What Can't Be Measured Can't Be Managed

Is one of the guiding principals of Government - which is why they want EVERYTHING to be measured so that somewhere along the line some section of Government can manage - tax - it.

Requiring reports to be sent to government is a subtle form of a tax - the business has to spend money to create something that is of no value to it at all and is often never looked at by government - it is just a checkbox on a person's desk that has to be marked (electronically more often than not) to fulfill a long forgotten requirement.

"... I have seen many workers continually exhorted to increase production, improve quality and reduce costs, thoroughly confused because they had no guidepost or measuring stick to go by. They did not have the facts as to their past performance, their current performance or the goals to shoot at. Because of this, it seems to me that providing this information to the people on the job who, in reality, are the only ones who can control production, quality or cost, is almost as important a function of paperwork as providing Management with the facts which it needs 1n order to make sound decisions. While no report ever increased production, improved quality or cut costs, the paperwork as the medium for transmitting the right information to the people who can control these functions directly . . ."  written by Ben S. Graham in 1950! http://www.worksimp.com/articles/paperwork%20simplification%201950.htm

The main function of paperwork in 2007 seems to not fulfill a specific useful goal - but just another piece of a process to prove to someone else that what was said to be accomplished - even when seen with own eyes - is only valid when it can be proved through an paper / electronic audit trail.

When I was working in a computer room we had a very simple way of running jobs. We had a run sheet for each night and all jobs came in on one or two carts on the right of the console We pulled the jobs off, ran the jobs, marked down the tapes that were created in the job log that came with each job, and when completed put them onto a cart on the left. Auditors came in and asked us how we knew a job was done - and we stated that if the cart on the left had the job sheet then they ran, cart on right - not run yet. Problem jobs were placed behind on a 3rd cart and the analysts contacted. The auditors did not like this and mandated that a complete paper audit trail had to be created and signed off when the jobs were delivered, what time the job started, what time it finished, and what time it was picked up, and a sign off on each step. The same was true for the jobs that were all run via a console - the automated log that I had created for them was no good - you had to have a paper log for each job run. The new rules added no value at all - it just added an extra set of steps and wasted time to a process that had worked with no problems for 12 years. But someone back in a Government office had mandated that you had to have a paper audit trail so they had to make it. Most of Government workers actually accomplish nothing of value - BY DESIGN. They process 'paper' to get 'something' from one place to another as part of this separation of duties.  It is a basic fact that modern US governments are supposed to be "transparent" so no one person is allowed to do all. What in private sector 1 person can do it take 3 to 4 people in ANY US type government to do due to the rules IMPOSED on them by citizens - to try and ensure no stealing occurs from the 'people'. A single person cannot decide what to purchase, run the checking account to pay for it, record the transaction,  make deposits, make withdrawals? Nope, you have at least 7 people involved in that in any Government - plus auditors to see if all the sign-off paperwork has been done.  If a person ran their household budget like a government it would need at MINIMUM 4 extra people to do it the way the government has evolved to  be run. And then people wonder why the cost of Government keeps going up! What is never looked at is that the cost of control steps (people) often way outspends the risk of theft. 4 Extra people means around $400,000 in total costs a year to prevent a POTENTIAL theft of $30,000. (Full time people.)

Good thing Government does not enforce the cost / benefit analysis on itself that it requires of anything a citizen wants.

 

Do Digital Cameras Make Better Photographers?

A CNet story by one of the editors mentioned that the advent of inexpensive digital cameras has created better photographers - I think not. The author, Michael Kanellos, stated "By contrast, digital cameras changed how people take pictures. " Nope, they can just take bad pictures faster and can see that they are bad faster - and try again- and again - and again. They don't have to THINK to take a picture or how it is framed, backlit, sidelight, fill flash etc - they just take.

They now need to purchase a thousand dollars of computer gear - and a few hundred more in software - to print them at home - or have a computer, fast internet connection, and subscribe to online photo firm to upload and have mailed to them to get their print - or lastly go to a kiosk / store to get them printed.

Nothing has really changed other than the ability to lose all your photos when your hard drive crashes. 90% of people never back up their photos. This would not be a problem if they immediately burn their images right to CD after putting them into their PC. I know many people who have taken thousands of images - and not a single backup on CD of any of them.

Course with digital they do take thousands of images - and using statistical averages that they have to get at least 1 good one out of them all.

I went to a Civil War Re-enactment and I used film, my friend used digital. I had taken 28 pictures after 1/2 hour and he had taken 160 in the same time. He asked me why I had not taken more and I replied - I did not need to. The ones I took were right the first time. I work the same way with my digital camera - you don't waste time with the quantity of photos - you go for the quality in each frame you take.

New Net Taxes Possible in November

Based upon the past legislative accomplishments of the current session of Congress's ability to get ANYTHING done - new taxes will come in November, 2007.

 

The way Congress runs - usually by exempting themselves from ALL rules that apply to everyone else - and they feel no pain for the rules they invoke onto others - this best of breed "Do nothing Congress" of the last 40 years will quietly do nothing, allow other states to RAISE TAXES - accept no responsibility - technically correct - and then run campaigns NEXT year on repealing it.

 

Like the Blackberry threatened cutoff due the 'Patent Troll' copyright suit in which the Blackberry devices of Congress had a workaround which would cut off EVERYONE BUT CONGRESS - they had a special exemption to continue to get signals even if an injunction was granted - shields the American representatives from harm if were ALLOWING the patent law to cause others.

 

This is no different.

 

Course with an access fee then ALL FREE WIRELESS points will HAVE to charge people to use them - since THEY will be charged by the counties / cities / states to get onto the network.

 

Kiss all free sites goodbye - no "provider" is going to pick up a $300 to $1000 a month tab per wireless hub charge. 500 or more people A DAY could use a free connection - and the cities WANT that 'free' money to pay for things people DON'T WANT - and the users have NO SAY in being taxed - since the same locals act like Congress and once elected never listen to what the people say - since the people never have "the big picture" and things are "too complicated for them to understand."

 

See CNet Article

 

http://www.news.com/2100-1028-6208126.html?tag=tb

 

A new marketing phrase for JAVA: Write Once Break Everywhere

It is so nice knowing that a JAVA update can break everywhere at once. E-Bay started using more JAVA and FORCED me to update to latest release - and I can go to any web site and it works - EXCEPT EBay!

"Power of 10" TV Show Question - America Still Around in 100 years?

I happened to come across the new TV show "Power of 10" being hosted by Drew Carey on Sept 4, 2007 (Tuesday) and this question struck me as quite worrisome.

The question they asked Americans (now did they actually ask at the beginning of the phone poll to each person if they are a US citizen or not?) is if they thought that the US will still be around as a NATION in 100 years.

Only 74% of those who were polled answered yes. I thought it would be around 85% (The audience and contestant both got it wrong. The contestant missed out on $100,000 by picking the wrong percentage range.)

Now this is very worrisome if 1/4 of the people think the nation we know today will be gone. If they think it will be gone then they will likely NOT do anything to prevent it at all.

Only 2% of the TOTAL population of the 13 original colonies actually fought (combined from BOTH sides) during the Revolutionary War - which allowed our nation to be created. 80% of the people living from 1775 thru 1783 never took sides and tried to stay out of it. (After the war some 50,000 Tories moved to Canada due to persecution of their loyalty to the King.)

If the same holds true for modern times - then a very small minority (US Citizens or not) could effectively fragment the USA and destroy it.

If the foreign minority does not assimilate into the US culture - and remain unique to their foreign morals and allegiance while being able to vote in the US - then they could effectively vote in a block and change laws, rules, and other ways that the US is run to effectively become a separate nation.

As an extreme example: if all the Mexican/Spanish people living in California voted that all state law enforcement personnel CANNOT be used to enforce any Federal law and only enforce California STATE laws - what could the Federal Government actually do? If they decided that a Free Trade Zone between California and Mexico exists and bypass US Customs what would the Federal Government actually do?

If the Federal Government threatened to cut off Federal Funding then California could then stop sending ANY money to the same Federal Government and they would actually have MORE money. What could the US Government do? Invade California?

All of this is possible if the Spanish majority in California voted as a block.