New Urbanism - A Critique of Disney's Celebration - Social Elitism, Developer's Practicality-Profit

Celebration: American Utopia or Stepford?

"The building of cities is one of man's greatest achievements. The form of his city always has been and always will be a pitiless indicator of the state of his civilization." Edmund Bacon, 1967

The art of city building, after being lost and rejected for over half a century in favor of decentralized commercial strip development and suburban sprawl (the stepchildren of Modernism), is being resurrected in several 'New Town' projects cropping around the country. Seaside, Newport, Windsor (all on the East Coast) and now Disney's Celebration have caught the hearts and wallets of Americans wishing for a middle ground between the infrastructure waste and social isolation of our refined suburbs and the higher density, raucous/ crime stereotype of the big city. A moot (perhaps) bonus is that somewhere in this in-between might be a new-found sense of community.

Millions of Americans in our sterile suburbs allow themselves to be robbed a human necessity: to experience a balanced social/ environmental upbringing (that our European counterparts enjoy day to day). Political isolationism and escapism have a root in our psyche. Throughout our lifetimes, minimal interaction on a daily basis for children and adults with a cross-section of individuals of varying ages with cultural, ethnic, and economic differences limits our world-view and understanding of each other. The core issues of community, democratic participation, and individual responsibility are ignored perhaps because they touch deeper philosophical and social themes that continue to be evaded by the American conscience.

As for New Urbanism, most Americans wouldn't know it if it bit them in the derriere. Starting with mitigation (a form of legal bribery: destruction of protected wetlands-flora and fauna, in exchange for $15M) Disney has not bettered the typical subdivision in many respects. At Celebration, inhabitants will commute out to their jobs while lower salaried workers in the CBD commute in. The net result is as much auto pollution as ever-even more since the whole mixed-use development is at a higher density. Commons and parks are by-products of tight lots which are improvements over the monotony of the typical subdivision, no doubt.

Celebration is over controlled and lacks social conscience. It is elitist: gingerbread glosses social inequity. There is no evidence of individual contribution by the citizenry nor will there be until ownership (Homeowner's Association) changes hands one day and Disney will be legally immune. Totalitarian control, as in Haussmann's Paris under Napoleon III, appears to be the only way that Americans can find a modicum of utopia. Relinquishing the Democratic process is an accepted trade-off in order to gain peace of mind (read ethnic, social, economic cleansing). Our dismal history of failed modern planning and zoning, originally intended to improve quality of life, has proven an antiseptic, deadening social and environmental conundrum where the only winners are bureaucrats and corporate developers.

At Celebration architects have been intoxicated by a power that could only have been relegated by corporate executive mandate. Design omnipotency tied to corporate ends has resulted in a high-brow, overpriced subdivision on steroids. Oddly, the downtown architecture appears to have been a product of weak management control over the imported 'name' architects. Pastel banality with a homogenous finish (due to single developer build-out of the entire ensemble and too much STO) is a Disney trademark. You can even spot a tinge of fascism at the entry sequence to the project where Disney Development offices stand abstractly in stark opposition to the truer to period Colonial and Classical Traditionalism of the other community buildings nearby.

On the whole the image of the residential sectors reminds one of the facades of early western boom towns which hide a more meager 'back of house'. Overblown facades are squeezed side by side on narrow lots while infrastructure is duplicated in the form of back alleys hiding 2-3 car garages. Sociability around the front lawns and curbside is thus dramatically impaired. Screening is allowed only at the rear where most families will spend their down-time in the pool and safe from bugs. They also won't be bothered by the parades of inquisitive tourists that Disney is planning to draw to the downtown.

While capitalizing on their brand-name and offering total predictability in all aspects Disney has tried very hard to make buying Florida swampland feel good: 'Utopia on a platter'. Sans serendipity, surprise, mystification, or complexity the overall theme is succinctly "defense by privilege". While 'citizens' are anxious to wake up in Mayberry they may find out to their chagrin that they have really bought into Stepford.

PART 1: An Early Look at Disney's 'Celebration'

What if they built a city and nobody came? (An intriguing thought but perhaps not the case here as corporate inertia and massive marketing will guarantee build-out.) In this instance I feel a strange sense of loss even though perhaps at first blush a Classicist's dreams are about to come true. While many traditional/Classicist architects and designers have decried the Modernist's indiscriminate foray into the built environment and hoped that the tide would someday turn back to a widespread use of classical or formal design principles coupled with a more traditional and organic planning theory, the concept of a Utopian setting to showcase a 'return to tradition' has not been attempted at this scale (except in Leon Krier's fantasies) in three dimensions. Until now.

In late February this year several local architects and residential designers were invited to a preview of Disney's 'Celebration'. This master-planned city of 20,000 will have state-of-the-art health and educational facilities, a town center designed by the usual cadre of 'important' period style architects (including a rather surprising modernesque Philip Johnson entry) and approximately 8,000 residential lots of differing types and sizes, the widest being 90 feet with 15 foot side setbacks.

The project manager, a Princeton architectural graduate with an MBA, insisted that the goal of the master plan was to induce a sense of community; the expectation is to achieve a varied mix of age groups and economic backgrounds where families would continue to live there throughout several generations. And there was a meticulously researched and produced architectural control standards manual (based on the 'pattern' books of yesteryear) illustrating the acceptable styles for the residential units: Classical, Victorian, Colonial Revival, Coastal, Mediterranean, and French.

Architectural control includes inviolable first and second floor heights as well as window and door types, setbacks, massing and materials use per each distinct style. Porch, roof, and facade treatments have recommended design standards as well. The picket fences, common areas, and shady boulevards as shown in the conceptual watercolor perspectives achieve a Mayberry-Savannah-Charleston feel with happy residents apparently enjoying the good life sitting at single and upper story front porches (highly recommended) watching the world go by.

I could not put my finger on what was troubling me except I remember that I felt either God was in the planning or I was hearing the drums of the Third Reich. The Strathmore model of the town center looked a bit contrived. Here were Pelli's, Venturi's, Stern's, and Moore's little monuments in the form of a bank, theater, apartment, office building, cultural center, lookout tower, etc. all arranged neatly on separate blocks. It seemed like a swell theme park to live in. Everything had its place, the main boulevard was on axis leading by the commercial zone to the lake-front promenade with intersecting streets that allowed a minimum of parking.

Further setback were the residential areas each grouped according to the size of the lots with alleys separating types and also eliminating the unsightly two or three door garage viewed from the front of the main street, no doubt a clear improvement over America's typical suburban layouts. Everything seemed as perfect as possible. Sometime after 1940 it was pointed out, "...architecture took a right, we are trying to continue the development (of well designed buildings, implied) as if it was never interrupted; we are taking the left fork in the road." Very true, I agreed, the Modernists surely drowned this country and the world with their banal excess of stripped down functionalism. I was rooting yet skeptical at the same time. A little voice inside me told me to stand up and defend... something--that was missing perhaps.

I asked if the entry points were to be gated. "Not foreseen, we want this to be an open community." What about security concerns? "No crime anticipated at the moment." We chuckled at the vision of 40's black and whites roaming the streets. Will the town center be able to sustain itself? "All space currently pre-leased." How can you make people sit out on the front porches in Florida's heat and mosquito swarms, especially since you are not allowing screened enclosures? "The overhead fans will cool and dispel the swarms." Well, there was nothing more to criticize, Disney had it all figured out. Satisfied we all left and thanked our host.

The next day I communicated the following in part:

I realize that your model incorporates the European traditional building forms in an American town setting, but wouldn't the more successful model (especially for the viability of the commercial activity) be to complete the circle and re-introduce the classic Italian, French or German prototype? Maybe this will be the theme of Celebration II? The other irony of Celebration is that I recall Walt's intent for EPCOT was for a viable 'City of the Future' which implied real examples of futuristic living and working (technological progress, etc.) nodes and the corresponding buildings. I guess we have looked into the future and really didn't want where the 'right-hand' fork was leading. For now, unless there is a proven better alternative I must agree with the premise that Celebration takes and its intent to re-educate America on what a community should really consist of. You have here a utopian layout that will re-ignite a spark of remembrance and longing in all who visit."

But that uneasy sensation kept grinding in my stomach. Finally I put it together: First, like Seaside, this community was designed to keep the visitor uncomfortable from just wandering into town and enjoying the sights. Second, with so much architectural control the organic tendency for creative growth was nipped before the bud like an Orwellian injection. Even with six allowable styles that quixotic architectural invention that makes a street-scape so charming and vital was not possible. A Victorian motif grafted onto Colonial Revival didn't seem credible. Mixing Mediterranean with Classical outlawed Palladio. Why, no Modernist touches were even thinkable! (I was surprising myself pushing for a bit of 'contemporary' styling).

"...Yet if the only form of tradition, of handing down, consisted in following the ways of the immediate generation before us in a blind or timid adherence to its successes, 'tradition' should be positively discouraged."

R. Venturi, 1966

Although the implicit goals of Disney are to introduce innovation for the better, their master plan has not sufficiently advanced modern urban planning practice in this case except to sterilize further. The free-standing artificiality of the town center reads more like an extension of Universal's or Disney's own facade-citecture at their studio lots. I will always prefer the historical prototype of the European (Italian, Greek, German, or French) town square with its natural liveliness and spontaneity that is so completely absent from American CBD's. (For that matter the caricature replicas of Old World themes in Disney World appear to be more people oriented than at Celebration!) The integration of many urban themes are required to present an enriching environment, especially in the 'downtown'. For example the infill of many years' growth, contraction, and rebuilding is vital to establish a thread of continuity and adds an indispensable degree of enrichment to the urban condition.

Everything of age in this country was indiscriminately torn down to make way for economic progress until the preservation movement took hold. What makes the Continental example so compelling is the mix of old (history) and new, the density and mix of commercial and residential, and the evidence of life --as witnessed by people enjoying their walking, chance social meetings, shopping and watching, eating and playing, etc. The main issue under contention is that Celebration isolates and zones functions like so many other modern plans which results in the same automobile centered or formally laid out suburban design. Consider the simple presence of street vendors (outlawed typically) which add so much color to the street life. And when the new Interstates bypassed so many of our nation's older communities even the opportunity for the tourist, traveler, stranger (gasp!) to enrich the citizenry by the chance meeting in the town square or at the market was extinguished. The complete interaction with the outside world is nullified. The town dies. This dilemma is especially true with planned towns such as Celebration and Seaside and the host of others 'a l'Americaine'.

You do know however before buying into Celebration that the proper inoculations have been made. I for one miss the smell of the diesel or the horse-drawn carriages down the dusty streets of Izmir, Turkey (where I spent my youth) as I might sit at a corner cafe, hailing a roasted nut vendor to sample the latest crop of sea-salted pistachios, while waiting for my olive oil braised lamb-chops to be served. Not just the smells but the sights and sounds as well of my fellow human beings involved in their daily way of life I miss and the rich environment that cradles this activity. Architecture cannot solve planning issues. Only people united to preserve their humanity can.

The final irony is this: over twenty five years ago Walt Disney created the Experimental Prototype City of Tomorrow (EPCOT) as a showcase to house and employ a viable population; real people in a working environment. This did not come to pass. What materialized was a clever but kitschsy perpetually outdated theme park initially planted with rather exciting (for the youngster in us all) but cornball 'futuristic' carnival rides underwritten by corporate America. Now Disney has decided that the past is the key to the future. And they have a totalitarian vehicle to prove they are right. For a while I was rooting for them, now I am more convinced that the wives of Stepford will have a place for their own.

At a time of such diversity in the visual appearance of buildings it is absurd to enforce conformity which merely degenerates into uniformity. With the acceptance of the principles of the gradual renewal of environment it is desirable to follow the practices of the past in which they were applied: each period putting its new buildings next to those of earlier times and without taking up design elements formerly in use. This is healthy practice, unaffected by lack of confidence or by the morbid desire to let the past control the present. It has protected the urban and semi-urban areas of bygone ages from becoming museums and it makes for the delight of so many English towns where the buildings of different periods stand cheek by jowl together and where the history of the towns can be read from the difference of their buildings. Whoever has walked along the rue de Rivoli, the most depressing street in all Paris, will understand what is meant by 'living diversity', small-scale planning, intimacy and other environmental values which are gradually being rediscovered. Therefore no more 'design guides', no more control of visual appearance by officials of limited visual education and sensitivity or by neighbours who wish to impose their own tastes or, as estate agents contend, to protect their 'investments' and whose ulterior motives bear no examination."

Walter Segal, 1980

Afterword

Upon receiving some criticism for the above remarks and after considering the matter further I came across a social study of Pullman, Illinois (10 miles south of Chicago) considered a model community built in 1881 which included housing and basic service amenities (as well as the factory for the Pullman Palace Car Company) where 8,000 people lived and worked. My sensibility was shocked at the parallels. "One of Mr. Pullman's fundamental ideas" as social critic and economist Richard Ely wrote in his analysis of the town "is the commercial value of beauty". Pullman commissioned a single architect to master plan and design the entire town. There was a market-house, theater, library, offices, shops, bank, hotel, fire department, educational facilities, etc. In describing the street-scape Ely observes:

Unity of design and an unexpected variety charm us as we saunter through the town. Lawns always of the same width separate the houses from the street, but they are so green and neatly trimmed that one can overlook this regularity of form. Although the houses are built in groups of two or more, and even in blocks with the exception of a few large buildings of cheap flats, they bear no resemblance to barracks... French roofs, square roofs, dormer-windows, turrets, sharp points, blunt points, triangles, irregular quadrangles, are devices resorted to in the upper stories to avoid the appearance of unbroken uniformity. A slight knowledge of mathematics shows how infinite the variety of possible combinations of a few elements, and a better appreciation of this fact than that exhibited by the architecture of Pullman it would be difficult to find. The streets cross each other at right angles, yet here again skill has avoided the frightful monotony of New York, which must sometimes tempt a nervous person to scream for relief. A public square, arcade, hotel, market, or some large building is often set across a street so ingeniously as to break the regular line, yet without inconvenience to traffic. Then at the termination of long streets a pleasing view greets and relieves the eye--a bit of water, a stretch of meadow, a clump of trees, or even one of the large but neat workshops. All this grows upon the visitor day by day. No other feature of Pullman can receive praise needing so little qualification as its architecture.

Indeed he continues: "Very gratifying is the impression of the visitor who passes hurriedly through Pullman and observes only the splendid provision for the present material comforts of its residents. What is seen in a walk or drive through the streets is so pleasing to the eye that a woman's first exclamation is certain to be, 'Perfectly lovely!'

But approximately six years after the first spade was dug to begin this utopia a great riot broke out. Despite Pullman's efforts to maximize his returns through efforts to beautify the town and include as many practical comforts as possible for his workers the inevitable breakdown occurred. It should be pointed out that like many other company towns, the workers did not own their own properties. Strikes, individual initiative, charitable and mutual insurance associations were thwarted, discouraged, or put down. A woman who had been living at Pullman for two years told Ely only three families among her initial acquaintances were still living there. Ely asked 'It is like living in a great hotel, is it not?' Her reply was 'We call it camping out.'

Ely concludes: "There is a repression here as elsewhere of any marked individuality. Everything tends to stamp upon residents, as upon the town, the character best expressed in 'machine-made.' Note that in this passage his reference is not to the social problems which no doubt had a deep negative impact on the people but alludes more to the architectural and planning characteristics which had been previously described as idyllic! He finishes in a more political strain, "...the conclusion is unavoidable that the idea of Pullman is un-American. It is a nearer approach than anything the writer has seen to what appears to be the ideal of the great German Chancellor. It is not the American ideal. It is benevolent, well-wishing feudalism, which desires the happiness of the people, but in such way as shall please the authorities. One can not avoid thinking of the late Czar of Russia, Alexander II., to whom the welfare of his subjects was truly a matter of concern. He wanted them to be happy, but desired their happiness to proceed from him , in whom everything should center. Serfs were freed, the knout abolished, and no insuperable objection raised to reforms, until his people showed a decided determination to take matters in their own hands, to govern themselves, and to seek their own happiness in their own way." How much of the unrest in Pullman was due to negative social factors and how much could be attributed to the apparently utopian physical infrastructure?

"The more influence a person is able to exert on his surroundings, the more committed he becomes."

Herman Hertzberger, 1980

A free people must freely adopt their choice of habitation in terms of style, materials, costs, etc. In many areas where over-legislation occurs under the guise of protecting the integrity of the community a boring repetition results due to restricted size, height, materials, and style. In addition to floor area ratios with attendant design restraints the resulting structures (which desperately seek to find any loophole through which a mote of individualism may be imposed) are often hideous attempts to exert originality or personality into an oppressive architectural milieu. Rather than so completely legislating the total design, especially the style, why not leave it to the individual (and his architect!) to select, innovate within a better resolved set of guidelines?

Sometime after 1940 it was pointed out, "...architecture took a right, we are trying to continue the development [of well designed buildings, implied] as if it was never interrupted; we are taking the left fork in the road."

"There is a repression here as elsewhere of any marked individuality. Everything tends to stamp upon residents, as upon the town, the character best expressed in 'machine-made'...

Understandably, shoddy construction and ill conceived schemes should not be allowed but rejection because the strict canon of 'Mediterranean' or 'French' was not followed 'by the book' limits creative growth and experimentation which in the long run, if permitted, provides a fertile diversity, freshness, yes even controversy at times which can only enrich the built environment and 'empower' the individual with the right of free expression. Style should never be legislated. Bad architecture should be eliminated.

"A good architect will always do original work. A bad one would do bad 'modern' work as well as bad work (that is imitative) with historical forms." P. Johnson, 1961

It is unfortunate that in newly developing towns and smaller communities the rich texture of classic urban models cannot be convincingly replicated. Given the choice between a pasteurized and homogenized model town with its inherent philosophical anomalies I will take the path of worn cobblestones down dusty winding streets past antique, crumbling and weathered edifices with gnarled wooden doors of enchanting designs, where the smell of the baker's bread permeates my being in the morning, past markets where one can inhale the smell of fresh tomatoes, grains and meats, brought in from the fields where even the pungent odor of pack animals mix with exotic perfumes, where the hordes gather to banter over the price of goods under open air canvas canopies and with merchants tucked into the niches of mighty stone relics, where the smell of fresh ground coffee is served in sidewalk cafes, and where even the odor of an imperfect sewer mixes with diesel fumes. Above all it is the people who bring these places alive, like stage actors on a set in which they have had a chance to personally paint and by which they can remember their own history.

The key to urban vitality, as L.M.Roth describes the views of the prominent writer and editor of Architectural Forum in the early sixties Jane B. Jacobs, is "diversity and complexity." Leonard Kip wrote of Genoa in The Building of Our Cities (1870): "With what joyous contentment he (the traveler) wanders through its winding alleys, finding new surprises at every corner!" Of Paris he describes the feeling of "Losing ourselves...with the full knowledge that we cannot be disagreeably led out of the way..."

Americans have for too long accepted the fruits of modern planning principles which breed monotonous city-scapes erected by rote to planning manuals designed with dispersive (instead of implosive) zoning with the resultant isolation of its parts, suburban and infrastructural waste. If 'a house is like a city' we would be all living in extravagant wastes of space, empty corridors leading to distant rooms whose only functional connections can be comprehended through a mapping system. Kip aptly describes our characteristic new communities and neighborhoods: "...when the resident can see the whole street rolled out before him as a diorama, he soon ceases to feel any spark of individual taste, but, catching the spirit of others, builds and rebuilds in the same style as every one around him, and so, in having a house, becomes the owner, not of a home, but merely of a certain number of lineal feet measured off from a rule."

In the mid-twentieth century Lewis Mumford decried the result of increased appropriation of space for the automobile in America's towns and cities claiming that the city existed for the 'care and culture of men' rather than for compromise to the mechanical monster. Los Angeles is the epitome of the 'consummate insensitivity and deadly efficiency' (Leland M. Roth, America Builds) of the Federal Highway Act's tenets and provisions gone mutant. Mumford asked: "Why should anyone have to take a car and drive a couple of miles to get a package of cigarettes or a loaf of bread, as one must often do in a suburb? Why, on the other hand, should a growing minority of people not be able again to walk to work, by living in the interior of the city, or, for that matter, be able to walk home from the theater or the concert hall? Where urban facilities are compact, walking still delights the American: does he not travel many thousands of miles just to enjoy this privilege in the historic urban cores of Europe?...Nothing would do more to give life back to our blighted urban cores than to re-instate the pedestrian, in malls and pleasances designed to make circulation a delight!"

On this point Celebration misses the mark. Although alleys hide the automobile the overall layout does not truly compel the pedestrian to leave his clinically ordered street and venture for even the smallest item. Corner groceries were once evident in the zone-free organic town of yesteryear but are absent here. The planning looks good from the aerial perspective but in reality does not deliver. The look of Charleston and Savannah is being attempted here but the activity and vibrancy will be absent at least as a product of its own citizenry. (Oh yes, the lights in the homes of Celebration's absentee occupants will be timed to turn on and off at night should the homeowners be at their Swiss time-share during the months of May through October.)

"The building of cities is one of man's greatest achievements. The form of his city always has been and always will be a pitiless indicator of the state of his civilization.

Edmund N. Bacon, 1967

Does Celebration propound to be the quintessential American town? Charles Moore (one of Disney's selected icons for one of Celebration's downtown structures) characterized the American attitude in describing the 'contemporary North American vernacular' as: "the work of a nation composed of people who at one time or another, in greater or less degree, have eschewed tradition, to strike out on their own." But he concluded: "Some of our most lively and convincing places in fact, are fantasies, Williamsburgs or Disneylands."

Disney must be applauded for their grand efforts, and meticulous attention to detail as always but to attempt the ideal and miss the mark so clearly by organizing the layout of their dream town to exclude the components that constitute the soul and lifeblood of any community (as experienced in historically viable models of living cities) will only result in a sterile aggregate of construction to be possibly abandoned like the American towns whose main streets have been bypassed, shopping relegated to the peripheral super-malls, and inner core left to decay. If not abandoned by virtue of the elect who will sign their names on the mortgage papers, vacated on the streets more likely. Architect James Marston Fitch has described the Italian street as "the most delicious experience of embrace and enclosure of any space on earth". The satisfying people/streetscape that Disney has created in EPCOT is a fantasy enjoyed by millions. There the effect was achieved that Bernard Rudofsky describes as having streets made "into oases rather than deserts." Cities like Charleston and Savannah are perfect models for the living community. They reflect what Edmund Bacon has characterized in ancient Greek cities as "the intimacy of inherited tradition...maintained." Why not match more closely the example of their and other cities of similar vitality and charm by rethinking our sterile zoning regulations, reducing the size of wasteful private residential lots, compactly integrating the living and working areas, and adding green space at the most beneficial locations? Encouraging pedestrian traffic will be no problem if services and entertainment are nearby, if during a stroll to the park you could also pick up some groceries, if on your way to work you could easily buy a newspaper and a snack from the vendor on the street. Does this sound like utopia? It has been done. It can be done. Only the mindset and status quo --and our 90 year love affair with our cars prohibits this healthful and economic alternative.

John Henry is a practicing Architect based in Orlando Florida (acclaimed for period style detailing), Urban planner, writer, and winner of regional design competitions. Quoted and published in local and national publications concerning architectural/planning theory and period style projects. In practice for over 21 years. Master Architecture, Texas A&M University. Member American Institute of Architects, National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. Contact and web info: email: JohnHenry@cfl.rr.com

http://www.DreamHomeDesignUSA.com Residential Design
http://www.FloridArchitect.com Commercial Architecture
http://www.EuroDesignVIP.com Urban Design

Is Your Venture Protected From Social Media Liability?

As the popularity of social websites like Facebook and Twitter continue to grow, the challenges facing the business industry as well as individuals become a critical issue that must be addressed. Many businesses are ignoring the opportunities and risks at their own peril. Those who decide on a proactive program can multiply their client base, develop new business and increase their brand recognition. Those who do not can be at risk of negative advertising and possible litigation stemming from employee or consumer complaints. A memo dated May 30, 2012 made public by the National Labor Review Board (NLRB) affirms the increasing danger that businesses encounter concerning their social media policies. It is essential that companies adequately check out their risk management policies and insurance coverage to include social media perils.

In regard to employees' online activities, businesses need to figure out what types of control are needed for their individual circumstance. Do staff use online media sites as a part of their job? Are they allowed to use company resources even when posting on personal sites? In the NLRB memo mentioned earlier, many businesses were cited as using unlawful practices to control their employees' social networking activities. Many companies were vague or too broad in the language used and the language could possibly be understood as a violation of their free speech rights. Wal-mart was favored for their social media strategy because they explained any ambiguous language so as not to disregard any associate's First Amendment or state-constitutional free speech rights. Failure to authorize appropriate controls have the potential to lead to illegal employment practices, misleading advertising, discrimination against a legally protected status (e.g. race, gender) or breaking of federal and state laws. There could also be further liabilities to those businesses under the purview or direction of a regulatory association.

In regard to business records management (RM) procedures, Symantec among other security control organizations stress the importance of implementing an official retention plan to cover against risks. A Forbes.com article about social media risks included a comment from Gartner Group figuring that by the end of 2013 half of all corporate litigants "will be asked to produce material from social media websites for e-discovery". Absence of a sanctioned RM policy could stifle the ability to produce records mandated by the court as well as add to the chance of unintentionally releasing material that would otherwise be kept from public exposure. Development of a transparent and executable policy can protect against legal liability or an embarrassing public relation situation.

The public wants the power to connect through online sites like Facebook and Twitter so the business industry needs to respond, adapt or lose an opportunity to see the great gift that comes with these growing technologies. One way some companies are taking advantage of the prospect is by developing "canned" text or pre-approved topics/statements that may be posted by employees. This approach can be a practical way to initiate a proactive social media policy and secure their investment at the same time.

In essence, businesses need to understand the risks and address social media policies in regard to crisis/risk management, intellectual property, client/employee privacy, and compliance with federal and state laws and industry regulatory restrictions. With the increasing use of technologies, companies should also speak to their insurance agents to ensure they have satisfactory insurance coverage - some providers require special riders in order to grant coverage against social media liability.

The best software vendor is Forms Boss. Their program will track clients, prospects as well as create any one of over seven hundred ACORD forms. They've automated the process to save time and money. Plus, it's really simple and easy to use. Visit Forms Boss at http://www.formsboss.com for additional details.

Reverse Mortgages Get Second Look Due to Meager Social Security Increase in 2009

Social Security benefits will be increased in January 2009 for 50 million people. The increase will be 5.8 percent and will be the largest increase since 1982 when Social Security benefits increased 7.4 percent. The 2009 increase will be more than double the raise that retirees received in 2008, which was 2.3 percent.

At first blush that sounds exciting, until you realize that what that equates to for the average retiree is a paltry $63.00 per month. Yearly benefit changes are based upon the amount the Consumer Price Index (PCI) increases from July through September from one year to the next. Unfortunately, the problem with using the CPI is that most consumers do not believe that the CPI accurately reflects the prices they are paying for crucial necessities like energy, food or medical care. This disbelief is particularly strong among those living on a fixed income.

Some argue that if the Producer Price Index (PPI) was used for the measurement for Social Security benefits increases, it would be more reflective of the "real world" for retirees. The PPI measures wholesale inflation. (Wholesale inflation tends to lead retail inflation.) The Producer Price Index (PPI) in June of 2008 set a 27 year record with a 9.2 percent increase in inflation over a twelve month period. The last time inflation was this high was the same year that Treasury yields exceeded 15%, and 30 year mortgage rates exceeded 16%.

Retirees Battered on Several Fronts

$63.00 extra per month seems woefully inadequate for millions of retirees that have been battered on several fronts this year. Not only have they seen huge increases in energy and food costs, but many have been assaulted by reeling stock market declines as well as plummeting home values.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that Americans' retirement plans have lost as much as $2 Trillion over the last 15 months, which represents more than 20 percent of their value, due to the upheaval on Wall Street. Real estate prices have dropped nationally by 20.29 percent. In some of the previously "hot" markets, like California, Nevada, Arizona and Florida the decreases have been even more severe.

More Are Turning To Reverse Mortgages For Help

Retirees worried about their decimated savings and stock market assets are turning in greater numbers to the idea of using a reverse mortgage to stabilize their cash flow and supplement retirement income. Luckily, the greater demand for reverse mortgage loans coincides with new regulations for FHA insured HECM reverse mortgages. The HECM reverse mortgage loan now has a higher National loan limit of $417,000. This is up from the previous loan limits that ranged from $200,160 to a high of $362,790 depending on what county the property was located in. Not only does the single National loan limit simplify the product but it allows approximately 30 percent more seniors to qualify and others to be eligible for even more money than they would have been with the lower loan limits.

If you are one of the many retirees that feel a personal disconnect between what the government says the inflation rate is and what your "real world" experiences are every time you go to the grocery store, the gas station or pay your utility or medical bills, then don't feel alone. The indexes that have been chosen are by design and unfortunately, will never be reflective of the "real world." Even with the conservative index that the government pegs the increase in benefits to, the system is still on target for insolvency by the end of 2011.

It is essential that we all take charge of our own destiny in retirement. If you thought you planned well and are now realizing that you could be short on money and long on time, you may have to take a look at tapping into home equity even though you thought you would never have to touch it and it would be left in your estate for your heirs.

Home equity does not have to be a sacred cow, never to be tapped into. Most adult children would rather see their parents live comfortably during retirement rather than sacrifice lifestyle in order to leave them a home that they don't want or need.

Senior homeowners 62 and older looking for comprehensive reverse mortgage information can do their research at http://www.letyourhomepayyou.com/ Consumer reports from HUD, FTC and other advocacy groups can be downloaded at this website. Free reverse mortgage quotes are available from, http://www.letyourhomepayyou.com/reverse-mortgage-qualification.htm as well as referrals to licensed senior advisers specializing in reverse mortgages in every state. Visitors are encouraged to use the free reverse mortgage calculator tool to see how much money they qualify for.

7 Reasons You Should Be Using Social Media

1. Social media is the 21st century Town Hall.

People do not meet the way they used to. Sure, we all still attend meetings at church and at city hall and at our children's teacher conferences, but more and more people are congregating online. Did you know that, according to iStrategyLabs, Facebook's United States' user base grew by 144.9% in 2009? Some estimates put all Facebook activity worldwide at as high as 20% of all internet traffic!

Facebook, and increasingly Twitter, are the places people are going to find out what is happening in the lives of their friends and family. Furthermore, with the explosion of fan pages, users are seeking out news from businesses, organizations, and causes that they support.

Friends and family meet regularly on Facebook. Colleagues and like-minded people use Twitter to share ideas throughout the day. Professionals are connecting on LinkedIn. Flickr and YouTube stream photos and videos to the world eternally. And blogs are maintained for topics as varied as pro football officiating and crocheting. All this is going on 24 hours a day, every day of every year. Is your business connecting with people where they are now?

2. Yours is a small company.

You own a small business, perhaps a local party store or an independent insurance agency. Social media is intriguing, but you cannot see the benefit to a business of your size. Let's say you own a small party store. You check out the largest chain pharmacy's Facebook Fan Page. They have 433,000+ fans. Do you have 433,000 customers?

Or say you are an insurance agent. After spending some time on a national insurer's Facebook fan page, you find you're joining 16,600+ others. Do you have 16,600 clients?

Small businesses need revenue streams more than ever. One cost effective way to generate business is through social media marketing. People who become your fans and see regularly what you post on your fan page are more likely to do business with you than a larger company with whom they might not share a connection.

Social media does not have to be a daily task, but it certainly should be something used weekly. A small business might post community news, events in the lives of staff members and their families, cross-promotions with other local businesses, and content related to its products or services.

3. Yours is a large company.

You are a president of business development for a large, globally-known company. The board of directors has asked you to find new ways of connecting with prospective customers. Let's go back to the example of chain pharmacies. The number of fans is staggering - 433,000 - when you consider how few fans Competitor #1 has (5,967) and that Competitor #2's page (88 fans) is apparently created by someone outside the company. If you are in business development for the competitors, do you think there is an urgency to use social media effectively?

Social media is essential to large companies in the 21st century. Modern consumers are discerning and intelligent. They want companies to be responsive and transparent. Social media allows your company to hear from and speak with customers, address their concerns, and generate positive feelings about your brand.

4. Your client base is mostly local.

Your company is successful on the local level; it sustains your business and you've reported moderate growth for several years. But lately you have wanted to drive business on a larger level.

Social media is a place to go "remote" while never leaving home. The beauty of platforms such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter is that you can reach a global audience from wherever you are. These sites will allow your business to be seen and known by thousands and thousands of people who might otherwise never know it existed.

Your business can promote its products and/or services to these new potential customers. You can inform them of your past successes and current specials. You can tailor orders easily without having to spend time on the phone or meet in person. Social media will introduce you to new people and render services to them more efficiently.

As well, local support will grow for your business so long as you focus some content on items of local interest. Producing social media content about civic news, high school events, community fundraisers, and the like will keep your base loyal and growing.

5. Your client base is mostly remote.

Your company sells mostly to customers who are remotely located from you. You engage people mostly through your website. Business is good, but you haven't made much progress with local customers. Perhaps you are a new business in a region that has long been faithful to a competitor. Social media is a way to bridge this gap. Your company may simply suffer from a lack of exposure. A strong presence on social media sites is evidence to prospective customers that you are interested in their ideas and that you are responsive to their concerns. These platforms of "open conversation" can showcase your business as part of a mutually-supportive community.

6. Your friends (and their friends) are your best advocates.

Who are you more likely to trust when he says you should buy a car from a particular dealer - someone you just met on the street or your friend of 20 years? We hope you chose the latter. If so, you are like 99% of the people in this world who believe the word of their friends because they share a common past and have trusted them in other situations.

A company needs friends or fans or followings (depending on the social media platform). You need not fear that you are breaching a social contract with friends so long as your social media is about your customers, their needs, and conversations driven by them. Strangers don't want to be "sold" anything and neither do your friends.

Social media is about conversation and community and relationships. Developing strong relationships does not mean you cannot promote your business, but it does mean you have to listen more than you talk.

7. Money goes where people go.

You can't afford not to participate. The perception of social media is that it is for young people. Sure, Facebook and MySpace began as platforms for college students and high school kids. However, according to iStrategy Labs, Facebook users of the age 35 and older are now 30% of the entire user base. Additionally, in 2009, users who are 55+ grew an astounding 922.7%. In fact, every demographic grew in 2009 except college users.

So everyone and their brothers are using Facebook and other social media platforms. Grandmothers are sharing pictures of grandchildren on Flickr. Auto dealerships are bringing the showroom to the customer's home with videos of cars on YouTube. And the local coffee shop is "linked in" with a new coffee bean distributor with lower shipping costs. People are taking their lives and their money to these virtual worlds. Are you there to meet them?

Getting Started Yesterday

Social media, while not ubiquitous to business, is by no means still a mystery. There are thousands of businesses of all sizes who "get it". Is yours one of them? If so, that is great and we'd love to share insights with you. If not, how will you get up to date? Where do you begin?

Facebook is the proverbial tip of the social media iceberg. The best advice we have is: choose one to three platforms and commit yourself to producing content on each one consistently. If we had to suggest three, we would probably choose Facebook, LinkedIn, and a company blog. However, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, and many other sites have their merits. Depending on your size, time constraints, and budget, you may want to hire an outside agency to handle social media content. Whichever path you choose, we welcome you to the conversation.

iStrategyLabs is a social media solutions company. Their Facebook research can be found by searching their name in a Google search.

Now, we understand that the majority of businesses do not have the time to execute even half of these engagement methods. At Xspond, we can. Our social media staff can implement these ideas and all the other ones we develop with you. Let us show you how at http://www.xspond.com.

Social Media Programs
Work Phone: 810-225-8350

Happy Birthday Form the Social Security Administration

(The biggest ponzi-scheme ever perpetrated against the American Wage Earner).

Upon attaining age 62 and at the advice of a friend I went to the local Social Security administration to inquire as to the state of my social security retirement. I was quite surprised to find out from the nice lady that it would be a smidgen under $1,000 per month. However if I continued to earn the income I need to pay my monthly obligations that it would be nothing. If and when I reach the age of seventy years old then I could draw my retirement without being penalized for being economically and financially productive.

After working for forty six years I feel like I have been had. I am still paying on the last $15,000 that I had to borrow to pay my self-employment tax from two years ago. OK, I should have set it aside in a pre-paid estimate. I tried but was short because of an extra successful year. Now that times are thinner, I still am paying on the $15K and need to work an additional eight years too.

The nice lady at the Social Security office explained it to me this way. As I need $5,000.00 per month to pay my monthly obligations, the first fifteen percent of every dollar I make for SS tax, Federal and State income tax, health insurance (self employed), home payment, home maintenance, transportation and fuel, auto insurance, and so on. It was shown me as follows. Take the $60,000.00 and subtract $14,200.00. Divide the remainder by two. $45,800.00 divided by two is $22,900.00. Take that result and divide my SS benefits ($1,000.00) in to it, the results are equal to a little under 23. Now any result greater than 12 means I have the amount equal to my benefits subtracted from my SS benefits for the whole year. If the result had been 12 or less but greater than zero, then I would have the amount equal to my SS benefits subtracted from my retirement for the number of months equal to that number between zero and 12.

I will need to work past the age of seventy if I am to meet my financial obligations and realize social Security benefits. I would have been much better off with a force funded annuity to start drawing from. Bernie Madof went to prison for 120 years for less of a fraud than the US Legislatures have perpetrated against the tax-paying American public.

Well, that is enough of crying over spilled milk. All this to say that I need, in deed, all American wage earners need to provide for their own retirement years without dependence upon a government that has ponzi managed our retirement funds and driven the postal service into the ground.

I have outlined the problem, now for the solution.

There are many ways to develop an income that will dwarf most Social Security benefits. The grass root ability of the American consumer when they work together is an awesome force. Working together by virtue of networking together with each other can control whole industries. Just take a look at the premier national seniors origination as an insurance consumer group for example. If there were to be a consumer pharmaceutical base origination similar to the premier national seniors origination started, it would make drug producers set up and take notice. Likewise, many seniors as well as earlier aged people like to travel. There have been several travel clubs and origination's that have sprung up which allows people of all ages to get very favorable prices on cruises and resort stays as a result of banning together.

The point here is that when people ban together they can save and cut costs. Too, if utilized correctly they can also cut out a huge piece of the profit pie to put in their own pockets. Finally marketers are recognizing the fact that people will organize into like minded groups to achieve a better lifestyle.

Why not utilize the available resources to develop an income that will replace the supposed and weak at best retirement programs touted by government agencies. We can do better! We can work together, with each other and enjoy ourselves with purpose. Let us help each other by joining in union, one with another the develop strength in numbers.

The old parable of one old stick can be broken easily. A bundle of old sticks can be very very strong, much stronger than the sum of the individuals by themselves. Together they can lend support to others, influence with authority, and through their strength in numbers have and take control. This is not to mention the wealth of wisdom and knowledge possessed by that bundle. What a wonderful bag of tricks.

I am The Money Miser. Will you join me? Will you become part of the solution?

Like any other ordinary citizen I like to travel. My friends like to travel. But with activities being limited by financial means, it is hard to take the cruises and stay at the resorts like we desire. There is a way to travel and get paid too and do it for less. Just look at [http://www.I-Need-More-Money.com/]

My given name is Keith. I am known as The Money Miser. Come visit me at [http://family-and-child-safety.com/welcome-family-and-child-safety-objective/]. I have other family friendly safety tips on my blog there and many safety related items and products. These include "ATV and Yard Equipment Safety", "Grandma's House, Is It Safe?", "Holiday Kitchen Safe", and others.

Find other links for my blog comments on family financial matters and my opinion about segments of government waste. These include articles on "It's Going to Blow, Parts 1 through 4, It's Guaranteed!", Stop It, Buy Healthy Food, and "Bon appetite", "How Good A Deal It Is!" on cash for clunkers, Cash For Clunkers, Boon or Boondoggle?", Save Money at The Grocery Store", "Time is Money and The Government Squanders Ours", and so on.

Copyright January 23, 2010 Keith V. Loucks

Social Security - Part-1 - The Trust Fund is a Fraud

In the late 1930's the U.S. Congress established a Social Security Fund to provide for aging and disabled workers, through the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA). This fund is a payroll tax, which today is just under 7.65% of your wage, and it currently supports both Social Security and Medicare (Social Security is 6.2% and Medicare is 1.45%); employers must also pay just under 7.65% of your wage to match your contribution. Your monthly Social Security check will be calculated relative to your age when you retire and the amount deducted from your wages during your working years. Even though the amount anyone will receive is figured according to their contributions in the past, every Social Security check comes from the weekly and monthly payroll deductions taken from wages and matching money paid by employers in the present. This amount is just over 15% of the gross wages of almost all workers, up to a wage cap of about $88,000 annually (the Medicare portion is deducted to a higher cap). This is a little less than one-sixth of all wage income. If many are working, then one-sixth of that labor may pay higher benefits and take care of the elderly and disabled adequately; if few are working, then benefits will have to be reduced and many of the elderly without other income may live in privation. Obviously the ability for Social Security to pay benefits depends on the ability of our economy to produce income.

By law, any surplus FICA tax collected by the Social Security Administration is transferred to the U.S. Treasury Department and exchanged for government bonds. The accumulation of these Treasury Bonds is what the government calls our Social Security Trust Fund. This fund, however, is a complete fraud, because the Treasury Department does not invest this money in any manner that preserves it, or require that the government departments receiving it must pay it back in the future. Like all taxes, it is spent as part of the annual Federal Budget and gone forever. It makes no sense to even talk about repayment. Even though these bonds do earn interest annually (additional Treasury Bonds), the interest is a fraud also; these bonds, both principle and interest, do not represent a fund, nor is the administration of this fund a trust, as any dictionary will attest. This bogus fund is just an IOU from Americans to Americans.

In the Reagan, Bush-1 and Clinton years, the Congress and the President attempted to balance the national budget (after the Reagan tax cuts of the early 1980's) by raising FICA taxes beyond what was needed to fund Social Security. The government then took by statute (Borrowed!) these excess dollars to help fund our other government expenses: Housing, Education, Defense, etc. But these excess dollars are spent, and the bonds, along with the interest due, are just promises by government to raise the Income Tax in the future when these bonds are due. For the Social Security Administration to hold bonds, redeemable only by the authority of the U.S. Congress to raise the Income Tax to pay off those bonds, and to call those bonds a Trust Fund, is ludicrous and a fraud. The Social Security Administration would have you believe that it will cost taxpayers less to fund Social Security obligations in the future when these bonds are mature and redeemable. It is truly amazing that people this stupid can be given positions of importance and trust in government.

The idea that the Social Security Administration and the Treasury Department are independent entities with legal standing like citizens or corporations is bogus. The Federal government in its entirety has legal standing, but its parts are not similarly independent. The illusion of separation and independence between the SSA and the Treasury is maintained because the FICA tax is a regressive income tax, hitting the working poor harder than the wealthy. The Social Security tax was instituted 25 years after the Income Tax was established by Congress; it would have been simpler in 1938 to raise the Income Tax on everyone to fund Social Security, but then the wealthy would have objected to paying their fair share, so the politicians bowed to the demands of wealth and we are dealing with the continuing misfeasance of our tax structure today. If our society were just now developing a tax structure to pay our collective bills, Social Security would get its funding from the general Income Tax just as The Defense Dept., Education Dept., Health and Human Services, etc.; because we would require that structure to be fair, by being equitable, in how taxes are raised; and fiscally responsible by taxing our productivity to avoid any kind of debt or phony financing scheme.

When the government sells a bond to any citizen, business, or foreign entity, it is obligated to payoff that bond when due, even if that requires reducing other expenditures, including Social Security, or raising taxes; because government must pay its debts first and foremost. We often hear the term "full faith and credit of the government" with regard to guaranteeing the payment of government debt; without which the government could not entice anyone to lend to it. But the "full faith and credit of government" is irrelevant with regard to the Social Security Trust Fund, because when we the people both own and owe a debt, that debt does not exist; so neither government faith nor credit are applicable in dealing with this issue. It is a mistake for the Treasury Department to issue Treasury Bonds to the Social Security Administration in exchange for surplus Social Security Tax, because it confuses everyone into believing that they are real obligations for payment by the government and the taxpayers that support the government; BUT THEY ARE NOT!

The Social Security Administration has monthly demands on its cash flow, and when its income is projected to be less than its outflow, Congress will need to raise taxes (in one form or another), or reduce benefits to recipients, to keep the Social Security Administration books balanced. It simply does not matter whether Congress raises taxes and that income is given directly to the SSA to meet its obligations, or Congress raises taxes to payoff government bonds held by the SSA, and those proceeds used to fund Social Security. In either case taxes are raised the same amount to cover the cost of maintaining the Social Security system. The Trust Fund bonds themselves are baloney, because they have zero value and liability to we the people.

It should be obvious to all that courts will give trial to cases of debt between different persons, corporations, and countries; but they would not hear a case where a person, corporation, or country was suing itself to collect a debt owed to itself. If the SSA had used its annual surplus to purchase industrial bonds in U.S. companies or government bonds of foreign countries, it would have legal standing to have a court enforce repayment of its investments plus interest, such that the profits of those companies or the taxes of foreign countries could be used by the SSA to support our elderly. Such is not the case with the Social Security Trust Fund. The American people cannot sue the American people to force payment of a debt they owe to themselves. We will either tax ourselves to meet the contemporary needs of Social Security or we will reduce benefits to the level that we can afford.

Consider a village moron going about his daily life, being given menial tasks by several businesses so that he may have a supporting income. The particular act that determines that this person is a moron is that when he spends his wages he writes himself an IOU for the money spent. If our village moron decided to retire and cash-in his IOU's at some bank, what bank would loan him money wherein he was both the creditor and debtor associated with his IOU's? You simply cannot be in debt to yourself.

Amazingly enough the American people have a government that is operating in this moronic manner. The U.S. Treasury is the part of the moron that spent the money to support us, while handing out IOU's, and the Social Security Administration is the part of the moron that holds some of those IOU's, and thinks they are collateral for which the citizenry may redeem for future income. This part of the moron even accepts additional IOU's as interest on the IOU's that are non-existent spent money. The working citizenry are the bank (taxable income) to which the Treasury and Social Security Administration want to come and cash-in those IOU's in the future.

The United States Government cannot buy its own debt in any form, in any department or agency, and profit by, or receive income from such an action. Government does not invest in corporate stocks and bonds, or own industries to produce profits from goods sold to consumers. It taxes the productivity of commerce and spends those taxes yearly. There is not one penny of money in our so-called Social Security Trust Fund; we may only tax the productivity of the present; and the productivity of the future, when and only when it becomes the present.

The national budget was balanced for the first time in a generation in 1998. In fact, it produced a 70-billion dollar surplus; and 1999, 2000, 2001 had larger surpluses. The surplus dollars sent to the Treasury by the Social security Administration and used by the Treasury to pay our general expenses, amounts to another Income Tax; it is in no way an investment that can be redeemed to cover any future need. These budget surpluses are not all from Income Tax; they are mostly from the Social Security Tax, because workers have been overcharged for Social Security for nearly 20 years to balance Federal Budgets; not to build a trust fund.

It is impossible to protect future Social Security requirements with today's FICA surplus. We can only supply ourselves with more goods and services today, or reduce the taxes to be collected next year, or pay off a tiny portion of the principle on the National Debt. There is no difference in income to government, regardless of its name; Income Tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, Excise Taxes, Usage Fees for national parks, Import Duties, etc.; all are levied by government to provide income, and spent by government in annual budgets. Government does not tax the past or future and government does not save or invest for the past or future, only the present.

If it truly makes sense to over tax people to support one portion of government and give them an IOU that could be redeemed at a profit in the future, then why not change all of our Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax, etc. into FICA Tax? Such that the Treasury Department could borrow all of our government spending requirements from the Social Security Administration and issue many more bonds from which we would presumably become an unbelievably wealthy country as those bonds mature. We can all turn into morons and live off the interest, without disturbing the principle. Whether the government establishes two types of taxes to fund itself or ten types of taxes is irrelevant; if one or more tax streams take in more than they require, their tax rate is too high; and if one or more tax streams takes in less than it requires, their tax rate is too low. The moving of tax receipts from areas of excess to areas of deficit is internal bookkeeping, not an investment. Excess funds that are spent instead of being refunded are gone and irretrievable.

In our current economy the baby-boomers are moving into their most productive and profitable work years, a relatively large group of taxpayers paying relatively larger amounts of Social Security tax, as well as Income Tax. The current senior citizens are enjoying relative affluence in their standard of living. But a few years from now when the baby-boomers are retiring and swelling the ranks of the non-working, there will necessarily be a higher tax burden to support those retirees. The money that will be available to fund Social Security will depend totally on the ability of future workers to pay taxes to government. And the bonds piling up in the so-called Social Security Trust Fund are void and worthless. If tax income cannot be increased, there is absolutely nothing that government can do to change what is coming except raise the age of retirement and lower the amount of benefits to be paid, to match the amount of tax that can be taken from those who labor in our economy.

In 2005 the President and some members of Congress were proposing to "save" what is not yet in peril (it cannot be broke if it presently produces a surplus). Any truly surplus money will remain quietly in the government's accounts. It will simply be a reserve to defraud the taxpayers of the truth about the full extent of our deficit spending, while the Social Security Administration receives more worthless bonds (IOU's) in their fraudulent electronic trust fund.

© March 2009

Craig D. Hanks

This article is taken from a chapter of my book SOCIAL BENCHMARKS. Other excerpts can be viewed at http://beyondfarenough.blogspot.com/.

Obesity Is A Social Contagion, Say Experts - Could Texas Be Spreading The Disease Of Fat?

Obesity is spreading like a virus -- literally. According to recent analyses of thousands of participants over three decades, you're more likely to get fat if your friends do. Looking at obesity as a sort of social contagion may even help explain why the weight of America's residents has suddenly ballooned over the last generation.

Sound farfetched? Well, not according to Nicholas A. Christakis, physician and professor of medical sociology at Harvard Medical School, and a principal investigator of a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that tracked a large social network of 12,067 people between 1971 and 2003. Unlike most studies of its kind, which only record the relationship of an individual and his/her contacts, the Framingham Heart Study looked at a network, practically tracking the entire town of Framingham, Massachusetts, and each participant's social contacts.

Studies like this could be especially important to Texas, where obesity has become a major health problem. Sixty-one percent of adults and 35% of children in the state are considered obese, and it's not just a cosmetic problem. The condition is a serious medical issue, and can lead to heart disease, type 2 diabetes (also at epidemic levels in Texas), stroke, and even certain cancers. In a state where 25% of the population is going without health insurance, and the health care systems are already overburdened -- particularly in the larger cities of Dallas, Houston, and Austin, where rural residents come seeking care -- any increase in disease could effectively collapse the system.

The Framingham study was actually a large federal study intended to investigate heart disease. Every four years, each subject was examined and asked to name at least one person who would know where he or she would be at the time of the next evaluation. As most of the town and its relatives participated in some fashion, a large social network was tracked and data, such as weight and body mass index, recorded. Investigators knew each participants' relationships with each other -- be it sibling, spouse, neighbor, or close friend.

Analysts concluded that an individual was 57% more likely to become obese when a close friend did. In fact, friends had more influence on each other than family. Statistically, there was no effect when neighbors gained weight, and close mutual friends had the most affect on each other, even if they were hundreds of miles apart. If one became obese, the other had a 171% chance of following suit. The same effect was noticed for weight loss, but as Americans have been predominantly growing fatter, an increase in weight was seen more often.

If the idea of likening obesity to a contagious disease seems harsh, perhaps it is, and, according to Christakis, he and colleagues are not intending to blame the patient for the disease so much as to determine why the epidemic is occurring. One explanation for the dramatic increase in American poundage is that an obese person is likely to influence another in his or her social network (i.e., a friend) to also become obese, in the same way that an individual losing weight might. Friends may also affect each other's perception of fatness, and what weight is acceptable. "...[the effects] highlight the importance of a spreading process, a kind of social contagion, that spreads through the network," said Christakis.

While Richard M. Suzman, from the National Institute on Aging (which funded the study) hails it as "one of the most exciting studies to come out of medical sociology in decades," colleagues like Kelly D. Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, aren't so sure. "I think there's a great risk here in blaming obese people even more for things that are caused by a terrible environment," said Brownell.

Further, no one disputes the influence genetics have on the condition. An individual generally has a genetically predetermined weight range, usually around thirty pounds. The environment, then, can play a major role in determining whether a person is near the bottom or top of that range. With all the advertisements for heavily processed, sugary, and high-fat foods that are cheaper than healthier produce, it's easy to see how "environment" can be a negative influence, indeed.

The Framingham review is unique, which can be seen as a rare and tremendous breakthrough, as well as a study that's difficult to replicate -- an important aspect in determining its overall scientific validity -- according to Stephen O'Rahilly, an obesity researcher at the University of Cambridge. No other study has the same, long-term, detailed analysis of a population and its social networks, and it could take another thirty-two years to produce one. Its results are telling, and something to consider. How much do we influence each other, and not realize it? If we can encourage our friends to gain weight simply through our own attitudes and habits, then can we, instead, encourage them to be healthier? Viewing the results as an opportunity to be aware of how much we can influence each other to do better, or as just highlighting another factor working against us, is really a matter of perception.

Keeping your weight at a healthy level is an important aspect of taking care of yourself. How you take care of yourself will certainly affect you as you age, and eventually your wallet, as well. If you’re a young individual who tries to keep informed and maintain a healthy condition and lifestyle, you should take a look at the revolutionary, comprehensive and highly-affordable individual health insurance solutions created by Precedent specifically for you. Visit our website, [http://www.precedent.com] for more information. We offer a unique and innovative suite of individual health insurance solutions, including highly-competitive HSA-qualified plans, and an unparalleled "real time" application and acceptance experience.

Precedent puts a new spin on health insurance. Learn more at [http://www.precedent.com]

Concerns Regarding the Social Responsibility of Multinational Corporations

We can, categorically, qualify all points of social responsibility as either human, economic, legal, or environmental. The human category of social responsibility would contain all issues related to individual persons and groups of people. These might be health, safety, unions, personal freedom and liberties, and human rights. Legal concerns relate to either conflicting international laws, regulations, or the political landscape. The economic category would contain issues related to currencies, monetary policy, investment, and wages. The environmental category would relate to the natural condition of the host nation and encompass environmental conservation, pollution, and the distribution and use of natural resources.

There are two fundamental problems that create the need for the human category of corporate social responsibility. First, all nations agree that there are some rights that people have. Second, there is no total consensus on what those rights are. This results in disputes over a reasonable minimum working age, a maximum number of hours of labor to be performed on a weekly basis, and minimum acceptable safety conditions at the place of employment. There are also questions about reasonable break lengths, frequency of bathroom use, and time to be dedicated to eating during the work day. There are also issues of racial and gender-based discrimination. For the multinational corporation (MNC), the matter of moving a contract overseas is no small one. While there are international guidelines on which policies should be adopted in these matters, the final responsibility for the ethical treatment of employees falls on the MNC.

There are several problems that give rise to the economic concerns of social responsibility. First, many MNCs have capital that far exceeds the total worth of less developed nations. Second, many less developed nations are unable to develop the level of economic and monetary policy to handle the influx of activity that a MNC represents. Finally, a less developed nation can be economically destroyed by the presence of a MNC if the business does not regulate their financial activities on an internal basis. Economic issues relate to the purchase of raw materials, investment in host nation financial products, capital markets, and taxation.

Legal concerns are more widely varied. A MNC is bound by international, local, and host nation law. They are expected to maintain lawfulness at all times. The issue of governmental corruption is also significant. A MNC must resolve disputes within the legal framework of its host nation. They must also avoid interference with the political machinery. The legal and political influence of a MNC can range from beneficial to warlike. Consider, a MNC that moves into a less developed nation and overwhelms the government with its economic power is less a corporation and more a conquering army.

Environmental concerns arise from several problems. First, less developed nations may not be able to properly value their national resources. Second, MNCs trade across markets and, as such, can engage in the arbitrage of cross-market price differences of environmental resources. Third, the value and dangers of certain environmental actions (i.e. waste disposal, pollution, water usage, etc.) are not fully known at this point in time. This creates further issues for the MNC. there is concern for how much, and what kind of, information the MNC should give to host nation governments on the potential dangers of their activities. Additionally, there is the danger on the MNC acting in a cut-and-run manner, destroying the natural resources of a less developed nation and running home with the profits. These are all significant problems that require solutions. The MNC must work with international regulatory agencies and host nations to produce a methodology that benefits both stakeholders and the host nation.

Rayn Hyden currently writes literary analysis articles on the subjects of Machiavelli and Don Quixote. While frequently mistaken for a well-known Berkley rhetor, Rayn lives in sunny Palm Beach and has never traveled to California.

Social Media: Why the Number of Followers Matter

Last week, we talked about the fact that having great numbers with your social media outreach on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn was not as important as what you did with them. My point was that having good numbers alone was not the goal in and of itself, that you needed to serve those followers with great information so they have a reason to continue following you.

This week, I want to go back and focus on the importance of the numbers, because I feel I may have done that point a bit of a disservice. You see, the numbers of followers you garner will be the driver of your efforts and provide an instant way of establishing your credibility with audiences who may not have ever heard of you.

The principle is simple, really. The soul of public relations is the power to enhance someone's credibility with their core audiences. Whether that audience consists of potential customers, readers or clients, they all need to see you as a credible expert in your area. If they don't, you'll never be able to move past the word "potential."

The toughest question to answer when someone is introduced to your work is, "Who are you?" If they don't know your name or your reputation, they need to find out something about you up front that is either compelling or unique. So if the answer to that question isn't something like, "He's the guy who invented the rotary engine (that was Felix Wankel in 1957, by the way)," then you need something else to establish your credibility.

Now if you have a strong following, people don't necessarily need to know about you or your expertise. All they need to do is click on one of your profiles to see you have 10,000 or 20,000 followers, and it instantly communicates that you are an expert and that what you have to offer has value.

Moreover, the media is actually starting to use the social media contacts of the guests they book to promote their shows. Recently, we booked a client on a national TV show and the producer emailed back and asked us if the guest could promote his upcoming appearance on his Twitter and Facebook accounts. This particular client didn't have a Twitter account and his Facebook account is grossly under-serviced. However, my campaign manager did comment that I had 55,000-plus followers across all my accounts and that I'd be happy to put out the word. The producer was very happy and will now be more inclined to give consideration to all the guests we pitch him, because he knows we can help promote our guest appearances. In the fight for ratings, sometimes a few thousand viewers can make the difference between a show winning its slot or losing to a competitor, so media outlets are doing everything they can to boost ratings. If you're able to help them with that, and you have a sizeable social media following that instantly establishes your credibility, you'll be an imminently more attractive guest.

The most important thing to remember is that social media is not just a "fun" thing to do. This is serious business and you want to approach potential followers with strong, expert advice and education. Many people don't put a lot of thought into who they decide to follow, so if you can provide a modicum of substance in your social media dealings - as I detailed last week - then you will find it easy to add followers on a regular basis.

And, having a large number of followers can be like gold for you and your business, because it can make the difference between someone encountering your name online and saying, "Never heard of him," or "Never heard of him, but 20,000 other people have, so he must be good."

For 20 years Marsha Friedman has been a leading authority on public relations as CEO of EMSI. Go to www.emsincorporated.com to signup to receive her free weekly PR Tips today! More resources for authors can also be found at www.publicitythatworks.com. Or call at 727-443-7115, ext. 202, or email at mfriedman@emsincorporated.com.

Let's Lower Taxes to Get National Health Care, Social Security and Free College!

The key to financing National Health Care, solving Social Security's long term funding problem, and going to college free of charge is to lower taxes. As incredible as this sounds, it's true. This can be accomplished by eliminating tax deductions and a simple restructuring of the tax code.

Eliminating tax deductions is the key to tax reform. This is because tax deductions are the main cause of tax fraud and the inequities associated with our current tax system. It is the tax deduction that allows the tax code to favor some segments of society over others, decrease the amount of revenue the government needs to properly fund the programs our society deems important, and leads directly to waste, fraud and corruption.

No serious attempt at tax reform can take place without addressing this problem. Therefore, abolishing the tax deduction is the first and most important reform that must take place. When combined with a simple restructuring of the tax code, these simple reforms create a tax system that treats everyone equally. And, when everyone is treated equally three things happen: First, the current codes ability to favor some segments of society over others is eliminated. Second, tax fraud will decrease. And third, government revenue will increase.

For example, in order to increase tax revenue from corporations we must first change the tax structure that allows businesses to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed. Currently, corporations subtract from their gross sales those deductions found in the tax code and labels the resulting number the net profit. This figure is then used as the basis for determining the taxes owed. The first $50,000.00 of net profit is taxed at 15% and above $50,000.00 of net profit the tax increases up to 35%. This creates a very strong incentive to add as many deductions to the tax code as possible in order to reduce the net profit so that the corresponding tax liability is lowered.

The solution is to replace the tax on net profits with a small tax on the gross sales. By definition, the tax on gross sales means that there are no deductions. This reform eliminates the ability of corporations to use the deductions found in the tax code to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed, eliminates the corruption associated with the current tax code, and creates the level playing field that requires all corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. And, when all corporations pay their fair share of taxes, government revenue increases.

The small tax on gross sales also produces a very small corporate tax liability. In fact, the business tax corporations will now be required to pay is so small that employer payroll taxes can be expanded to include National Health Care and still produce an overall tax liability lower than what corporations are currently required to pay. This overall lower tax liability will be the basis for corporate acceptance of their expanded payroll obligation.

These same principles apply to individual taxes. When deductions are eliminated, the ability of individuals to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed comes to an end. This means that the scenario that now occurs, where wealthy individuals end up paying less in taxes than poorer individuals, is no longer possible. This translates into increased revenue for the government.

The elimination of personal tax deductions also heralds the end of personal income taxes. The elimination of income taxes presents as a tax reduction and this tax reduction allows for the expansion of payroll taxes to include National Health Care and Public Education. These new payroll taxes will be readily accepted because individuals will still be paying less in overall taxes and yet will receive more in benefits. Most people will simply wonder why these reforms had not been implemented earlier.

The elimination of tax deductions and a simple restructuring of the tax code needs to be implemented as soon as possible. This is because government revenue raised under the current system is inadequate. For example, in fiscal 2007 the government collected $2.4 trillion dollar, however, it spent $2.8 trillion dollars. This created a deficit of $400 billion dollars and this $400 billion dollars was added to the national debt (which is rapidly approaching $10 trillion dollars). Contrast these amounts with the revenue generated by the reforms set forth in my proposal. Based on very conservative numbers, my tax reform plan will increase government revenue from $2.4 trillion dollars to a staggering $3.31 trillion dollars. This means that rather than running a budget deficit we will be running a budget surplus.

This budget surplus allows us to fund all current programs, create and fully fund National Health Care, resolve Social Security's long term funding problem and expand public education to include college, free of charge. And, as incredible as all this sounds, it was accomplished by lowering taxes!

Fishman's Framework for Tax Reform is available to read free of charge at:
http://www.serioustaxreform.com

Contact: mark@serioustaxreform.com