The Pseudo Position

You know of which I speak...you've encountered it, the Pseudo Position.  That's the position with a title that you have strived for and know about.  You've worked your whole career to attain that position and you finally have the credentials and experience to go for that job.

You get to the interview and everything goes well.  Your experience and understanding of the job allows for you to "move up the ladder".  The interviewer explains the job function and responsibilities...all standard for that position.  You are offered the job and you accept.

Now comes the "What the....?!?!?"  You're on the job and you come to find out that you hold the title, but the responsibilities and authority are quite different then what you were led to believe.  As a matter of fact, your job function is that of a position that is at a lower level then what you accepted.

You know what I'm talking about here.  Many of us have fallen for this corporate employment scam.  Yes, the pay may be higher then the lower level position pays, but it still isn't what the real position is suppose to pay.  Corporations do this type of con all the time...it's called Title In Lieu of Pay.  They need someone with your experience and knowledge, but don't want to 1) pay the higher salary to actually be something less in position, and 2) really don't want to actually give you the real perks that go with the real position (because those are reserved for their "favorites").

You know what I'm talking about.  The supervisor position that ends up with you having the title but still doing the subordinates job.  All that has changed is that the corporation now has someone to be the buffer between themselves and the employees below you.  You really don't get to supervise.  Or how about the manager that is not given the authority or perks all other managers in the organization receive...just get the responsibility and workload of all of the positions below them that the corporation does not want to fill.

 

Profits drop?

It was just announced that Home Depot said that its 4th quarter profits declined by more then 27% (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23349107/).  So?  Is this dire news?  Should one panic and dump Home Depot stock?  Should we stop shopping at Home Depot? 

Wow!  Home Depot profits went from $925 million to $671 million.  What does this mean?  Nothing!  Their revenues dropped so their profits dropped, too.  They also plan on only opening 55 new stores.  How many new Home Depot stores do we need?  When does it stop?  When you have a Home Depot across the road from a Home Depot?  This whole "grow or die" mentality is not rooted in reality.  You cannot keep increasing revenues and profits without havimng some type of ceiling.  It cannot go on forever.  Did any of them ever hear of expodential growth?  Well, it can't be sustained.  To better illustrate what I'm talking about do the following math example -

1.  Start with 1 penny.
2.  Doubel the amount from Step 1 (now you have 2 pennies)
3.  Again, double the amount (now you have 4 pennies).

Keep doing this 30 times.  What do you come up with at the end?  I come up with over $5 million dollars.  If you were to do this for real and startying with a penny on day 1, and double your pennies each day for 30 days, on day 30 you'd have to put in over $5 million dollars.  it's the same with what the corporations expect.  It just becomes unreasonable.  It becomes meaning less.

Should you keep shopping at Home Depot?  Sure, why not?  Should you shop around or buy blindly from Home Depot?  Shop around.  The whole purpose of opening all of those new stores is to make sure that there is a Home Depot store within a very short distance of you so that you don't shop around, you'll go to their store (because they believe you are lazy and stupid) because it is close and convenient, and you'll pay whatever they charge.

Remember, corporations never do anything because it is solely convenient for you or it is in your best interest.  These may be factors in their decisions, but only if the benefits to them outweigh the ones to you.

They still dodged the bullet.

I just read a news article about a woman in California that was awarded $9 million froma lawsuit against her insurance carrier.  I won't go into details, you can read them at http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCallPlusBreastCancerNews/story?id=4338818.

As I read the article it amazed me the heartlessness of the corporations in America.  Here is a woman that has been diagnosed with breast cancer.  Now, along with having to deal with this devistating news her insurance carrier decides to drop her in order to protect their profits.  Remember, corporations will allow NOTHING to stand in the way of their profits and their ability to gouge you of your money. 

But based on what I read in the news article, $9 million as an award was really lenient.  I just don't know what would be an appropriate award against a cold-hearted, uncaring corporation who's only (absolutely ONLY) concern is the amount of money they can take from you without having to give you anything back.  And I'm sure that there were complaints from other people when the insurance carrier dropped them, but nothing was done.  Why?  Probably because they were not in a life-threatening situation...at the time.  Does it make the situation right if there is no life-threatening illness involved?  Why did it take a lawsuit to have the practice stopped?  I'll bet that the insurance carrier didn't stop the practice because they felt some type of responsibility toward the insured.  After all, the insurance carrier said that it was going to change the practice to allow a "third-party review" (translation - a legal team will review each case to determine if the saving will outweigh any potential liability).  Trust me, this insurance carrier will continue to rape their customers. 

Now one last thing that I caught in the news article and I wonder how amny other people have or will catch.  After the insurance carrier rescinded her coverage, while she was in the middle of her medical treatment for breast cancer, her treatments were stopped because her bills were not being paid.  Wow!  Is there something in the Hippocratic oath about not doing harm...unless you don't get paid?  In the news article it did say that she finished her treatment through a state-funded program.  But I wonder who helped her find this state-funded program.  Was it any of the doctors that stopped her treatment for not being able to pay her bills?  Was it her lawyer?  I'm almost sure that it wasn't anyone from the state.  What would have happened if this state-funded program wasn't located (by whoever)?  Would the woman have been allowed to just die? 

So, I pose this last question to you....we already know how heartless the insurance corporation is but how heartless and uncaring are the doctors?  Do they have any responsibility at all in this situation?  Would they have redeemed themselves if THEY had helped the woman find the state-funded program?

When Did It Change?

When did things change from when a company's primary focus was their products and service to their stock prices?  When did things change from a company being concerned about the value of their product or service to just the value of their company stock? 

Boy, if this annoying as hell.  Stocks are sluggish because of investor's "feelings"?  What happened to customer's "feelings"?  The only feelings companies are concerned about as it pertains to customers are the ones that cause them to pull their hard-earned money from their pockets and hand it over to these corporations.  Why are corporations so enthralled with gouging the public of their money by stressing that their actions (i.e. lay-off, outsourcing their suppliers from off-shore, reducing quality while increasing prices) are due to increasing their profit while at the same time they artificially inflate the price of their stocks (i.e. Enron, Global Crossing, TYco, etc.) so as to make more money? 

Where is all of this money going?  It sure isn't going into the employee's pocket (those that are left behind after a lay-off tend to have more work dumped on them and no pay increase).  The only time you actually hear about employee's pay is during any labor dispute.  This is when corporations yell how the employees are distroying the corporation because they want so much money.  I guess the corporation does not want anyone or anything to interfere with THIER ability to line their own pockets.  All that extra money (profit) shouldn't be going to those who actually do somethign to earn that money, but to those that do absolutely nothing and add no value.

Did you ever notice that when lay-offs occur that only those that actually did something are the ones affected?  You never hear about any executives being let go (well, at least let go WITHOUT this great multi-million dollar severence package).  Imagine how many people you could keep and for how long if you got rid of the over-paid severence packages.  But that's not acceptable to the corporate executives.  Remember their rule...themselves first, then the company.  And the employees are not even in the equation.

So, someone tell me....why should I care about investors?  I'm not referring to institutional investors (i.e. your mututal funds, 401K's, etc.) but the individuals.  How much clout do they actually exert on corporations?  Or are they another phantom that the corporation puts out there so as to have a scapegoat to blame their own incompetance on?  If a company puts out a good quality product or service, why should I care about its investors or its stock price?  If the company's product or service is of good quality and the company is well managed, then the risk of the corporation folding are minimal or non-existent.  Right? 

So, I guess I just answered why a corporation's stock prices are more important then its product and services.  Because the corporate executives can mask their incompetence at managing the corporation by inflating the stock price.  People will not ask probing questions as long as the stock prices are going up.  The corporate executives and board of directors don't want anyone asking questions about their competence to run the corporation.  And as long as they don't have nayone asking probing questions or looking over their shoulders, they can pretty much spend as much time as they need to line their pockets and enhance their own careers.

No consequences...Or Are There?

I've been following the whole Congressional activity regarding the subprime home loan mess.  I've also followed, with great interest, the activities being done by the individual states on the matter.  My conclusion?  The states seem to have a clearer picture and the federal government doesn't have a clue.

I can understand, and agree, that the primary task should be to help those that were the victims of those predatory loans.  Yes, there were probably a few people that were stupid and didn't ask the right questions and shut their eyes becuase they were going to get what they weren't otherwise qualified to receive.  But let's be blunt about this...no consumer held a gun to any mortgage lender's head and forced them to offer this predatory loan. 

After helping out those victims, the next step is to find those responsible and hold them accountable for this mess.  This is where the states have it over the federal government.  The states are beginning to investigate the originators of these predatory loans to determine how much they actually disclosed.  Unfortunately, this is being driven by the fact that many shareholders lost tons of money and not the fact that people were conned and lied to.  In any form of government or corporations, doing the right things has NEVER trumped making loads of money.  As long as they can make obscene profits, they can always justify their methods and buy off officials to look the other way (need I mention ENRON?). 

So, who is to blame for the current subprime fiasco?  Well, that's easy to figure out.  Follow the money! 

1.  Who made the most money from the subprime con?
2.  Who knew enough to minimize their losses?

And why isn't the money being followed?  Because, more then likely, it will lead to those that we have entrusted to protect us and to put our interests before their own.  The powerful people.  Who might they be?  I will let you draw your own conclusions. 

And I'm sure that everyone who was involved in this fiasco can justify their actions or inactions.  Many will say that it was not their responsibility to look out for the consumer, that they were grown adults who should have been more diligent, etc.  Yes, we've heard all of the justifications...from con artists. 

One of the more interesting aspects of the aid being discussed by Congress is to ease up the bankrupcy rules.  Hmm, I distinctly remember our congress making the bankrupcy rules more stringent against their own contituents' wishes, BUT it was exactly what the banks and lenders wanted...to be able to suck the life blood out of consumers with Congresses blessing.  So, who should pay the consequences?  Not the consumer!

But there is an old saying:

If You Aren't Part Of The Solution...You Are Part Of The Problem.

States Key In On Stupidity Gene

I'm sure that everyone has heard about the couple from Georgia that won the Mega Millions lottery. I guess what they say is true....someone has to win at some point. And that is what gets people to keep spending money on the lotteries. That MAYBE they'll win (which is why normal people call it GAMBLING). Even when they don't win, they keep coming back for more and more...because "Someone has to win at some point in time", so why shouldn't it be you. Has anyone tried to figure out for every winner, how many people lost (also know as LOOSERS).

I'm not a great fan of gambling, as you can probably tell. Why? Because you cannot affect the outcome (otherwise known by those running the gambling enterprises and always making money, regardless if anyone wins or not, as cheating) through any specific knowledge or skills. Let me illustrate. You and 99 others are going to be taking a test. The outcome of this test will determine if you will be getting a specific job or not. Now, there is only 1 position open, so you have to be the one with a the highest test score. What can you do to improve your score? Well, you can study for the test. Or if the test pertains to some level of skills you should have been spending time honing those skills. In other words, your skill and knowledge, or lack thereof, can impact how well you do.

Gambling is not in the same category. The whole point about gambling is to be able to get your money without having to payout anywhere near what you bring in. Many states run their own lotteries and they say that they do it so that they can collect money and help pay for either senior citizen programs or help pay for educations. This is the biggest lie and myth to be foisted on their citizens. These lottos are the biggest cash-cow that was ever dumped in their laps! They can't lose! Just look at the payouts and the methods they use to pay out the winnings (the amount advertised is the amount you'll receive if you take it over 20 years).

Again, the states have found a way of tapping into that one "stupid gene" in humans. You convince them that they can get something for nothing (or almost nothing). "Look! You can win $200 million for only a BUCK!" Gee, what happened to all of the other bucks you spent the previous weeks and months? They're gone! They don't count any more? The odds do not change with the amount that you spend on lottery tickets. There is no guarantee that you will win...but there is a guarantee that you will be poorer by the amount you spent and the agency collecting the lottery money is richer by that same amount.

If anyone has the time, they should figure out the amount of money any lottery takes in. You'll then see that no matter who wins or who loses, the lottery agency ALWAYS wins. Why do you think the states don't allow just anyone to run their own lottery? They'll tell you that they regulate it because they want to make sure that the lottery is fair and not corrupt. HA! Who says that just because the state runs/regulates a lottery it is fair and legit? What? There is no corruption with state officials? Please! They bank on your naivete and stupidity. As long as you don't question their actions and just believe whatever they tell you, there will be no problems.

And, lastly, heaven forbid that you have a dollar or 2 left in your pocket...they WILL find a way of getting from you.