Browse: Home / Blog

WERE POOR BUT DIDN’T KNOW IT!

By Rob Severson on July 27, 2011

I googled on that phrase and got millions of hits!  There are books on the subject, famous people
quoted, and who knows how many others as I just looked at a few pages.

I grew up in the 50′s with parents and relatives who grew up
before the depression and survived it when it happened. They grew up poor, but
didn’t know it mostly because most everyone else they knew were in the same
boat.

Many had the same recollections; they were happy because of
their faith in God, their families and their friends.  They worked hard for what they got and
appreciated what they had.

Now we live in a different world. We have faster and better
communication via TV, radio and the internet.
We are plagued by temptation to have more; more toys, cars, cell phones,
clothes, vacations……….. what else?
All this marketing certainly helps business and the economy but it also
now shows people how poor they are.  Is
that good?

In my book “Connecting Peace, Purpose &
Prosperity”  I suggest that joy and
inner peace are our number 1 need in life.
Most would agree that happiness does not come from wealth or material
things, but we certainly need to make a living to provide for us and our
families.  We also need to have a purpose
which I believe is to help other people, right out of the Bible and most
religions that I know of.

I believe very strongly in helping other people, admittedly
for some selfish reasons as well.
Helping others brings me out of myself, my problems and lets me see how
good I have it in my life.  But helping
others must be done for their good, or the effort is lost.

WE MUST HELP THE POOR!

But, are we really doing that with all the messages we
send?  I started writing that people have
testified that they were poor but didn’t know it; does it help for them to now
know it and realize how much they are missing?
I’m not referring to the base needs, but all the other stuff we
see.  We also have politicians telling us
over and over that we have injustice in our system, is that helpful or is it
just disheartening?  We hear many harshly
criticizing the wealthy for being greedy and condemn that notion vehemently.

But……  with all
the products and stuff out there, I question whether we can ever provide for
everyone enough so that they can buy all the things the “greedy”
can.  Are we promoting the insatiable
wants that we criticize the greedy as having?.

So my question is: are we helping the poor and lower income
folks with their lives or teaching them to be greedy like the ones we don’t
respect?  Are they better off listening
to all the politicians debate equality and “discovering” they have it
bad, or were they better off when they “didn’t know it”?

That is not so say we shouldn’t help disadvantaged
people.  My thesis is simply that I
believe people really want to be happy; to live lives that are full of joy,
happiness and peace.  That includes
making enough to survive, living within one’s means, and giving to others when
possible.  Like my parents and
grandparents did, and they were happy!

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Response

DO YOU HATE YOUR JOB?

By Rob Severson on July 21, 2011

I was at a great seminar the other day dealing with finding one’s dream job.  The presenter had some great ideas on it including clarity of mission and elevator pitch and networking to find that dream job.

She also talked about having a job that you hate and commented on the high number of people who say they are in that category, hence, the message to find a job you love.

It all makes sense and she did a fine job presenting it.

All of that is well and good.  But I have one question:  why do we hate our jobs?

Stupid question to many I would guess.  There are many reasons like having a “bad” boss, not liking the people we work with, nature of work, pay, benefits, hours, and mammy other reasons that are innumerable.

But think about this, you may not like it but hear it out:  could the problem be us?

I think we have forgotten that the purpose of work is to put bread on the table.  I grew up in the 50′s with parents who survived the depression.  I don’t recall them ever saying they hated a job they had, even in the 20′s and 30′s when they had tough ones.  Their purpose was to survive, and when they married and had my brother and I their purpose was to support us in the best way they could.  They were unselfish in what they wanted as their goal was to provide us as best they could.  I was also raised to understand serving customers as they were in their own business, a valuable lesson for the self employed and those working for others (their customers!)

That is not to say I think people who hate their jobs are selfish; but I do know that the jobs I didn’t care for were due to my needs not being met, whatever they were.

I believe that in addition to making a living our other purpose in life is to help one another, a spiritual principal endorsed by most religions.  It also works in one’s job and job success.  In my career I learned that problem solving was my forte and I practiced it in every job I had.  I was engrossed in the task at hand and not with my pay or any other personal issues I had with the job.  In return for serving the company, I also got promotions and raises due to the contributions I was making to the firm.  The people I worked with who were more self focused didn’t do as well, and didn’t like their jobs.

I used to think about my job as my own business; I sold my services to my customer, my employer.  I got paid based on how much my value my services added, and promoted when I proved how much more I could do for THEM.  Not what they could do for me.  And you know what?  The better I did the more I liked my job!

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a response

LEARNING TO SURVIVE AND OVERCOME OBSTACLES!

By Rob Severson on July 16, 2011

I like to talk with people wherever I go.  Sometimes I ask questions, other times people just open up to me.  I love hearing their stories.

A few weeks ago I was speaking at an alternative school about stuff I have in my book.  This school serves kids that have had some problems, addiction, grades, legal or whatever.  After my talk a young girl came up to me and sat down like she wanted to talk, so I listened.

Her story tore me apart and I am not a bleeding heart.  She was 18, had a 1 1/2 year old child and was living with her boyfriend who was a convicted felon and couldn’t find a job so she was supporting him.  Her mom, a 2 time alcoholic treatment failure was moving in with the girl along with her unemployed boyfriend.  Her father would have little to do with her.  All I could do was listen, as she tearfully told me all this. I wished I could have done more.

Later I met a middle aged woman who told me her story.  She had been a single parent, (later remarried) raised 2 kids and put then both to college.  She had a good job, no college, just started at the bottom of a startup business and worked her way up.  She also does house sitting, walks dogs, and I’d bet about anything she has to do to survive and pay for her kids educations, morally of course.  She clearly was a survivor and seems very happy that she is.  She also is clearly a hard worker and opportunist.

So…. I wonder how she got that way and if the first girl can do it too.  Is being a survivor something in our genes or can it be learned?  From what the first girl told me I think she is on the right track, she has a job or two and has some goals for what she wants to do.  The school she is in, and more specifically the class I talked with, focuses on these kids and works on teaching them how to make a living, manage money and get jobs.  For her sake I hope it works out for her.

One thing I noticed with the other woman is that she seemed eager to get more work, even when she talked with me.  She floated the idea of house sitting which I caught as an offer to do that for me, something I may consider.  I think that was one of her keys to success, being on the lookout for work with everyone she meets,

I am looking for ways to help both young people and older ones who are really interested in surviving on their own.   I’d like to believe it can be taught, especially some basic concepts  that some don’t seem to understand.

The first is to be others centered.  Sounds altruistic, but it woks.  Finding out about other people, what they do, if they know of any jobs, or how you can help them is a good start.  When people learn you are interested in doing something for others they may respond with something you can do for them or someone else.  It also removes the temptation of a pity party that any single mom can fall into.

Second, networking is something we can do all the time.  It has come to be a catch phrase for job seekers only, but is the best way for us to get our services to market that we have.  While it may be fun to talk about sports, concerts or the kids, it can be equally fun to talk about work and opportunities that are out there for various skills.  All it takes is a little conscious effort to find it; it may be there where least expected!

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a response

WHY NOT TAX EVERYONE, THAT WOULD BE FAIR!

By Rob Severson on June 26, 2011

I’ve been thinking about the budget battles n Minnesota and the federal government.  I think there is a solution that will anger everyone!  I have spent a lot of time thinking about some of this and hope to get folks thinking if nothing else.  All comments are welcome!

I’ve been thinking about the budget battles n Minnesota and the federal government.  I think there is a solution that will anger everyone!

First, let’s just look at the economic issues.  Both entities have projected shortfalls in revenue vs. spending.  Both have a faction that wants to raise taxes on the high income folks or a faction that wants to decrease spending.  It seems apparent to me that we need to do both, even though I don’t want to pay more myself.

So……why not increase taxes on everyone?  Say, perhaps, 10% of the current bracket for all earners.  That could go a long way in denting the shortfalls for each.

It would take away all the social engineering and bickering over who should pay more and still be as progressive as it is now.  It would make everyone understand the problem; what government is doing with our money and the cost of all the stuff we want.  Everyone would be angry, but no one could feel singled out to pay more.

Second, I’d find a way to have the 40% of Americans who pay nothing pay something, if only a little.  That would be a teaching moment as, well as providing some ownership in our government for all rather than disenfranchising them.  I think we would all appreciate what we have more if there were a cost to us.  In effect, we have ‘sold’ the government to the high income people as evidenced by the “nasty” lobbyists.

Third, if we solve the current budget debate, then the legislature and congress could focus on really turning the governments around by cutting questionable spending and eliminating waste and fraud.  Perhaps with no constituents asking for things they now understand they can’t afford, governments could focus on what we can afford. I think they would have the country behind them.

Obviously tax increase would make most people angry, I don’t know anyone who wants to pay more in tax except for some very rich I read about who have so much it wouldn’t matter.  I hear that all should share the pain and this would do it.  It could always be undone after spending is reduced or the economy picks up to where it isn’t needed.

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Responses

WHY POLITICIANS FIND COMPROMISE DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE!

By Rob Severson on June 23, 2011

fOR MORE OF MY FRIEND STEVE’S “RANTS” CHECK OUT HIS BLOG SITE: http://home.comcast.net/~steve_bakke/site/

 

MODERN POLITICS:

WHY IS COMPROMISE DIFFICULT

…… AND SOMETIMES IMPOSSIBLE?

 

Stephen L. Bakke – June 21, 2011 (My “Summer Solstice Report”)

Constant Bickering and Gridlock Over Issues

Within this topic, you might be surprised at what I am tired of. It’s not the gridlock – strange as that may seem. I am tired of constantly hearing about how America has “deteriorated” into inflexible pockets of ideology. I am tired of the shallow “pining” for the good old days when we always managed to “work things out.” While I too see the advantages of achieving agreement on matters of policy and direction, I have come to understand (I think) why we seem to be more polarized now than in the past. We have had cultural changes for sure! And that has led to a different list of issues, or at least different perspectives on the old issues.

Certain issues come and go, solutions are debated, and legislation is actually passed. However, there are some other stubborn issues which seem to linger as non-compromised, unresolved issues which we hear about again and again – e.g. military conflicts, health care reform, Social Security reform, immigration, voter identification, union card check vs. secret balloting, definition of marriage, Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and that pesky abortion issue.

Paul Lachine – NewsArt

Face It – The U.S. Has Changed – Arguably, Not for the Better!

Extreme examples of cultural changes graphically demonstrate what has occurred in our society. I would argue that it wasn’t many years ago that the certain characterizations would never have been made by prominent on-air commentators. They would have been unacceptable to the public or too radical to be taken seriously. For example, I submit two comments about “Weinergate” made by influential on-air personalities. While a bit cynical and “humorous” in nature, these were intended to send as serious commentary:

  • ·         Chris Matthews commented during a MSNBC “Hardball” program, that Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner could be in danger of being forced out of Congress by Blue Dog Democrats who face uphill battles in red states because, as he put it, “people in the rural areas of this country who are Christian conservative culturally – you can say backward if you want … don’t like this kind of stuff.”
  • CNN gave Bill Maher a platform to deride one of the Left’s favorite targets: “Dick Cheney used to go out and shoot birds by the hundreds that were like in a cage. To me, that’s a lot more psychotic than anything Anthony Weiner ever did.”

 

Can you believe that? There was a time when those statements would never have been made by main-stream commentators. There was a time when an often “sleazy” comedian would never have been enlisted to provide supposedly “serious” commentary. And consider the unfortunate “editing” of the Pledge of Allegiance during last weekend’s coverage of the U.S. Open golf tournament. During what was described as a patriotic presentation of values, a group of children were expressing their “Pledge.” The edited version omitted the reference to “under God.” An apology was issued but wrongdoing wasn’t admitted. What is happening?

It’s clear to me that this is symptomatic of a dramatic change/slide in our cultural rules and conventions. There is a significant portion of liberals and progressives who truly have contempt for our culture and the legitimacy of our Founders’ concept of “Divine Providence.” You’ve got to admit, this demonstrates movement of one element of society,(and it ain’t the “Right”) to a far different reference point for interpreting our culture and judging our leaders’ actions. I’m no model citizen or intellect (God knows that’s “fur shur”!), but this concerns even me!

Important Liberal and Conservative Philosophical Differences

Conservatives believe that liberals have more enthusiastically embraced this gradual evolution of culture than has the Right.  Conservatives claim to have tried to hold on to a more traditional set of values. Following are some examples of what I believe to be dramatic cultural changes:

  • Liberals have increased their resolve to prove that the federal government is the greatest tool for creating prosperity. Conservatives continue to believe the greatest threat to creating prosperity is government.
  • Conservative philosophy, in its purest form, believes in government’s role as defined, or limited, by the U.S. Constitution. Liberals are for an ever-increasing government role.
  • Liberals consider the Constitution a “living, breathing document” – to be used in the context of international law, moral relativism, and moral equivalence. Conservatives believe the Constitution stands on its own.
  • Conservative writer Dennis Prager envisions a new “American Trinity” developing.  According to him, the traditional conservative “trinity” is “E Pluribus Unum, Liberty, and In God We Trust”.  He sees “E Pluribus Unum” being replaced by the concept of “Multiculturalism”; “Liberty” being replaced by “Equality”, and “In God We Trust” being replaced by “Secularism”. The familiar American motto “E Pluribus Unum” means “out of many, one”.  It represents our unity and is based on recognition of our inherent diversity.  Liberals have come to interpret this as unity of thought throughout a diverse culture.  Conservatives always have interpreted this as celebrating a common unique culture, not blurred by such things as multiculturalism.
  • The Left has increased their focus on equality of the result.  Liberals now tend to infer unequal opportunities when observing unequal outcomes – i.e. they believe equal outcomes result if people truly have equal opportunity.  This is known as egalitarianism.  The definition of equality for a person on the Right would emphasize the concept of equal opportunity.

 

Compromise Requires Certain Things

Getting back to the point of this report, when parties to negotiations find themselves far apart philosophically, compromise is the goal but is often impossible. With some issues, there is no way to achieve “win/win.” Any result which is different from the ideological extremes may not give a satisfying result for either party. In order to be an effective compromise, the result each party must gain something, be able to brag about it, and provide some feeling of satisfaction. Can you see how some things just don’t lend themselves to that type of dynamic?

An Example

Consider an example of a very contentious issue – abortion. Pro-life supporters commonly believe that a human life starts at conception and any termination of a pregnancy ends a human life. Pro-choice supporters argue against the certainty of that definition and support a women’s right to choose whether or not to continue the pregnancy. They also argue that this right to choose (during the first two trimesters) is protected by the Constitution’s “right to privacy” provision. That argument was upheld in the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision.

The antagonists in this issue are both absolutely, sincerely adamant about the correctness of their position! The abortion opponents, quite simply, believe that terminating a pregnancy terminates a life. What would be the suggested compromise on that belief? The abortion rights supporters dismiss the concept that a fetus is a human life. They hold that the fetus is part of the mother and therefore it’s the mother’s right to choose. How should they compromise? There is no possible “common ground” that I can see! There is no way to create a “win/win” on this issue.

I have taken an easy example to contrast and explain. Now you try to create a “win/win” on some other issues. It’s tough – sometimes just difficult and sometimes impossible. Try analyzing the following issues and create a “win/win” satisfying compromise for both sides: military conflicts, health care reform, Social Security reform, immigration, voter identification, union card check vs. secret balloting, definition of marriage, Israeli/Palestinian conflict, etc ………

The Final Analysis

Traditions aren’t just questioned or examined, they are being cast aside. And as a result there is an understandable polarization over the issues which are presented to deal with our situation, society and culture. You don’t have to agree with my opinion that “non-compromise” is understandable, and if you do agree you don’t have to like it. I only ask that you understand what I am saying and consider this as you evaluate future political conflicts. I think it will help you understand the dynamics of each situation.

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a response

NATIONAL DEBT AS SEEN BY AN ACCOUNTANT!

By Rob Severson on June 14, 2011

Steve Bakke is a friend of mine and writes reports on various current event and political topics.  You can find his reports on his blog site:  http://home.comcast.net/~steve_bakke/site/

THE NATIONAL DEBT? – JUST GUESS WHAT IT REALLY IS!

 

Stephen L. Bakke – June 14, 2011


We’ve Come To Accept What We’ve Been Told!

I’ve done it. You’ve done it. Conservative political leaders and the conservative media have done it as well. We all have focused on the $14,500,000,000,000 national debt and the annual addition to that total of approximately $1,500,000,000,000. That’s all in TRILLIONS friends! And our President and the democrats in Washington, while giving lip service to the debt, don’t seem particularly exorcized about continuing to add to that total. They seem to accept the current debt situation as the “new normal”! But I think they actually know that’s NOT all there is!

 Mallard Fillmore by Bruce Tinsley

If only $14,500,000,000,000 was the total! It’s NOT! The truth is actually soooooo much worse! Maybe the “Democrats in DC” are actually on to the truth – hence their blasé attitude about the “14 something” number. I thank a reader who sent me a copy of some of the work done by researcher and columnist Dennis Cauchon on this issue. Thanks to USA Today (can you believe it?) for initially publishing Cauchon’s research. Those sources pointed me in the right direction of researching the issue only a bit further, and passing this summary along to you.

Can You Say “Sixty One Trillion, Six Hundred Billion” Dollars ($61,500,000,000,000)?

Friends, this one hit me between the eyes, and it shouldn’t have since I claim to be a CPA. I was lulled to sleep by the “paltry” “14 something” number and forgot what every accountant should know about recording liabilities (another word for debt). Let’s step through this analysis slowly so I get it right. First here is a graphic comparison of the two amounts being compared:

REAL debt – including ALL obligations ————————————————– $61.6 Trillion

 

National “debt” we are used to seeing   ———— $14.5 Trillion

The difference is “47 something” – but what does that difference represent? Stay tuned!

Step by Step

The impression given by BOTH sides of the aisle is that “14 something” is the amount that, as of this point in time, is being passed on as a financial burden to future generations. So, why is “61 something” the correct amount?

For those who want the “quick and dirty” explanation only, consider these two points:

  • Reporting the national debt as only the “14 something” number ignores all the ACTUAL obligations the government has incurred for amounts not yet spent.
  • Of our government’s total ACTUAL obligations, only those which have already been funded, by borrowing, are included in the “14 something” number.

 

If that’s enough explanation for you, stop here or skip to the next section. If not, continue below.

For those who want a little more technical explanation, consider the following:

  • I don’t think anyone I know has ever seen comprehensive financial statements for the United States government. If this were readily available, it would include a “balance sheet” showing all assets and liabilities/obligations/debt. The obligations would include ALL AMOUNTS for which we and future generations are obligated.
  • In the U.S. (and similarly for other countries) there is a concept called “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (GAAP). These are promulgated by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and are, for the most part, accepted by the Fed’s “regulatory accountants,” the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC). In cases in which regular GAAP differs from SEC requirements, it generally has to do with additional disclosure requirements imposed by the SEC on publicly traded companies.
  • The Cauchon/USA Today analysis is a successful attempt to start evaluating our government’s financial position in a manner consistent with the way the Feds evaluate the financial position of corporations in America. That seems fair to me! “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander!”
  • According to commentary from the National Center for Policy Analysis, this project was accomplished using STANDARD ACCOUNTING RULES for calculation of amounts since 2004 and using data from Medicare and Social Security annual reports … AND the little known audited financial report of the federal government. (Did you get your copy of that report?) I don’t have the time or inclination to evaluate further the nature of that report or its other implications. You do it and send it to me.
  • It is with apologies to accounting experts and purists that I attempt to summarize here something which is very complex – but “here goes.” Entities that prepare financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles must make accruals (i.e. recognize in the financial statements) for pensions and other “post retirement” benefits (e.g. health care).
  • These post retirement benefits are, for the most part, what I am dealing with in this report. Financial statements, presented according to GAAP rules, must include amounts relating to current and former employees post employment benefits. The costs should be recorded during period of service, since that is when the amounts were earned. Under GAAP, we must not ignore these costs until they are paid. They are true obligations far earlier than that.
  • This accrual of liabilities/obligations/debt applies not only to federal employees, but also to citizens who, by virtue of their being covered by Medicare and Medicaid (for example) have earned certain retirement benefits. Under GAAP, this obligation should be recorded when incurred by the government and NOT just when it is paid. The traditional “14 something” amount represents only amounts that have now been paid, and the necessary funds borrowed. THAT’S NOT GAAP! 
  • In the final analysis, one REAL difference is that interest is paid on the smaller “14 something” amount, while the difference of “47 something” bears no interest because it has not been spent, and therefore no funds had to be borrowed from citizens, China, etc. But they are obligations nonetheless!

 

That, in a nutshell, is the “bean counter” part of the discussion.

Now That the Wound Has Been Opened, Let Me Pour On Some Salt! Ouch!

Let’s start with the fact that the national debt from expenditures already made is $14,500,000,000,000. Let’s add to that the TRUE future obligations which haven’t YET added to the national debt – that would be the amount of approximately $47,100,000,000,000. That brings the total TRUE obligations to $61,600,000,000,000. That’s in TRILLIONS friends – a nice tidy sum! Now let’s consider some other details of this problem (you may want to send small children out of the room):

  • While we have been warned to anticipate an increase in the national debt of at least $1,500,000,000,000 (the 2010 total) in the coming year, adjust your thinking to get your mind around the fact that the total national obligations (that’s the “61 something” number) is anticipated to increase by almost $5,500,000,000,000! Ouch!
  • Of this increase, Medicare made up approximately $1,800,000,000,000 in 2010 – and Social Security added a “meager” $1,400,000,000,000. Double Ouch!
  • The total unfunded obligations of $61,600,000,000,000 amounts to – HOLD YOUR BREATH and send the small children out of the room – $534,000 per household!
  • This household total is more than five times what they borrowed for everything else, on average! “Why bother pinching pennies?” some may ask! Good point! 
  • The unfunded obligation for the federal employees’ pension plan has been funded largely by – guess what? – IOUs from the Federal Government! 
  • Some of the estimates used in reaching the “61 something” number could actually be understated because of certain questionable assumptions used in the OMB estimates of Medicare costs used in passing Obamacare. We know those won’t be accurate. 
  • Certain social security assumptions also call into question the adequacy of the estimate. For example when estimating the future costs for future workers i.e. the costs beyond their 75th birthday have been ignored. Also Social Security holds MANY IOUs from the Feds and these apparently have apparently been omitted from some of the estimates. 
  • In similar fashion, some officials ignore the total of the $14.1 Trillion debt total (those for prior expenditures). Why? Because, they say, it’s closer to $9 Trillion if you take out the portion which is represented by Federal IOUs. Good Grief! Isn’t that like paying off a car loan with a home equity loan and feeling like you’ve reduced your debt?

 

I just can’t get my mind “around” some of this information and illogical thinking! Why does our dilemma just not seem to matter to some? Here’s an example of a symptom – Michael Lind, policy director at the liberal New America Foundation’s economic growth program, seems to be in denial when he says that there is no near-term crisis for federal retirement programs. He just dismisses the problem and moves on. Try using that argument with the SEC when they say there’s a material under-accrual or misstatement! “Them’s fightin’ words,” and non-compliance through misleading financial statements can give rise to criminal charges. And so it goes – on and on!

Just Like the Little Dog in the Travelers Insurance Commercial

… “Trouble! Trouble! Trouble! Worry! Worry! Worry!”

 

(My faithful assistant Baxter has been pushing me to work a “canine interest” story into one of my reports – OK, Baxter – this is it!)

 

If you weren’t worried before, it’s time to start – just like the cute little dog. But should we throw up our hands in frustration and resignation? Of course not! Let’s “get a move on”!

 

There’s much more on other economic topics coming soon.

Posted in | Leave a response

JOB TRANSITION SUPPORT GROUPS

By Rob Severson on June 13, 2011

I am privileged to speak at two job transition support groups next week.

I will be at Easter Lutheran at 7:30 AM on Tuesday, June 21.  More information can be found here:  http://easter.org/wordpress/job-transitions-group/

I will be at Woodbury Lutheran Church at 7:00 PM on June 23.  Information at: http://www.woodburylutheran.org/ministries/support/careertransition/

I will be speaking about my experience getting fired and moving on to build a successful career.  Much of it I have in my book “Connecting Peace, Purpose & Prosperity”.

I firmly believe that it is our calling to help people whenever we can and that is the reason I am doing these talks.  I don’t claim to have al the answers, but if I can provide a few ideas that help even one person by doing this it will be worth my time.  The world has become much more complicated than the one my parents and grandparents lived in, but there are many lessons from them and others that will help us survive.

Anyone is welcome to come to these meetings, employed or not.  These groups are a great place to network and help one another.’

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a response

BENEFIT FOR MDA

By Rob Severson on June 7, 2011

 My friend Becky Able and her son, Alex raaise money for muscular dystrophy.  Alex is an accomplished piano player and is participating in this event.

If you can make it, all are welcome!!

Concert/Open House for

Muscular Dystrophy!

Listen to music and stroll through the flower gardens while supporting Alex Amble’s mission to raise funds for a cure of muscular dystrophy.

Hosted by Alex’s neighbors, Mark & Lynne Thornsjo:

Saturday, June 11th; Noon – 5 p.m.

6279 Crackleberry Alcove; Woodbury

(come and go as you please)

Donations accepted that day with all proceeds to MDA

Light snacks and beverages will be available

Please join us while listening to the talented musicians:

12:00 p.m.            Alex Amble and Jacob Drusch / trumpets

12:15 p.m.            Pasha Amble / piano solo

12:30 p.m.            Kathy Parsons / piano solo

 1:00 p.m.             Kathy Parsons & Lynne Thornsjo / two pianos

 1:15 p.m.             Alex Amble & Lynne Thornsjo / two pianos

 1:30 p.m.             Maya Drusch / vocal soloist

 1:45 p.m.             Gabe Gazzola / piano and vocals

 2:45 p.m.             Marie Vestal / piano solo

             3:15 p.m.             Mary Karlsson / piano solo

             3:30 p.m.             Alex Amble / piano solo

 4:00 p.m.             MN Dolce Recorder Ensemble/Brad Wright/Larry Tempel/Mark Krusemeyer

to RSVP go to https://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=134070523335572

for updates on the schedule go to above facebook link or http://www.alexamblemusic.com/calendar.html

Location info at:  http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=m&lat=44.872715&lon=-92.97746&zoom=14&q1=6279%20Crackleberry%20Alcove%2C%20Woodbury%2C%20MN

Driving instructions to Thornsjo’s at 6279 Crackleberry Alcove (651-458-0743; business line 651-459-4343):

1. From most metro areas, take Interstate 494 to southbound Hwy 61 at Newport.

2. Go south on Hwy 61 ~1/4 mile and exit at Glen Road.  If coming from Hastings or other points to the southeast, go north on Hwy 61 and exit on Glen Road in Newport.  Head east on Glen Rd, down the artificial hill they built for the intersection, to the 4-way stop sign.

2. Continue east on Glen Road 0.9 mile to Crackleberry Trail, which is just past the Woodbury city limit sign around a right-hand curve.  There also is a left turn intersection sign just before the curve and past the Woodbury city limit sign.  (NOTE: If you miss the Crackleberry Trail turn note that there is a second intersection with Crackleberry Trail about ½ mile further east.  That’s because Crackleberry Trail forms a half-circle north of Glen Road and comes back and crosses Glen Road there.)

3. Turn left (north) on Crackleberry Trail and go about one city block to Crackleberry ALCOVE.  It is the first cul-de-sac of several along Crackleberry Trail if you took the first, west-end Crackleberry Trail turn per above.

Please park in the cul-de-sac and walk down the driveway to the house.  Visitors needing assistance walking may drive to the house.

 

Posted in | Leave a response

Banks, government and small businesses

By Rob Severson on April 28, 2011

I’ve been thinking about the similarities of banks and government, especially on how they work with small businesses.  I have spent 30 years working with them and see quite a few similarities. 

One of lenders prime functions is to provide the funds to keep businesses going and to succeed.  They set loan covenants that are designed to protect the bank’s loan as well as to provide financial guidance for the borrower that keep the borrower in good financial condition too.

Government also offers funding via SBA and other programs.

Government passes laws that offer businesses tax incentives and other subsidies to help businesses succeed. 

Each takes a “piece” of the business via interest or taxes.

Each would claim that small businesses, are the mainstay of our economy.

The irony of it all is that most businesses I have seen would tell us that banks and government should “stay out of running their business”!  They really don’t like the strings attached to their loans or government programs, they want to be independent as much as possible. 

I don’t have many ideas on what small businesses should do other than spend some time learning about and understanding each of these entities.  In my financing coaching business I spend a lot of time teaching my clients about lenders, how they think and how they function, which often comes as a revelation to many clients.  Most of them don’t know much about lenders and don’t really care as long as they have money and no hassle.  They may not have anyone on staff that understands banks either.  Many however find themselves in a bind with a lender and are forced to learn when they are at their weakest;

when they get kicked out of a bank, or a bank refuses financing and that is when I get referred to them.  Usually I can figure out a solution, but it often a major stress event for the business. 

I usually wish I had been referred in earlier so I could have helped them avoid the problem when there would be a better, lower cost solution to the problem.  Like going to a doctor for a checkup, sometimes early diagnosis is the key to survival.

I am available for free consultation any time for any business that wants a quick look at their financing situation… it may be the best time a business can spend.

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a response

At Passover, a lesson for us all about Moses!

By Rob Severson on April 22, 2011

Now don’t exit right away, I am not going to preach!  But I do want to share an interesting story about survival and careers from the Bible.  I believe it is true and that God orchestrated it, but will tell the story in secular terms just because it is fascinating.  And, you may find that the Bible does have some lessons for us.

Genesis recounts the story of Jochebed, who was Moses mom.  Jochebed was a Hebrew woman who had a child named Moses.  At the time of his birth the Hebrews were enslaved to the Egyptians and were very abused by them.  Because the Hebrews were multiplying the Pharaoh became concerned about an insurrection by the Hebrews, so he ordered that the first born sons be killed by throwing them in to the Nile River.  Many were killed in this process, but Jochebed hid Moses and concentrated on finding a way to let him survive, rather than be another victim.  She put him into a basket and sent him down a stream to where some Egyptian women were bathing and would discover him.  They did and instantly fell in love with the baby and kept him for their own.  They realized that they needed to nurse him and Moses sister, who had been watching them., came forward and volunteered her mother to take care of the baby.  They took her in and Jochebed nursed her own child for them. 

Moses was raised as a privileged Egyptian and in a worldly sense had it made.  One day he discovered his true heritage and began defending his people who were being beaten and treated poorly by the Egyptians, and was forced to flee Egypt for his personal insurrection.  In a few years he returned to Egypt commissioned by God to lead his people out of captivity which he successfully did.  There is much more to this account in Exodus that is equally fascinating.

But, we can learn quite a bit about just this snippet from the Bible.  Even in just a secular sense.

Jochebed was a survivor!  While her friends were probably wallowing in pain and tears about losing their babies Jochebed was keen on Moses’ survival and came up with a creative plan to make it happen.  She had knowledge of women and their love for babies so let the Egyptian women “discover” Moses and fall in love with him.  She knew Moses would require nursing so sent her daughter to volunteer her nursing services to them for Moses care.  I don’t know if she was paid, but probably got some food for her service so in actuality got a job out of taking care of her own child!  How creative is that?  Focusing a personal survival solution saved her child rather than focusing on her victim situation which certainly was justifiable.

One last brief lesson from this would be why did God appoint Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt?  Or, if you don’t believe this, then I ask how did he prepare for doing this?

He had no experience as a leader and had only recently discovered his heritage.  He had been on the wrong side of the issue for a long time and would have to earn his trust from the Hebrews.  He did it by proving his intent through his actions in the process of negotiating with Pharaoh.

His biggest asset for the job was his heritage.  He may have been the only Hebrew  who could walk into the palace and get an audience with Pharaoh.  He probably had relationships with many people in the palace who allowed him to come in and get to see Pharaoh directly.  He used his contacts well and achieved his mission by getting in the door.

Survival lessons from this story:

  • Don’t wallow in self pity, be creative and find a solution
  • Jochebed was unselfish and gave up her son so he may have a chance to live
  • Sometimes it is up to us to personally assure our survival
  • It pays to understand people; like Jochebed did when sending Moses to baby loving women
  • Rather than give up, take a thought our risk and try it
  • Use your contacts like Moses did in his mission
  • Moses used his assets to help other people, not himself and became successful by being others’ centered

 

Survival may be very different in today’s complex world, but I think the fundamentals are the same.  We need to learn them and apply them!

Posted in | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a response

Page 5 of 13« First...34567...10...Last »