Ramsey’s Total Money Makeover & Brown Cow Yogurt

By | |
4 Comments

Wear some financial underpants

I graduated from BYU with a Master’s degree in accounting. BYU’s accounting program is regularly ranked as one of the top three schools in the nation.

Whoa. Go, John. I ought to be some kind of financial superstar, right? You’d think I would have come out of that program with all my crap put together, living within my means, investing wisely, making a bundle of moo-lah. I’d have a tidy stash.

Yeah, nope.

That program taught me how to account for money, but not how to use it. Or maybe I was just too dumb to get it. We came rolling out of school with thousands of dollars of debt. So instead of graduating and building our wealth, we worked to pay off the man.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

I can tell you right now my daughters aren’t going to do the same. They will pay as they go. I’m not co-signing any loans. They’re not going to use credit cards. If it takes them a few years longer to graduate, then it takes them a few years longer.

But they’ll be free when they finish. No shackles for my girls.

I always thought it was a good idea not to send them out into the world without underpants. Or knowing how to brush their teeth. It’s equally important I don’t send them out there not knowing how to build wealth and reap all the security and peace that comes with it.

This is why every child of mine is going to get a copy of Dave Ramsey’s The Total Money Makeover. It’s a goofy title, but the principles in it are sound. I can’t tell you how much I wished I’d known and followed the steps he outlines there on how to build wealth when I was just starting out.

  1. Save $1,000 in an emergency fund
  2. Pay off all your debt except the mortgage using the debt snowball (and don’t go into debt)
  3. Complete your emergency fund by saving three to six months’ expenses
  4. Maximize retirement investing
  5. Save for your kids’ college
  6. Pay off the home mortgage early
  7. Build wealth and give like crazy
  8. Live like no one else

The book starts out by talking about the debt myth, i.e. debt is a great tool and should be used to create prosperity. Sometimes a little debt can be helpful. But in the vast majority of cases “debt adds considerable risk, most often doesn’t bring prosperity, and isn’t used by wealthy people nearly as much as we are led to believe.” Ramsey goes on to say, “Your largest wealth-building asset is your income. When you tie up your income, you lose. When you invest your income, you become wealthy and can do anything you want.  How much could you give every month, save every month, and spend every month if you had no payments? Your income is your greatest wealth-building tool, not debt. Your Total Money Makeover begins with a permanently changed view of the Debt Myths.”

After tackling debt, Ramsey outlines other money myths and wealth-destroying attitudes and then explains each of the principles of the steps outlined above.

I love this book so much it’s part of my gift package to every couple that invites me to their wedding reception. I hope those new couples follow his recommendations. It will bring them peace. If you want to give your children the gift of financial peace, if you want that peace yourself, I recommend you buy this book today and start following those baby steps. You can get the book for a mere $10 bucks at his website http://www.daveramsey.com.

While you’re waiting for it to come, you might want to go over to Larry Correia’s site (another accountant and fiction author), and read his hilarious comments on some real folks who actually were sent out without any financial underwear: http://tinyurl.com/3zx9tbo.

Thick and Creamy

I love thick, creamy yogurt.

Mix it with some raisins or fresh fruit, and I’m in heaven.

The problem is that most of the yogurt on the shelves today is weird Splenda- or NutraSweet-filled crap. Or it’s full of sugar. And none of it has that thick mouth feel.

I had some great yogurt up in Oregon a few years ago, but could never find anything like it here. Then a little while ago I hit the jackpot.

Hello, Brown Cow Greek Yogurt.

Thick. Oh, baby is it thick. Creamy. And full of goodness: 23 grams of protein, 9 grams of sugar, 0 grams of fat, and active cultures of more of our belly friends than any other yogurt I’ve found—give a big welcome to S. Thermophilus, L. Bulgaricus, L. Acidophilus, Bifidus, and L. Casei.

I get the plain style. This allows me to mix it to my taste with fruit, granola, or a little bit of sugar or honey.

If you’ve been looking for some good yogurt, let me recommend Brown Cow.

Since when did young adult fiction become the cure for cancer?

By | | ,
7 Comments

Meghan Cox Gurdon wrote an opinion piece for the Wall Stree Journal called “Darkness Too Visible” in which she complained that it was hard to find young adult fiction these days that isn’t filled with coarse, dark material–profanity, pederasty, mutilation, etc. She claims that “contemporary fiction for teens is rife with explicit abuse, violence and depravity” and wonders “why is this considered a good idea?” She concludes by saying:

So it may be that the book industry’s ever-more-appalling offerings for adolescent readers spring from a desperate desire to keep books relevant for the young. Still, everyone does not share the same objectives. The book business exists to sell books; parents exist to rear children, and oughtn’t be daunted by cries of censorship. No family is obliged to acquiesce when publishers use the vehicle of fundamental free-expression principles to try to bulldoze coarseness or misery into their children’s lives.

This, of course, sent hordes of folks into a frenzy of posts sneering at Gurdon’s so-called prissy sensibilities, decrying censorship, and extolling the virtues of young adult literature and dark material in particular. For example, Mary Elizabeth Williams in a Salon piece called “Has young adult fiction become too dark?” rolls her eyes, then deigns to wade into what’s she thinks is an obviously juvenile argument to apparently show Gourdon how “stupid” she really is. Williams concludes:

One of the terrific side effects of an obviously click-baiting piece of editorial twaddle like Gurdon’s is that it reminds people how many fellow passionate readers there are in the world. That incendiary WSJ piece promptly sparked a tear-jerkingly beautiful twitter #YA saves trend full of heartfelt reactions and links to outstandingly reasoned, article responses from well-read adults and teens on the value within so much of YA literature and its downright lifesaving effects.

Williams suggests fiction doesn’t have the power to lead people into bad behaviors. After all, she assures us, “an entire generation of women managed to devour the ‘Flowers in the Attic’ series without having sex with their brothers.” No, according to Williams (and all the #YAsaves folks), YA fiction only saves lives. And she provides a link to prove it.

But Williams misses the mark. Completely. This isn’t about whether fiction has power to influence us in good and bad ways. There’s a huge body of research on media effects which clearly proves fiction’s power for both. Nor is it about the theraputic uses of dark material.

The heart of the matter revolves around a rather mundane thing–customer service and marketing.

Gurdon and those parents she describes in her article want a certain type of entertainment. For years, YA fiction has provided that type of entertainment. But things have changed, and the YA label isn’t reliable to them any more. It’s like someone who has purchased steel cut oatmeal for years is now suddenly bringing the bags home to find them filled with sardines or, horrors, Twinkies.

We can argue the merits of sardines and Twinkies. And a hundred other foods. We can argue the merits of certain types of stories for certain types of readers. And my metaphor above–maybe you think using Twinkies is unfair; maybe you would have wanted me to use something like Triscuts or Wheat Thins. But that’s all beside the point.

The real problem here is that the publishers have ignored a significant segment of the market who want to buy books but can’t find the types they’re interested in. Either the covers and blurb material don’t help them find what they’re looking for, sometimes misleading them, or the publishers have simply made the mistake of not thinking about this segment of the reading market.

The fix is easy. (1) Produce more books for these folks. (2) Label your books in a way that makes it easy for the consumer to find what they want. They’re not asking for censorship. They’re asking for a nutrition label that lets them know what they’re getting. Publishers can do what the movie and gaming industries have done with rating systems that prominently display on the cover. Or use some other method. This isn’t a moral issue, it’s simply a matter of helping the right customers find your good or service. It’s a matter of good marketing and branding.

And I would think, with the upheavals in the book industry today, that publishers and booksellers would want to do whatever they could to boost sales. Surely it doesn’t help to turn customers away because your package is confusing them.

In the meantime, the battle will rage and this simple practical core of the issue will be lost in the fires and clouds of smoke produced by the arguments extolling and excoriating the virtues and vices of fiction.

Writing Update: 6/13/11 – reviewing the beginning

By | | ,
Comments Off on Writing Update: 6/13/11 – reviewing the beginning

I’ve finished chapter 17 of CURSE. I’m up to 50,000 words and have moved from the presentation phase into the struggle. And I’m stopping at this point to review the what I’ve got. I’ve learned that if the foundations of the story–the presentation phase–has fundamental flaws in it, you’re only going to create a HUGE rewrite mess if you push on.

I know this from experience. When writing the first draft of CURSE back in 2009 (oh my heck, it feels like forever ago), I ignored my Spideysenses and told myself I could fix anything that was wrong in post production.  And it IS possible to fix many things afterwards–you can change scenes, improve clarity and transport, remove continuity errors, layer in character tags and things like that.

And it IS true that sometimes you do just have to write to the end to figure out the story.  Sometimes you have to just write to the end, and do it in a substandard way, because if you don’t you’ll never finish anything. Sort of like sketching first and then painting. But if there’s something wrong with the basic premise of a story line, and you keep writing, then that story line affects everything it touches. The fractures ripple out all the way to the end of the book. And you might end up, like I did, having to toss a huge amount of what you’d written.

Which is not all bad. I learned a lot and invented a lot of cool stuff while writing that. But when you’re on a deadline, it can be a killer.  And I’m not doing that this time. I worked out the big issues in my chapter outline.

So I’m pulling back and reviewing. I’m delighted with everything but the villain. He’s still not right. I love his chapters, the scenes. I love the name I’ve given him–Endless. But the structure isn’t right. I’ve inadvertantly created two main villains. And that’s not useful. Having two “main” villains doesn’t double the power of the opposition. It splits it. The villain/henchman model works well. But I don’t have that either. Over the next few days I’ll be rectifying the setup. Then moving forward.

For those of you who are writers, I thought you’d be interested to know that there were a few times these last two weeks when I dreaded the writing. I had a large problem before me or had to invent a new chapter (as opposed to using something from the previous draft), and a dread filled me. But I sketch/drafted my way to the end, and soon found the writing a joy again. 

I can’t say enough about the sketch/draft method. I’ve found it works in creative activities OUTSIDE writing as well. When working up a lesson plan for my day job, designing landscaping for our house, developing a talking script for a sales call, writing a technical manual, or a hundred other things I’ve had to do–it’s always easier to work from something than create everything all from scratch.

Sketching allows me to create that first draft. And it allows me to do this without having to worry about quality. Sketches can be silly. Weird. Full of crap. They can be all this because I can throw them away. They’re not meant to be permanent. And so there’s no pressure to perform. There’s no staring at a blank screen or page. Sketching is a free-wheeling joy. It fills me up with ideas. And then, when I’ve got the general idea of what I want to do, I can start in on the “real” draft knowing WHAT I want to accomplish which leaves me free to think about the HOW. And if I run into problems and realize the draft isn’t going to work, or I run into something better, I just call the current draft a sketch (or “take” as used in the movie business) and move on to the real one.

Sometimes a chapter or section requires 1 sketch or take, sometimes I’ve run up into the 20’s. Sometimes I haven’t needed any at all. It’s not the number that’s important, it’s the process that has really freed me.

Hey, I live in Washington and I’m an Idiot

By | |
7 Comments

I’m sick of politicians who are more worried about votes, Republican or Democrat, than actually doing what needs to be done. Sick of these fools buying votes with Federal programs for everything from farm subsidies to gelatin wrestling.

When someone runs for office, does an idiot switch get flipped? “Vote for me, I’ll spend like there’s no tomorrow. Cause look, honey, I got this magical piece of Uncle Sam plastic. It doesn’t cost anything. And when the bill comes, we’ll just tax all the rich folks to pay for it, and send government agents to put them in jail if they don’t. Or we’ll print money and make it all worth nothing. Or, better yet, we’ll just use the funds we set aside for social security.  It would be dumb to just save and invest that money we’re taking from people for their retirements. I mean, it’s just sitting there earning interest. Besides, we’ll set it all up like Amway with downlines and circles, and the rising generation will just be taxed out of their brains to pay for it.  And that will be someone else’s problem anyway. See the pretty money, honey. See it? Vote for me.”

They’re like that candy man in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang with the nose that should have scared the soup out of those kids. Of course, American voters aren’t kids hiding in Benny Hill’s basement. Maybe the switch is getting flipped on some of us as well.

Here’s what we need. It’s not rocket science.

1. A balanced budget ammendment to prevent our super smart and caring representatives in Washington from continually spending what they don’t have.

2. Real spending reductions. What does that mean? Dave Ramsey just shared some thoughts on what’s it’s going to take to get the nation out of debt. Go have a listen.

Edit 6/7/11: Besides, Paul Ryan, here’s Tim Pawlenty with some ideas on how to accomplish it.  I’m looking forward to seeing the ideas Romney and the other presidential candidates put forth.

The Meth Epidemic, The Marines

By | |
5 Comments

The Meth Epidemic

Mamphetamine is the most addictive illegal drug in America. Unlike marijuana, cocaine, or heroin, all of which are synthesized from easy-to-obtain plant material (cannabis, cocoa leaf, opium poppy), meth requires ephedrine or pseudoephedrine, which are very complex to make and require a lot of know-how and high-tech processing. The only folks who have that ability are legitimate chemical factories. In fact, there are less than a dozen such factories around the world that produce these chemicals. Which means it should be easy to stop illegal use at the source.

“Should” is the key word there.

When you’re trying to halt drug trafficking, you can work two sides. There’s the demand side and the supply side.

When you work on the demand side, you try to affect people’s desire and use.  For example, in the 1960’s the Federal Trade Commission, along with other government agencies and private groups, began a campaign against tobacco. Using government policy, public awareness, and education over the last forty years, these groups have significantly altered demand for tobacco in the United States. In 1963 more than half the nation smoked. 4,345 cigarettes were consumed per capita. But as these groups worked to affect demand, those numbers dropped steadily until by 2006 only 1,619 cigarettes were consumed per capita.

That’s astounding, folks. A whole culture was changed.

When you work on the supply side, you try to reduce the production and distribution of drugs. This can sometimes be almost impossible to do. For example, almost anyone can grow marijuana. And it takes very little knowledge to harvest and package the parts that are used.  Same with alcohol–home brewing has been practiced for ages. In both examples, the ingredients are easy to obtain and the processing is relatively simple and easy to hide.

But there are some drugs that are very difficult to produce. The key ingredient for barbiturates is one. In the 1950’s and 1960’s barbiturate abuse was increasing. But the government instituted some regulations on the legitimate businesses that produced these ingredients, and it reduced the amount available on the streets until we very seldom hear of barbiturates being used these days.

So where does meth fit in? Well, as I stated above, there are less than a dozen factories that create the key ingredients. Meth is a perfect candidate for supply side intervention. Unfortunately, regulation isn’t as easy as it may seem.

PBS’s Frontline recently aired “The Meth Epidemic” which explains the history of meth in the United States and the battle raging over its cure. If you’ve ever wondered about what meth is and how it affects our nation, you’ll want to watch this. I think you’ll find it eye-opening and well worth your time. Watch it for free here: http://video.pbs.org/video/1933783731.  

The Marines

The US Marine Corps is a fascinating organization with special capabilities. With the exception of the Coast Guard, they are the smallest of the United States’ armed forces, although they’re still bigger than the entire British army. Part of what makes the Marines unique is that they have the ability to rapidly deploy an independent task force (infantry, air support, ships) to almost anywhere in the world within days. Because of this, they are usually the first boots on the ground in any engagement. They pave the way and the Army and other branches follow to provide overwhelming and continuous force.

But the differences include more than their mission. The Marine Corps emphasizes authority and responsibility downward to a greater degree than the other military services. It members are, on average, younger. And its creed “Every Marine’s a Rifleman” has special implications for its commanders and troops.

In order to do some research for a novel I’m writing, I’ve been watching a lot of documentaries about special operations forces and the Marines. One of the best introductions to the Marines I’ve come across is the 2007 PBS documentary called The Marines. It examines what it takes to become a Marine and what it truly means to be one, outlining the rigorous training process that each recruit must endure to become a commissioned officer. I found it fascinating.

If you have ever been curious what makes the Marines different from the other branches of the military and what it takes to become one, you’ll want to watch this film. I couldn’t find it on the PBS site, but you can find it split into 10 parts at YouTube.com. Just go to site and search for “pbs the marines”.