debate are all over the Internet and social media platforms. The rhetoric is usually civil, but sometimes it’s not. With our 1st Amendment rights comes the common sense responsibility to debate your position on issues, and not by demonizing a political party, or with personal attacks and name calling. Everyone has a right to say whatever they want, with a few lawful exceptions. Yet there is also an ethical responsibility in free speech and a true logic in effective debate that doesn’t include spouting political spin and myth as fact.

Voters are engrossed in the political debate, and social media is a perfect platform as evidenced by a simple search on the keyword “political” on Facebook which returned a result count of 9,900 pages the other day. Youtube has political videos and clips too numerous to count. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty held his first Facebook town hall meeting March 31. It was well received, and proved to be a great use of social media to provide a real-time, transparent, economical, and interactive way to talk with voters. From a Facebook search of top political names for the top fan pages and fan numbers done on April 2, some of the results might surprise you. (These numbers can change at any time of course as fans join or leave the fan page, and I only looked at the “positive” pages for each name.)


Top Positive Fan Page RELATED TO NAME and # of Fans

President Barack Obama 7,982,205

Speaker Nancy Pelosi 18,737

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid 8,680

House Minority Leader John Boehner 58,669

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell 3,782

Newly Elected MA Senator Scott Brown 221,989

Sarah Palin 1,515,481

Glenn Beck 777,465

Jon Stewart’s 558,342

Stephen Colbert’s The Colbert Report 535,480

Anderson Cooper 360 343,323

Sean Hannity 255,385

Bill Maher 177,226

Rachel Maddow Show 129,833

Rush Limbaugh & the EIB 70,026

Keith Olbermann 48,186

Bill O’Reilly 16,081

Chris Matthews 7,985


According to Sysomos’ recent Twitter study:

• Overall, U.S. President Barack Obama is the most popular politician with 2.24 million followers. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is the most popular within the 168 identified members of the political Twittersphere with 68 followers, while President Obama is followed by 56 out of the 168.

• ABC News' Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos is the most followed media personality (Group 2). Nansen Malin, a blogger who is on the Republican Party's Executive Board in Washington State, from Group 2, has the most followers within the political Twittersphere.

CNN Breaking News is the most followed news source (Group 3) overall, while the Los Angeles Times Top of the Ticket is the most followed news source among the political Twittersphere.

• Within the political Twittersphere, George Stephanopoulos is followed by the most politicians; Virginia Senator Mark Warner is followed by the most media personalities; and MSNBC cartoonist Darly Cagle is followed by the most news organizations.

Americans are tuning in to politically-based television programs like never before, since the 2008 presidential campaign and election. Whether you like Fox News or not, they tout the “top 13 programs on cable news” and “the most total viewers.” There is no denying FNC programs, The O’Reilly Factor and the Glenn Beck, dominates the ratings. Their viewers grow every day. FNC program contributors, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Juan Williams, and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, are becoming political rock stars with name recognition similar to pro athletes and well, rock stars like KISS’ Gene Simmons. Glenn Beck is the only person in America other than Oprah Winfrey who is able to catapult a book to the top of popular bestseller book lists simply by mentioning the book on his program. And, these are all political and history-themed books.

Whether you drink coffee, tea, kool-aide or just plain water, everyone has an opinion. There are usually very different ones in the same family. In my own family of four sisters, debate is lively as I suspect it is in every American family. One sister is a die-hard Republican, and one is a died-in-the-wool Democrat. One believes President Obama wants to move America to a European style socialist culture, and one believes social justice policies that redistribute wealth are just fine. One thinks the new health care legislation is unconstitutional, and one believes everyone should have “free” health care. One is upset over the check she had to write when she filed her taxes, since she feels the government already took too much out of her pay all year. And one doesn’t pay any income tax, will receive a refund, and thinks only the rich should be taxed. One can’t wait for the 2012 election that she feels will surely replace President Obama, and the other thinks that sister is just an Obama-hater. Yep, Elizabeth and Rosie are still debating from "The View" inside of my family. The only hot button issue we four of us seem to agree on is that same-sex marriage should be legal, and the Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell policy should not. Then other family members debate us all on our equal human rights position and the definition of marriage.

Thousands of Americans don’t just express opinions with each other. Many also call their representatives in Washington or write them a letter as part of the American political debate. In fact, many in 2010 have done this for the first time in their lives. A good friend of mine who lives in Arizona sent a letter last week to Senator Jon Kyl expressing her opinion of what Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said that morning on television.

With permission, here is her letter:

Dear Senator Kyl,

I find it troublesome that Mr. Geithner holds press conferences discussing legislation like controlling companies from becoming "too big to fail." I find this wrong on several levels. Last I checked, his role as Secretary of the Treasury doesn't include a voting role in the Senate or necessarily the right to propose legislation. Am I wrong in this assessment of his role?

Secondly, I find it horribly un-American to say that if a company is overly successful with too broad a reach the government can step in and say - halt – “You're doing too well.” Could not this in essence be said of Microsoft or Google or our own Government?

And, on that note, the real issue I want to address is why are we not looking at our government as possibly being an entity that would be subject to "too big to fail" fail-safes, as it were? I presume, without too much research, one of the largest employers in the United States is the federal government. I also presume that because its agencies are so large and it employs so many people, it is rare we would think about collapsing one agency or the equivalent of a large company as Mr. Geithner spoke about for the private sector. Am I wrong in my assertions? So, is it wrong to think the reason our government won't consider a more simplified and equitable tax structure is because it would cause a loss of jobs within the IRS? Is it wrong to think we don't seek out changes in the Postal Service, which has been leaking money like a sieve for years, simply because it would mean scaling back on postal employees throughout the country?

Why isn't Washington turning the eye on its own house and demanding it be on time and on budget? Geithner’s expressed "too big too fail" philosophy strikes me as trying to use a broom to clean up after a flood. The reality is this philosophy is only going to create a bigger mess and a bigger infrastructure to house the mess. Good luck with that.

Sincerely,
Lesley Woodring
Concerned Citizen

Some say America‘s best days are behind us. I don’t believe that. As 2010 is already reflecting, Americans are not complacent about our Constitution, politics, politicians, and government policy. The majority of Americans love their country and are willing to fight with debate for their vision for it -- no matter what side of the political aisle they support. Our founding fathers are looking down on us and smiling. They are pleased we are proud of the political roots they firmly planted, and that we are still discussing their work and legacy. They would have liked the Internet, and without a doubt, each would have had their own political blog and offered Facebook town hall meetings. They are fist-bumping each other that we, as American citizens, continue to engage in passionate political debate, and that we regularly utilize our 1st Amendment right of free speech to do so without fear or censorship. This is one of the ways we honor our heritage and their legacy. The political debate is definitely on in 2010 -- as it should be by the intended design of the American culture’s DNA. The spirit of Americans will never be broken.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio





COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE;CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Thursday, February 25, 2010

BALANCING HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICS: MIA (Missing in Action) - Leadership in Washington

Balancing Healthcare, Public Policy and Politics with Linda De Seife


Here are some headlines that I read over the last few weeks that have inspired this month’s column:

  • “Snow Adds to the Political Drift”
  • “Why Washington Is Frozen”
  • “America’s Candor Gap”
  • “A Year Later, Where did the Hopes for Obama Go?”
  • “No Deficit of Cynicism”
  • “Stimulus Created Jobs, But No Real Optimism”
  • “Debt Ills, Rate Plan Knock U.S. Stocks”
  • “Fudging Jobless Statistics”
  • “Reid Puts His Bill Before Bipartisanship”
  • “White House May Abandon Civilian 9/11 Trial”
  • “Economic Data Stirs Fears”
  • “America’s Greek Tragedy – Greece’s Crisis Holds Warning for Us”

Now this is quite a list, and I could go on, but you probably get the idea. Is it any wonder that Americans are angry? Is it any wonder that, although technically the economy is in recovery, Americans don’t feel it, and so are not spending on houses, cars, or anything else other than the necessities? Is it any wonder that fear and uncertainty are paralyzing our country and holding back the recovery?

One day the headlines say things are getting better; the next day they’re not. One day we’re trying terrorists in civilian trials in New York City, and the next we’re not sure. One day we need a new agency to study global warming; the next day Florida is freezing, and Washington is literally buried in snow. (Although figuratively it’s been feeding us a snow job for years; that’s the problem!)

America is not working, in more ways than one.

Then we have a State of the Union address that is nothing more than a laundry list of legislative initiatives and a scolding of the Congress, Republicans, the previous Administration, and even of the American people by a President who is above it all, blames everyone else, and takes no responsibility for his actions, or inactions, over the last year.

Where is the clear direction, strategy and transparency that was promised? All we’ve gotten for the past year is drift -- from one issue to the next and back again. Tactics, tactics, tactics! Talk, talk, talk!

Now the Democrats are trying to say, and the media has picked up on it, that America is ungovernable. This is nonsense. What America lacks is leadership -- people who know what it takes to make the system work. We have an inexperienced President who, to use a business analogy, instead of being the CEO, is behaving like a functional vice president or department head.

The concept of leadership is very complex. There are many definitions, but there are some common traits of leadership. Some of these are: defining a vision and translating it into reality; trustworthiness; taking responsibility for your actions; inspiring confidence. The management guru, Peter Drucker, has said that “effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.”

One of President Obama’s problems is that during the campaign he sounded like a leader, but, now after the campaign is over, he has not delivered. He seemed to have the attributes, but there have been no results.

The famous psychologist Carl Jung declared, “The true leader is always led.” Bill Clinton realized this after the 1994 elections and worked with the new Republican majority to reform the welfare system and end the era of big government. Obama, to the contrary, refuses to get the message. So it is likely, that he will get more messages in November. We’ll see if he gets it this time.

And the Congress is no better. The long time Speaker of the House, Sam Rayburn, who was legendary for arm-twisting and jaw-boning believed, “You cannot be a leader and ask other people to follow you, unless you know how to follow too.” Today’s so-called Congressional leaders find it easier to buy votes than to truly negotiate the issues by listening to their members and their constituents.

We all know that another key to leadership is trust, but as I look at Washington, where is the trust? Democrats don’t trust Republicans, and Republicans don’t trust Democrats. The people don’t trust the government, and the government doesn’t trust the people.

The President’s words say one thing, and he does another. Then he called a health care summit, but even before the event, he began posturing to paint the Republicans as obstructionists if they don’t just go along. During the event, he again became the lecturing professor. So, Republicans are right to be suspicious of his motives. Have we forgotten the concept of the loyal opposition? Their role is not to just go along; their role is to oppose that which they do not believe in.

Where are the adults in our country today? It’s not the President, much as he tries to play that role by chastising others. It’s certainly not the Congress. The adults, who are trying to lead their leaders and who understand the challenges we face, are the American people. But we can’t do it alone, especially when paralyzed by the indecision and lack of strategy and vision in Washington. We need to feel confident that our country has direction that we can support. Those who voted for Obama thought that’s what they would get, but they were mistaken.

What we have is paralysis, driven by a lack of strategic direction, confidence and optimism, which could tip us back into recession, or, at the very least, is delaying a strong and sustained recovery.

We need leaders, like Ronald Reagan, who had a vision for America and confidence in the people to make that vision a reality. We need leaders with courage, who fulfill their vision based on their passion, not their position. We need leaders who raise people’s aspirations and energize them to achieve great things.

America is not ungovernable, and government is not broken. America lacks leaders who know how to govern, who respect their constituents, and who can build consensus and work through issues for the good of the whole, the way the Founders intended.

What are your thoughts on the subject?


Quote of the Month
“All the ills of mankind, all the tragic misfortunes that fill history books, all the political blunders, all the failures of the great leaders have arisen merely from a lack of skill at dancing.”
-- Moliere


For more information, please visit Linda's TNNW Bio





THIS ARTICLE--THIS AUTHOR--YOUR FEEDBACK

(1) If you would like to post a comment on this article for this author and for other readers to see, or if you would like to read the comments which have been posted by others, simply scroll down to the very bottom of this article (where it says "Posted by...") and click on the small text hyperlink that says "comments": a pop-up window will open which shows all of the comments posted by others. At the end of the other posts, there is a textbox for you to post your own comment.
(2) If you would prefer to contact the author in confidence, or to write at greater length regarding reciprocal links, special projects or professional issues, simply click on the button in this box labeled "CONTACT AUTHOR," and a pop-up form will magically appear for your use. It even allows you to include web and blog urls, downloads and attachments of all sorts.
(3) If you have not yet become a Member of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER COMPANIES (there is no charge), you should do that using the buttons below. Click on FREE NEWSLETTER button to start the process; then choose either the RSS Feed or the Daily Email delivery option.


Contact Author
Join TNNWC
Free Newsletters
Daily Email Extra
Total RSS Feed
BACKTALK! ™




*Follow TNNW on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TNNW_BUZZWORKS
*Published by TNNWC. All rights reserved.*Join our GICBC and receive Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE
The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

THE POINT: Remember Bush 41’s “Read my lips, no new taxes” fate? Does President Obama?


The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


When I read the February 22, Business Week interview with President Obama’s “agnostic” response to a question referring to his commitment level to his campaign pledge (taxes would remain the same or go down for those making less than $250,000 annually or for roughly 95% of Americans), my first reaction was: Do you remember former President George H.W. Bush’s “Read my lips, no new taxes.” pledge in the 1988 presidential campaign? Do you remember not honoring that and raising taxes in his first term as President severely politically damaged him and greatly contributed to his 1992 reelection loss? Does President Obama? Does Congress? My first thoughts were: President Obama’s “agnostic” response was a cold shoulder to the American taxpayers considering this constant tax pledge during his campaign and first year in office. I believe this tax pledge was one of the deciding factors for many that voted for him.


It is inconceivable to me that anyone in Washington believes they are entitled to spend and tax to the point that all Americans will be looking at huge tax increases and new government fees to pay for all of the new spending. President Obama’s “agnostic” response was a glimpse of realism that tax hikes will also be affecting those making less than $250,000 annually. It may come in an income tax hike for them or in other forms of taxes and fees, but it appears it is coming. President Obama knows it. We really shouldn’t be surprised, for there was a clear warning sign back in August, 2009 as reported by the New York Daily News: White House officials on Sunday refused to rule out hiking taxes as one of the "hard choices" needed to fix the economy over the long haul.


Vice President Joe Biden recently proclaimed “Washington is broken.” I believe he was referring, and spinning actually, to the partisanship he wants to portray as the reason new big government programs legislation, which all include new taxation, has not been passed by Congress yet. Hearing him say this and understanding his definition of what about Washington is broken would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious for the economic future of Americans. It was a stunning display of the tone deafness of Washington and how its definition of broken is different than that of the majority of voters. Most in Washington are not truly representing the majority of the American people whom do not want bigger government and the resulting bigger budget deficits. The American people know this can only lead to more taxes and fees.


Mr. Biden is right about Washington being broken though. The majority of Americans agree, and I have to believe all politicians, especially the President and Vice President, are well aware of the legitimate issues. Both addressed many of the real problems while being interviewed by the voters for their current positions. As with any job interview, they explained how they planned to be an asset to their employers, the voters, and the “change” they would bring to the company, the federal government. Both addressed the lack of accountability in the current company management and assured their prospective employers they would expect to be held accountable. I believe the first place to start with accountability is to change the dynamics of political campaign promises being thrown out as soon as one gets the job. The American people know what was promised in the job interviews by President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden – accepting accountability, eliminating corruption, maximizing transparency, and changing business as usual. I also remember hearing there would be an elimination of earmarks, special interest, and lobbyist. And of course, no tax increases for 95% to name a few.


It appears the majority of these interview talking points, along with several other social change points, were tossed aside in the first few months of the job performance. Why have Americans allowed politicians of both parties, their employees, to get away with such bate and switch tactics for decades? These types of tactics are considered fraud in any other circumstance. Job candidates that do not live up to their interview talk or have misrepresentation in their resumes are fired for dishonesty in the private sector. It is a general understanding by all this is the consequence for such behavior. Should a job applicant employ a “say anything” and “say what the employer wants to hear” strategy in the interview to get the job and then the job performance is lacking; this is not waved away with a casual “Every job candidate does this.” mentality by an employer.


Are politicians really any different than other employees? Should the federal government have different politician employee performance standards than any other U.S. company? Should the voters, their employer, have different expectation standards than other employers? Should we effectively want to fix broken Washington, we must first hold politicians to the same honesty and performance accountability standards any other employer expects from their employees. The voters must change the paradigm of their expectations as employers and realize political campaigns are nothing more and nothing less than a job interview with them doing the hiring.


What politicians say in their job interview should remain solid in their job performance. The politician elected was selected over the other job applicants based on their interview presentation. What they represented in the interview process does matter, and this is where accountability when they get the job starts. If a private company manager employee consistently went over the company’s budget and ran a deficit in their department, the employee could not wave this away, and the employer would not accept this performance as effective management. The manager employee would be fired and replaced with another employee that could manage a budget and show leadership in keeping it balanced. Should we truly want to lower and pay off the deficit, we must hold politicians to the same fiscal standards businesses and families are held to in their budget management. In addition, if an employee talks down to or disregards the opinion of their employer, this is insubordination, and they should be fired.


The bottom line is the U.S. federal government (and many individual state and local government) is broke as we all know. The U.S. deficit is projected to hit $1.6 trillion in 2010. The deficit is the difference between spending and income in one year. Our total debt is now projected to be in excess of 100% of the GDP beginning in 2011. Greece is bankrupt with their government spending 52% of its GDP. Our nation’s credit card is well over its credit limit. We must pay down our credit balance and not even consider adding any new purchases until we do. Pointing fingers, affixing blame, and touting an inherited deficit is of little console and is not an acceptable argument to continue adding to the credit card balance at this point. It’s time to stop the blame game, the political spin, embracing special interest, and making backroom deals. It’s time for our representatives from both major parties to suck it up, show strong leadership, take real corrective action, and start to be a part of the solution and not continue to be a part of the problem. It is time for them to live up to their job interview presentation of their management skill set.


In today’s fragile economic climate, hiking taxes to what amounts to exorbitant rates on any business or family is not the best answer or even a reasonable answer to paying down the deficit. Class warfare may have worked in the past, but it is not working in America now with regard to tax rates. As reported in a recent Rasmussen Poll: "Most Americans favor a law that would limit the amount of taxes paid to state, local and federal governments so that no one would pay more than 50% of their total income in taxes. Even when that standard is applied to someone who earns a million dollars a year, most Americans say that such a fortunate individual should pay less than half of their income in taxes."


It is easily seen as the double-talk that it is for one to talk seriously about paying down the deficit and at the same time to seek huge new government programs and spending. It is time for politicians to grow up, to get real, and to understand American taxpayers (and future generations) are not an open checkbook with funds magically deposited nightly by the money fairy or the Federal Reserve masquerading as our rich uncle. As reported in another recent Rasmussen Poll: "President Obama may have to go back on his campaign promise against raising taxes on Americans making less than $250,000 a year in order to reduce the country's record budget deficit. But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that even if the president and Congress raise taxes to reduce the federal deficit, 58% of voters think they are more likely to spend the money on new government programs. Separate polling shows that the vast majority of voters nationwide (83%) of Americans say the size of the federal budget deficit is due more to the unwillingness of politicians to cut government spending than to the reluctance of taxpayers to pay more in taxes."


It’s time to acknowledge that significant job creation only occurring in government jobs is not sustainable as true economic recovery. This is in reality only adding more to the deficit in the long run. The private sector creates the wealth and financial stability of our nation, not the public sector. Let’s face it, New York and California can not pay their bills after several state tax hikes due to the enormous obligations of their public employee costs. Western European countries already imposing many of the new program models being considered by Washington have standard high unemployment, growth stifling tax rates, and low innovation. Where is the line for the U.S. when the ability to tax the private sector no longer can afford the only growth being in government jobs?


While politicians tout the stimulus is working, many in America do not agree and are not optimistic with big spending and big tax hikes looming. As reported by ABC News Poll on February 16: "Just 23 percent think things are getting better and 77 percent say the economy is staying the same or getting worse – a chilling assessment given the very low ratings of current sentiment. A key indicator from last week's ABC News/Washington Post poll underscores these persistent negative feelings. Eighty-eight percent think that the economy, despite what economists say to the contrary, is still in a recession. And on a more personal note, 53 percent say that based on their experience the economy has not begun to recover."


Defining the “rich”; and therefore, whom can withstand large tax increases without further damage to unemployment figures and the economy in general, is not as simple as pointing to anyone whom makes $250,000 or more in this current recession-era America. As reported by a Washington Post Poll: "Concern about the impact of recession crosses party lines. More than six in 10 Democrats, Republicans and independents say they have been hurt by the recession. Higher- and lower-income households alike reported significant levels of economic pain."


Blue states and red states – left and right – Democrats and Republicans: The first step to tackling our fiscal problems is to stop consideration of any new spending programs. The next step is to task the newly formed, 10 Democrat and 8 Republican, Deficit Panel with auditing all federal government programs with the goals of eliminating the great waste of taxpayers’ money in service and program duplication and ridiculous earmark spending. Did you know there are 69 federal agencies to administer 10 early education programs as just one example of extreme duplication? We must also look at every existing state specific earmark expenditure, whether 1 year old or 100 years old, and ask the question: Would the taxpayer’s of the state in which the earmark provides benefit be willing to pay higher state taxes in any form to pay for this program to continue it in their state?


All earmarks and pork barrel spending must be seen as unacceptable in Congress’ fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers with no exceptions. Every politician promises a form of this in almost every campaign. As you will recall, President Obama presented that he would not allow earmarks in his 2008 job interview - the 2008 Presidential campaign. It is time for this promise to be a reality without further discussion or consideration of any kind.


We simply can’t afford pork barrel spending and special interests any more. Responsible families don’t buy their children gifts when they can’t afford the house payment – even if their children threaten them with hating them or throw a public tantrum. Politicians seeing it as their duty to “bring home the bacon” of federal money to be spent in their state can no longer be acceptable to Washington or their represented states. The “bacon” must be recognized for what it is - money taken by the federal government in the form of taxes and fees paid by American working families and businesses at all income levels.


I realize many will see the “stop new spending and eliminate old earmarks” as the first steps in tackling our fiscal problems as an extreme answer and politically undoable. Yet, consider a recent Gallup Poll: "Americans are markedly cynical about the amount of waste in federal spending, more so than at several other times in recent history. On average, Americans believe 50 cents of every tax dollar that goes to the government in Washington, D.C., today are wasted. That's an increase from 46 cents per dollar in 2001."


When an American family is laden with debt it must be paid off to enable the family to regain their financial stability, and when an increase in income is not an option; the family eliminates current unnecessary expenditures even if it hurts such as cable, entertainment, dining out, dog grooming, salon services, clothing, etc. They choose one service and eliminate the duplicate service such as cable/satellite, landline/cell, theater/Blockbuster, etc.to cut expenses. And, they do not add any new expense obligations until they have paid down their current debt. They certainly don’t continue to charge up their credit cards insisting that all charges are necessary when they are not. They don’t refuse to realistically look at lifestyle spending cuts that would enable them to pay off their credit card balance to have stability again. They would never consider breaking into their child’s piggy bank or just handing a kindergarten class their bills to pay off when they begin working in 12-20 years.


Political rhetoric about spending being “frozen” that does not take into account examining and eliminating unnecessary existing programs and duplication waste is again really just political double-talk. This does not reflect a sincere or serious approach to making an authentic effort and difference in reducing the deficit. That is the sacrifice families make to pay their bills, and it must be the sacrifice politicians make to pay the nation’s bills. No more political spin about government tightening their belts without actually doing so. No more word games and double talk. Tax increases or new taxes as an answer to deficit reduction is not political belt tightening. Raising the debt ceiling isn’t either. It’s also time to acknowledge that no company or state is too big to fail. Private businesses and families file bankruptcy when they must as sad as this may be for them. (At least financially unsound businesses used to until the federal government began picking losers and winners in private enterprise.) It is not what they want to do or an easy path to take, but it is recognized by law as a last resort option and does provide an ability to restructure and start over on more solid fiscal ground.


I believe President Obama will have the same fate as Bush 41 did in his reelection bid; if like him, he does not live up to his tax campaign pledge. This commitment was not “agnostic” when he was interviewing for the job and should not be allowed to be so now. I believe if he imposes new taxes on even the higher wage earners, which are in reality often business owners; and the result is even higher and longer unemployment rates, his employment contract renewal is also highly unlikely.


With the taxpayers now wide awake and closely watching federal spending and tax policies, it will not matter whether these new taxes come in the form of higher income tax rates (or reworking tax brackets or eliminating some tax deductions), higher payroll taxes, new health insurance policy taxes, new gasoline or energy taxes, any type of new “fees”, or a federal sales or value-added tax. Voters are intelligent. They will recognize a new “tax” that will affect them whether directly in tax hikes, new fees, or deeper unemployment. It will not matter if it is creatively named to hide the fact that it is indeed a new tax obligation coming out of their wallet or purse. They will recognize any new taxes are necessary for the most part only because politicians refuse to manage and spend their money responsibly.


Should the Deficit Panel not recommend seriously eliminating waste and stopping further spending as the first steps to paying down the federal deficit, they will be viewed as simply working from a “justification of new taxes” predisposition. They can call new tax proposals “necessary” and “of a bi-partisan agreement” in their findings, but the taxpayers will not accept this political explanation or direction any more. Should a tax hike be recommended and any group of taxpayers is carved out of it, this will be seen for the pay back to special interest that it is too. And if the Pay/Go order simply becomes another vehicle to justify more taxes, this will be recognized as such by taxpayers.


Should the current path of increased spending and new taxes be the path politicians stay on, I believe the incumbent big spenders of both parties in Congress will look back in January, 2011 and realize Tiger Woods had a better 2010 than they did. Congress certainly will have more to explain and apologize for to the people that should have been considered in their decisions and actions. The reason for this careless behavior will be the same, but most politicians, unlike Mr. Woods, will not likely acknowledge they acted out of self interest and simply felt “entitled”.


I am skeptical, yet I am hopeful too that I am wrong in my skepticism. As Mrs. Woods expressed, the proof will not come in words, but in actions. The voters will be watching the actions. The politicians’ employers, the voters, will be watching their employees, the politicians, and judging them by their interview presentation and job performance match up as well as the overall health of the company, the federal government, under their management. I know America can pull through this hard time, and we must - even if it takes firing every politician employee we have and starting over. I'm hopeful our politician employees have heeded being put on performance probation and will make the necessary changes to have a good performance review in November. If not, like any responsible employer, we'll have to let you go for the good of the all.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio.





THIS ARTICLE--THIS AUTHOR--YOUR FEEDBACK

(1) If you would like to post a comment on this article for this author and for other readers to see, or if you would like to read the comments which have been posted by others, simply scroll down to the very bottom of this article (where it says "Posted by...") and click on the small text hyperlink that says "comments": a pop-up window will open which shows all of the comments posted by others. At the end of the other posts, there is a textbox for you to post your own comment.
(2) If you would prefer to contact the author in confidence, or to write at greater length regarding reciprocal links, special projects or professional issues, simply click on the button in this box labeled "CONTACT AUTHOR," and a pop-up form will magically appear for your use. It even allows you to include web and blog urls, downloads and attachments of all sorts.
(3) If you have not yet become a Member of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER COMPANIES (there is no charge), you should do that using the buttons below. Click on FREE NEWSLETTER button to start the process; then choose either the RSS Feed or the Daily Email delivery option.


Contact Author
Join TNNWC
Free Newsletters
Daily Email Extra
Total RSS Feed
BACKTALK! ™




*Follow TNNW on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TNNW_BUZZWORKS
*Published by TNNWC. All rights reserved.*Join our GICBC and receive Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE
The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Saturday, October 03, 2009

BLUE THING #9: This Week's Top Buzzed Items and Terms

This Week's Top Buzzed Items and Terms
BLUE THING #9: This Week's Top Buzzed Items and Terms

This is a very interesting resource, brought to us courtesy of http://blog.omgili.com :

Did you ever want to know what’s happening on the internet in real-time? “Yes” you say, I use Twitter! Well good for you, I guess we can’t teach you anything new since you already know everything… So go on and don’t read the rest of the post because you are so smart and successful…

OK, you are still here. Good! By now you probably know about the “Search Options” feature Google introduced in May. One of its features is to limit the search results by time frame. By default the available time frames are: Any time, Past year, Past week, Recent results, and Past 24 hours. Past 24 hours is good, but still far away from Real-time. What Google isn’t telling you is that you can search in the past minute and even in the past second. The trick is to change a parameter in the URL that will narrow down the time frames. Let take a look at a simple example:

Search for Barack Obama in the past 24 hours:

http://www.google.com/search?q=barack%20obama&hl=en&output=search&tbs=qdr:d&tbo=1

Published by THE NATIONAL NETWORKER Newsletter. All rights reserved. Subscribe Free - Click HERE.
The National Networker Companies
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

NETWORKING FUN FOR THE INTROVERTED: Flocking, Obama and an anarchist at the G-20

Networking Fun for the Introverted
with Wendy Kovitz


This month, I'm serving up a few eye-catching stories from around the web. Is social networking bad for you? Does social networking need censorship? What are the legal and ethical complexities of social media?

'Flocking' behavior lands on social networking sites
by Sharon Jason
USA Today
For the most part, being part of a social network is good for you, research suggests. For example, a study in this month's Scientific American Mind finds that social support and social networking offer benefits, from additional resilience to greater life satisfaction to reducing the risk of health problems.

"The mythology we have is that people used to spend whole days hanging around community — like the bar at Cheers," (Barry) Wellman says. "They didn't. They stayed home. If we switch from television to social networking sites, it's a switch toward sociability — not away from it." (Barry Wellman is) a sociologist at the University of Toronto in Canada who started analyzing social networks in the 1960s and has expanded his studies to online.
For the complete article please click here.

For another great article, please see CNN's Obesity, politics, STDs flow in social networks.

People have profound influences on each other's behavior within three degrees of separation, the authors find. That means that your friends, your friends' friends, and your friends' friends' friends may all affect your eating habits, voting preferences, happiness, and more.
(Fourth degree, not so much historically speaking. But who knows what kind of trouble that will get us into/out of.)


It's Not Facebook, It's the People Who Use Facebook
by Jose Antonio Vargas
Huffington Post (blog)

It's easy to be anonymous online, as anyone who's ever been a victim of online slander knows. It's also easy to threaten the life of the sitting American president. And the controversial Facebook poll asking users if President Obama should be killed underlines two emerging ethos of the connected, free-wheeling, open-like-an-open-wound Web.

What's acceptable to say in the company of your friends or relatives can go public. And spreads. Then hits a collective nerve.
For the complete article please click here.


Twitter Crackdown: NYC Activist Arrested for Using Social Networking Site ...
Bay Area Indymedia
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 :Elliot Madison was arrested last month during the G-20 protests in Pittsburgh when police raided his hotel room. Police say Madison and a co-defendant used computers and a radio scanner to track police movements and then passed on that information to protesters using cell phones and the social networking site Twitter. Madison is being charged with hindering apprehension or prosecution, criminal use of a communication facility, and possession of instruments of crime. Exactly one week later, Madison's New York home was raided by FBI agents, who conducted a sixteen-hour search.

For the complete article (including Elliot Madison speaking with his attorney Martin Stolar) please click here.
For more information, please check out the following sources: HuffPo, WOK3, Guardian, FastCompany, CNN, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.


Social media not only changes the way an individual voice is heard but alters the perception of how the individual fits in with the world as a whole. Good or bad, we're all connected.

For more information, please visit Wendy's TNNW Bio.

- Wendy Kovitz
http://www.BookOfAra.blogspot.com - blog of fictional fantasy memoirs


Published by THE NATIONAL NETWORKER Newsletter. All rights reserved. Subscribe Free - Click HERE.
The National Networker Companies

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Saturday, April 25, 2009

REAL ESTATE...AND OTHER THINGS OF VALUE: Greatness

Real Estate...and Other Things of Value with Yossi Feigenson


How can we define greatness? Is there even one single definition of greatness? How do we know if we have witnessed greatness? ? Is the ideal of attaining greatness something the common man can strive to achieve? And the biggest question of all; does everyone have the ability to achieve greatness?


Dr. Robert Solomon, a pioneer and leader in technology based thinking, has said that the population can be divided into three categories:


The first group consists of most of the population. For the most part, these are people who don’t have a strong sense of self awareness. They may be good, kind and productive, yet they don’t function with a sense of mission, a sense of purpose. These people are usually very influenced by popular culture. Their life is often lived by rote, they are not even sure they know why they do whatever it is they do. They are simply drifting along with the current of their circumstances. They also represent over 90% of our population.


Then there is the second group: People who have a sense of purpose to their lives. They plan for their lives and execute accordingly. They are usually well educated, and in the career of business of their choosing. They create their own circumstances. They are usually well read, have strong family ties, and have a sense of responsibility to community. This group represents 9.99% of the population.


Stand Out, Get Results! Exclusive offer on Inspire Your Buyer's Direct Email Campaign Program


This brings us to the last group. These are the elite. According to Solomon, you find about 1 in 10,000 people on this level. These are the uber humans. They are super achievers, leaders of industry and winners of various awards. They are often whom we refer to as great. We are awed in their presence. These people are often the rich and famous, but, just as often, they are folks living in obscurity, out of the public eye, yet, living their lives at an extreme level of consciousness.


Let’s take a look at one of our new heroes; the pilot, Chesley “Sulley" Sullenberger, who so ably piloted his plane into the Hudson River. It doesn’t take much imagination to understand that this story could have, and in many instances would have had a quite different outcome. The question is however, did Sully just instantly become great? Or was he preparing for this moment his entire life? And when his moment arrived he was ready to answer the call.


I instinctively understood that Chesley Sullenberger was a person that lived his life on a level, that when this moment came to him He was ready. Let’s explore a bit. He got his flying license at the ripe young age of 14. He mastered glider flying. He thoroughly investigated and studied flight disasters. He also studied the psychology of the crew in the cockpit. He was a pilot in the Air Force from 1973 until 1980. He is flying commercial airliners since 1980.


I think we are onto something.


Now let’s take a look at our new president, Barack Obama. It is startling to see how Mr. Obama has so carefully orchestrated events, prepared himself, and aligned himself for this moment. As far back as 1995 he had his sights on the oval office. He saw a vacuum of leadership, an opportunity for his charismatic personality to catapult him to where he is.


He penned what have now become, two best selling biographies. He wrote and delivered the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic national convention. He was then tagged as one of the most influential politicians by Time Magazine. After the speech, Newsweek ran a cover of him with the caption “are we looking at the next president?


You see, greatness and heroism are often defined by a moment. Yet, in most cases it is a life of preparation in relative obscurity that allows the individual to seize the moment, and be labeled as great.

The big question that needs to be answered is what about the rest of us? A good friend of mine asked me how this can be applied to each and every individual. The vast majority of us go about our lives, our routines, trying to balance our family/work/community lives. Most of us will never be called upon to demonstrate greatness. But herein lies the essence.


This friend, David, works as a computer programmer for a well known, prestigious, global media company. I said to him: If you go about your business, always being on top of your particular area, the day may come when you see something come across your screen that can save the entire company. Will you be ready?


Our duty is to at the very least be in the top 9.9 percent, where we are performing on high levels, and, more importantly, growing through learning, reading, and self improvement and self awareness. And when the moment comes calling: Will we be there to heed the call?



####

Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. All rights reserved.
####
To subscribe for your free TNNW Newsletter, go to www.TheNationalNetworker.com. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free continuous RSS feed (available either by traditional RSS or by direct email), go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com.

You are also invited to click our buttons:

Subscribe to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER
Link To THE NATIONAL NETWORKER
The NATIONAL NETWORKER Toolkit
TNNW WEBSITE
-------
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Blog Archive

BNI News Feed

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy
The Emergence of the Relationship Economy features TNNWC Founder, Adam J. Kovitz as a contributing author and contains some of his early work on The Laws of Relationship Capital. The book is available in hardcopy and e-book formats. With a forward written by Doc Searls (of Cluetrain Manifesto fame), it is considered a "must read" for anyone responsible for the strategic direction of their business. If you would like to purchase your own copy, please click the image above.

Knowledge@Wharton













Site Credits:


Featured in Alltop
ALLTOP Business
News Wire. HOT.
Cool Javascript codes for websites
KeepandShare.com(R)  Fabulous Free Calendars

Create FREE graphics at FlamingText.com