Cookery Information

Many experts in personal finance preach the need for a written financial plan. It is true when we have a written plan; we tend to see the true picture of our current financial status. A plan puts in words and in numbers our intent for future expenditures, savings and perhaps investments. Steven Covey said: “begin with an end in mind”. A plan helps us articulate the end that we envisioned. It is a great idea, but there is small problem with a plan. The problem lies in the fact that most people have a hard time putting together the plan and secondly that plan is thought of being a budget. The plan is like a diet we agree to commit to for life only to abandon the idea after a week. Most of us have what is called budget phobia.

There is a group of folks in the State Capital whose job it is to vote on a budget every year by October 1 for the next year. These folks miss the deadline every year. Why? Because they have a fear of the controlling nature of this document called budget. These folks, known in some circle as the US Congress, have shut down the government in 1994 giving the document control over the life, health, and welfare of the American people.
It is often said that Congress is out of touch with the general public and does not truly represent the general public’s interest. But when it comes to budget phobia, we are properly represented in congress. Our behavior and action as it relates to money are consistent with the folks we are sending to Washington to manage the people’s money.

I submit that budget is an invaluable and indispensable tool needed to achieve financial stability and control of god’s money. We must include it in our financial toolbox; it must be sharp and ready for use. However, before we use a tool that can be disruptive and ineffective, before we use a tool without proper training, I am suggesting some exercise to prepare us for this journey in the road less traveled. I am suggesting a renewal of financial mind set.

I am introducing two words: GUN and Butter.

Guns are more accurate the hotter they get, guns are more valuable the older they get; butter, on the other end, melt when it is hot and may not be tasty or healthy when it gets old.

I am suggesting that as we go about our business of spending our hard earned money, we need to ask the question: is the item we are about to purchase is gun or butter? Would it get better over time or would it become useless before too long? Would it improve our net worth? Would it produce income? Would that financial decision have a positive impact in my quality of life over time or would it be a catalyst for financial disaster? By asking those questions myself, I have become an expert on how not to spend money. I usually go to Sam’s to buy gas. I usually browse the store to sample the various food items they offer. I once tasted a seafood salad and bought a container out of shame because the lady serving the samples was staring at me. I still have that salad. Now when I go to Sam’s, I still taste the food as I tell myself “it’s only butter, you don’t need, remember that salad”

Keep in mind I don’t have a monopoly on good or bad financial decision. I am sure I made decisions that others may find rather stupid. In fact, I know I made decisions that have been detrimental to my financial health. In a way, making those mistakes, like the one above, improves the validity of my opinion: I can say I have been where you are today; I have walked in your shoes; today I am where you are trying to go: I have a renewed financial mind set.

To help you renew your financial mind set, I am suggesting that you think of gun and butter before you spend any money. I am well aware of the fact that we are discussing personal finance. In the word personal, there are variables that will not compute. In the word personal, there are emotions, feelings, and sentimental values. Saving money does always feel good, wasting money does not always feel bad. A friend told me he could save money if he stops supporting his 27 year old daughter, but he enjoys giving her money, paying her car insurance and her cell phone bill. That’s fine. Who am I to tell him what to do with his money? My intent here is to suggest, if you decide to buy butter instead of gun, that you make a conscious decision to do so. With that in mind, remember: Gun is good financial decisions and butter is bad financial decision. Gun is good, butter is bad!

You may want to think that we need gun, you want butter. Of course I am realistic: no is going to spend one’s salary buying stock and real estate which are the best guns to accumulate. We are more likely to spent 125% of our salary to eat out, buy expensive furniture, clothing, and useless gadget. You might image I consider those butter! I am hoping for a happy medium, I am hoping for a buttered gun approach, light buttered gun.

Share This

Dear Cathy:

I just found an interesting article on someone else’s website. What are the rules if I want to put it into my own ezine? Can I paraphrase and indicate where I found the info?

Or must I request permission to reprint, then list the item word for word? I am finding that most requests for permission go unanswered.
Signed: Trying to Do the Right Thing

Dear Trying:

First I would ask, “Why do you want to use someone else’s article?” If you’re selling yourself, I recommend you use your own words and ideas. If your writing seems awkward, or your thoughts seem to stall between your computer and your brain, consider taking a course, joining a group and/or hiring a coach.

If your goal is to create an ezine with a huge circulation, and then sell ads for the ezine, you may be wise to use all sorts of content. You’re not selling yourself — you’re selling a daily or weekly portion of ideas.

The ultimate example: Kevin Eikenberry’s Powerquotes. Kevin has built a huge following by sending around quotes — not his own original ideas. He’s also a really nice guy who answers his email.

Now suppose you see a terrific article on one of my websites (And why wouldn’t you? They grow like wildflowers.) Like most website authors, I state clearly that anyone may reprint my articles if they make no changes and use my resource box. Go for it!

But suppose you want to write your own article about reprint permissions. You want to mention that I said, “Better to write your own article if you’re selling yourself.” You don’t want to use the whole article — just this one idea.

No problem! Just mention that Cathy Goodwin presented this idea and supply my website address. You’re free to add more ideas, disagree or send people to my site to read more. Just give me credit.

What you’re doing now is “citing” a source, whether it’s a website article or a book from the library. You must take care to reproduce ideas accurately and in context.

For example, if I say, “Here’s what NOT to do: Help yourself to anything on the web,” don’t you dare say, “Cathy Goodwin invites us to help ourselves to anything on the web.” That can get you in real trouble, as well as make you look very, very stupid.

Now let’s imagine you like this entire article (I live for this) and you want to reproduce the ideas. However, you want to paraphrase and just say, “Based on an article by Cathy Goodwin.”

Frankly, I can’t see why you would want to paraphrase more than a single idea from an article. If you really like my articles, add a link to my site (and ask me to reciprocate — I usually say yes).

Now let’s suppose you come across a website with a terrific article. You want to reprint that article, but the author ignores your request for reprint permission. I recommend that you abandon this article and move on to a new one, preferably your own.

Why publicize an author who can’t be bothered to respond? How do you know the article you want was legally acquired? Perhaps the author paid a ghostwriter and now feels embarrassed to take the credit.

There are dozens of databases that offer free content. I send my own articles to several. Simply type “free content” into a search engine and you’ll be overwhelmed. Some of these collections insist that authors specify their own reprint guidelines. Others ask us to agree to their guidelines whenever we submit an article.

Another tip: If you like articles by a particular author, type that author’s name into a search engine. Chances are you’ll turn up a website offering free content — and the editor will have established permissions for everyone.

When in doubt, I’d prefer to err on the side of caution. An author who feels her work has been stolen will resemble an angry bee, determined to sting you in a most awkward portion of your anatomy. You won’t even get a pot of honey — just an article you didn’t need anyway.

About The Author

Cathy Goodwin, Ph.D., is an author, speaker and career/business consultant, helping midlife professionals take their First step to a Second Career. http://www.cathygoodwin.com.

“Ten secrets of mastering a major life change” mailto:subscribe@cathygoodwin.com

Contact: cathy@cathygoodwin.com 505-534-4294

Share This

I have noticed that there has been a drive to make profit from labels that exists not only at the level of pharmaceutical companies, but also from cash strapped school district and sadly, from disengaged parents themselves. School districts are able to obtain additional funds for each child labeled. These funds do not necessarily go towards the aid of individual students but can be utilized in various ways. Some parents (who are emotionally disconnected from their children) and who are undergoing financial distress jump on the idea of obtaining a diagnosis and label for their child in situations where the problem is one that is solely the result of psychosocial factors,in order to cash in on various taxpayer funded programs.

These parents are attempting to exonerate themselves from any sense of responsibility or accountability in addressing the emotional needs of their children themselves or seeking to make the necessary changes that would aid their child in being more motivated and functioning more successfully. The education system also fails to provide the appropriate means of adapting methods suitable to the child’s learning style or instilling a zeal for learning. Instead, they are perpetuating the problem of the child’s lack of motivation by teaching their child that it is not through hard work and diligence that achievement can be obtained but rather through manipulation and ‘milking’ the system for whatever they feel they are ‘entitled’ to. It is this sense of entitlement that leads to individuals believing that they can obtain something for nothing, and thus gives them no drive or motivation to achieve goals or to become more productive citizens. Zeal for learning and productivity will never come from handouts or by a stale, rote educational system.

How must a child feel to know that their parent has labeled them as being ‘brain disordered’ or suffering from a subjective ‘disorder’ only to obtain additional monies. It is well known that these funds do not go towards improving the functioning of the child but is often used as a ‘personal expense account’ for their parent and the child for various things that are completely unrelated to the supposed ‘disability’.

In addition to seeking funds through what in the common lingo is known as the ‘crazy check’, these individuals go further to obtain various therapeutic services with the sole intention of trying to justify their claim to these monies. They are often seeking services with which they do not provide any investment of their own. They have allowed the government or more appropriately said, the taxpayers to provide for their financial welfare and then allow ‘professionals’, once again paid for by taxpayers, to assume the responsibility of providing care to their child.

Some of these individuals will attempt to justify their ‘milking’ of the system by using the guise of advocacy. In the true sense of advocacy, they would be seeking to address the actual challenges that their child faces by providing structure, tutoring, hearing their child’s voice, resolving conflicts, and making changes to the distressing environment that would allow their children to be healthful and productive. It is easy to not put forth any effort in these areas, shirk responsibility, and lay claim that the government and professionals need to do their part, to be ‘accountable’, of course at someone else’s expense.

There is a dire need of reform of this unfortunate system. There should be no further rewards to parents who do not take responsibility and accountability. Children should not be given labels that can stick for life or be considered ‘disordered’ in order for funds to be obtained. When there exists a real physical or developmental challenge, that can be appropriately demonstrated through valid, objective tests, it would be understandable that there may be the need for assistance, but even here there needs to be carful checks and balances to insure that the funds are used to provide the appropriate resources to the child and that such funds are not pilfered.

Dan L. Edmunds is a doctoral candiate (abd) in Pastoral Community Counseling and has served as a therapist and consultant to children with autism and developmental challenges as well as children with emotional challenges.

Share This