No one likes to pay taxes and most people wish that the tax laws were more "fair."  This is a subtle way of saying, "I think I pay more than I should."  This thought transcends all tax brackets and incomes.

The IRS recently reported on statistics from 2006 (which is scary in and of itself).  Of all the returns, the top 1% (those with the top 1% of the income) paid 40% of all taxes, but accounted for only 22% of the income.  That's not fair.

The top 50% of the tax filers paid 97% of all income taxes and accounted for 87.5% of all income.  That's not fair.

As far as the bottom 50% of all taxpayers, they actually collected more then they paid.

This is what scares me.  These people can also vote.  Soon they become a majority and we taxpayers will become a minority.  Then this majority can vote for the politician who will give them the most money, knowing that the minority will pay for it. 

And that's not fair!

Although I follow the Detroit Tigers, you would be hard pressed to call me a fan.  It's been years since I have watched a complete game.  In fact, it was in the Tigers last post-season push a few years back that I even watched a complete inning.  The game just moves too slowly.  I get bored between pitches.

Nevertheless, if I happen to be watching a TV show live (which I seldom do), I will flip to the game to catch the score during commercials.  If I am watching something recorded (which is more common), then when my show is over, I will check out the score of the game.  I might only do this one or two nights a week, but twice this year I have flipped to the game and on the next pitch, I saw a Tiger hit a walk-off home run*.

What are the odds?

* A "walk-off home run" is a game-winning, game-ending home run.  It is not overly common; it can only occur when the home team is behind and during their last at bat.  The batter hits a home run, which wins the game for his team, giving them a victory instead of a likely defeat.  The game is over at that point and both teams "walk off" the field.

I recently noted that medical insurance reform is one of President Barack Obama's "top priorities."  It seems that medical insurance reform has been a stated goal of the last four (or more) US presidents.  I've often said that the real problem with healthcare resides not with the doctors, but with the lawyers (as well as sympathetic juries and greedy plaintiffs).  It is lawsuits, the threat of lawsuits, and outrageous awards that are pushing up the cost of healthcare to untenable levels.

My response has been to seek to take control of my healthcare costs by taking an active role in treatment options.  Just because a person wearing a white coat tells me I need a procedure, doesn't mean I will comply.  Don't meekly say, "Yes," but boldly ask, "Why?"  Why do you recommend this?  What is the cost?  What is the benefit?  What is the expected outcome?  Too often, I suspect, the procedure is more for the doctors' benefit than mine. 

Towards this end, I have a high deductible insurance plan (meaning lower cost) and a tax-free health savings account (HSA) to cover the deductible.  I recommend this for everyone who qualifies.

Of course, some of the proposed remediations include taxing my medical insurance and removing the tax-free aspect of my HSA.  In response to this, I have facetiously said that once the new government plan is in place, I will cancel my insurance and use Uncle Sam's option.

Right now, I am beginning to consider this more seriously.  I just received notice that my medical insurance is going up 31%.

The numerous Maple tress and Blue Spruce in our yard provide ample and ideal nesting sites for various varieties of birds.

Most noticeable are the Robins.  This is because they throw a fit if you get anywhere close to their next.  Sometimes they fly full speed, straight at your head, veering off at the last moment.  I'm not sure how close they actually come to making contact, but it seems like it is within inches.  Once, a particularly aggressive one was so persistent and unrelenting in his attacks, that I had to forgo any hopes of yard work near his nest.

We also have Mourning Doves in our area.  I have no idea how many next in our yard, because their behavior is the opposite of Robins.  When potential danger approaches, the Mourning Doves in the nest seemingly freezes, doing nothing to alert a predator to their presence.  A few weeks ago, while doing some minor tree trimming, I reached for a small branch to lop off and noticed a Mourning Dove, quietly perched in her nest, about two feet away.  She was staring directly at me, but did not move.  She looked like a statue and I had to watch for several seconds before I was convinced she was actually alive.

I'll trim that tree later.

I've checked on her from time to time.  She's always in the same pose, though no matter from which direction I approach, she is always facing me.

I don't know how long it takes Mourning Dove's to hatch, but she's been waiting a long time.  I hope the outcome is positive.

(By the way, to get a good shot, I had to use the flash — she didn't even flinch.)

Today it was a tad hot in southern Michigan, surpassing the 100-degree mark at my house.  (For the record, I have a digital thermometer that is mounted in the shade.) 

In these parts, it is not unheard of to hit 100 at some point during the summer; however, those records are typically reached in August or in proximity thereof — not in June.  It was over 100 at noon and again when I checked at 3 PM, thought at 5:00 PM it's cooled down to more reasonable 96.

On the news this morning, an ozone warning alert was issued for my county.  Among other things, I am not supposed to mow lawn.

This has always perplexed me.  I could have mowed lawn yesterday; I will likely be permitted to mow lawn tomorrow.  But mowing lawn today is bad for the environment.  I'd like to point out, that if I wait and mow lawn tomorrow, it will take longer, thereby causing more ozone damaging pollution.

The other curious thing is that the adjoining county was not part of the alert — and I live a quarter mile away from the county line.  Since there is not likely a marked difference hovering over the county boundary, does that mean that part of the other county should also have limits placed on them?  Or perhaps it means that where I live has been needlessly included in a warning intended for the other side of the county.  Does 1,320 feet really make a difference if I should mow lawn or not?

Either way, my grass has not stopped growing and needs my attention.  I guess my lawn is unaware of this ozone issue.

I was away at a convention last week and my bride accompanied me to help out.

At the hotel, I encountered something new (at least to me).  We were instructed about a new energy saving device in the room.  Upon entering, we were to insert our keycard into this wall-mounted device, which would then activate the lights in the entryway and bathroom.  Then, when we leave the room, we simply remove the keycard and those things are automatically shut off about 25 seconds later.  (And yes, I really did verify that it works.  It's kind of like wanting to know that the refrigerator light actually goes out when the door is shut.)

I mused aloud that as an added bonus, I would know exactly were my keycard was when I leave the room.

It's an ingenious system — except when you have two people sharing a room, but operating on different schedules.

You see, on the first morning, I shuffled off to breakfast while my wife was still in the bathroom.  (She often skips breakfast and I seldom do.)  Twenty-five seconds later, I am a safe distance away and she suddenly finds herself in the dark. 

Oops!

Isn't technology great?

Several years ago, I realized that a ritual had crept into my morning hair-combing routine.  This added activity was inconsequential, not contributing in any way to my final appearance, yet morning after morning, I persisted in this needless habit.

It took only a few seconds and eliminating it did not substantially increase my free time each day — I calculated that time I freed up through the elimination of this habit garnered me an extra 30 minutes per year.

Recently, I noticed another time-wasting habit relating to brushing my teeth.  For some reason, I would wet my toothbrush, apply the toothpaste, and then wet the paste, before brushing.  Why?  I don't know.  It's not in the instructions — in fact, the instructions don't even say to use a toothbrush.

I eliminated the initial application of water on the brush with no discernible change in the teeth-cleaning experience.  Removing the second hydration only slightly changed the initial feel of toothpaste in my mouth, but likewise did not detract from the final outcome.

However, this has been a hard habit to break.

First, I would catch myself after it was too late.  Within a week, I would stop myself after turning on the water, but before inserting the toothbrush into the water.  The next phase was catching myself as my hand moved towards the faucet. 

Now after a month of effort, the first application of water has been successfully stopped, but avoiding the second time still requires some effort.

It is well worth it, however, because once I have successfully broken this habit, I will gain an extra two hours of free time a year.

Now, if I could just identify a bigger needless habit, then I would really gain some free time.

Did you know that the three major US stock indices are all positive for the year? 

According to CNNMoney.com, as of last Friday (June 12)

• The DOW ended the week up for the year, albeit slightly, at +.26%
• The S & P 500 has been in positive territory since early May and now stands at a gain of 4.76% for the year
• While the NASDAQ moved to the plus side the beginning of April and is now at a whopping +17:87% year-to-date.

Although there is still a great deal of ground to make up, it is encouraging to see growth for the year from all three.  Investments are beginning to rebound and positive signs abound.

Yet it is hard to pick this up from the mainstream media, which is mired in the swamp of doom and gloom, focused on negativity and pessimism.

As for me, I am full of optimism and expectations.  Will you join me?

I've not yet posted any photos of my lawn this year.  That's because I've had nothing new or significant to share.

My flowering crab apple tree was as beautiful (and fragrant) as ever, but I could have posted last year's picture and no one would have known the difference.  The same goes for the periwinkle, while, as expected, the phlox continues its decline.

I also had my usual springtime dropping of Maple leaves, though thankfully this year was less severe than last.

But here is a new picture (from this year!)  I don't know its official name, but my family calls it "Snow on the Mountain," which is most appropriate, given its white and green variegated leaves.  (My agriculture teacher apparently did not share my appreciation for its beauty, gruffly referring to it as "gout weed.")

Regardless of its label, I really like it.  It looks like this through the spring and most of the summer, though inevitably towards the end of summer the leaves turn brown and it looks half dead — only to revive with water and extra attention.  Each year I endeavor to bypass this "half dead" phase, but so far have not been able to come up with the right combination of moisture and care.

Even so, I am able to enjoy it for several months. 

I pride myself in having the discernment of knowing when to not take shortcuts, those times when doing so could likely end up costing more work or taking more time.  Conversely, I also know which shortcuts are actually worthwhile.  This applies to travel, repairing things, performing work, and so forth.  Although I don't believe in luck, some people seem to have better fortune than others.  If you've seen — and happen to remember — the movie "Just My Luck" you were treated to both extremes of this situation: one person who expected everything to always work out — and it did — and the other who expected that everything would go wrong — and it did.

A few weeks ago, I did an uncharacteristically "low percentage" move, one born out of laziness or haste or a combination thereof, it was a decision with a high likelihood of disaster.

I was hand mowing around my house with the push mower; I neglected to first pick up the hoses.  Upon seeing the first hose, not wanting to stop the mower, I tipped the deck up, slowly and carefully pushing it over the hose.  Everything went as I hoped.  At the back of the house, the process was repeated for the second hose.  This time, it was done a little less carefully and a little quicker — the results were not pleasant, with bits of rubber flying in all directions.  Now I had to stop the mower.

So, for not wanting to take a few seconds to stop the mower and move the hose, I ended up spending about a half an hour, going to the hardware store, buying a replacement fitting, and wrestling it into place.  Now my hose is a few feet shorter as a result.

Haste does indeed make waste.  I hope I learned my lesson.

Over the weekend, the final phase of the United State's conversion to digital TV was completed — but not without some angst from angry viewers.

For my part, it was a non-issue, since I do my TV viewing via satellite.  Even so, I do have an antenna as backup and bought a converter box so that I could experience digital TV via terrestrial broadcast on my aging analog TV.  My early testing proved that I could receive and decode these new signals, so imagine my surprise on the day of the conversion I could not view one local station. 

Based on online comments, many others experienced the same fate.  For me, rescanning the channels did the trick.  Others were not so fortunate, as they lived too far away from the broadcast station, still needed to connect their converters — or hadn't yet bothered to buy it.

Of course, the media was able to find a few malcontents who claimed ignorance of the whole affair or wanted to blame the government for taking away their TV.  I even heard one person demand that the old signals be re-instated. 

A personal side-note is that Friday evening, I lost part of the vertical deflection on my old TV (which is tech talk to say my viewing area shrunk).  Turning the TV off and back on, restored the full display, but it's happened twice since, which means I will soon be buying a new digital TV — and won't need the converter box after all.

Several years ago, I sought to add another product to my publishing business.  I looked at options and considered alternatives.  Two possibilities rose to the top.  I began investigating both, planning to pursue whichever path opened up first.  Instead, they did.  So, I embarked on two nearly simultaneous publication launches: AnswerStat magazine (addressing medical call centers) and Answer Plus Newsletter (for telephone answering services). 

AnswerStat is an advertiser-supported magazine, in which ad revenues cover the production and distribution costs; it is a model in which I take all the risks (I could lose money — and have on a few issues — or realize a profit, which are beginning to occur on a somewhat regular basis).  In contrast, Answer Plus Newsletter was a custom publication in which a sponsor covered all the costs.  In this endeavor, my risks were minimal and a modest profit was ensured.  (AnswerStat is still going strong, but the plug was pulled on Answer Plus after two issues.)

Launching both simultaneously was a confusing challenge.  I was forever getting the two confused, as each had different requirements, goals, and expectations.  This would result in things being overlooked or double-checked.  I asserted that I would never again make the mistake to two simultaneous product launches — it is just too bewildering.

Fast forward seven years and I did it again.  After years of being a "future" project, I recently launched TAS Trader, an e-publication.  (It is laid out like a printed newsletter, but distributed electronically.)  It is an advertiser-supported publication.  Right on its heels was another "someday" project, an e-newsletter, Medical Call Center News.  It is supported by a sponsor.

Although neither is printed and both rely on email for connect with readers, the similarities end there.  Their design is different, their cost structures are different, their distribution is different, the revenue models are different, and their supporting websites are different. 

So, guess what?  It was a confusing challenge.  So much so, that I'll never again launch two products at the same time.  Really.

Many years ago, I worked at a mid-sized company.  It was at a time when alternative long distance carriers could first be considered; I was tasked with investigating options.  A common prospecting method among the providers was cold calling via the phone.  They would share a baseline of general information, followed by the query, "So, about how much do you spend on long distance a month?"

Seeking to have some fun, I would be evasive, saying, "Oh, it's in the twenties."

There would be an awkward moment of silence, before they'd timidly seek clarification.  "Ah, do you mean twenty dollars?"

"No," I would deadpan, "twenty thousand."  At that point, they would hurriedly set up an appointment to meet with me in person.

That was then.  Today is different; my long distance usage is in the twenty-dollar range.  What bugs me is that my bill is substantially higher.  Here's a breakdown:

Long distance:                   $29.31 (it was a high month!)
Reoccurring charges:       $19.95
Other fees/surcharges:    $15.11
TOTAL:                                $65.92

So, my "long distance" bill is only 44% long distance; 56% is for various taxes and surcharges.  Therefore, my 5 cents a minute rate, effectively becomes 11.25 cents.  Even though this expense is a fraction of a percentage of my annual costs, it is one that causes great angst.  For my own piece of mind I must do something about it.  However, my usage is not going to garner me any attention or interest.  I'll be lucky if anyone will even talk to me about it.

I've been having an annoying window pop up on my computer every now then.  Although it takes but a mouse click to close, I do wish I could permanently rid myself of it.

The message is: "Wikia Search: Something went wrong! Take a deep breath and try again."

I've been taking a lot of "deep breaths" lately — not because "something went wrong" (at least not that I can tell) or that I need to "try again," but because I need to close that darn window before I can continue working.

It's been doing it for a couple of months, seemingly starting about the time that Wikia Search reportedly shut down.

When I first encountered the erroneous error message, I Googled it, getting a few matches, but no useful insight.  Another Google search today shed no additional insight into the matter.

My computer is doing some other strange things, too, like the 21 second delay (for which I gratefully discovered a work around solution) and not opening Word documents when I double click on them.

I think the ultimate solution is to buy a new computer or reformat the hard drive of this one — neither of which I want to deal with right now — so I guess I'll just need to "take a deep breath" and close the window — again.

A few months ago, I choose not to renew a tertiary domain name for a website.  One semi-resourceful individual saw that it was now available, researched that I owned a similar one, and offered to procure it for me — not realizing that I was the former owner.  (See "The Difference Between Good and Bad Marketing.")

A few months ago, another enterprising person noticed that a domain name, which was a shorter, more desirable version of one I already had, would soon be available.  For a fee, he offered to obtain it for me.  I never asked how much — I merely registered it myself.  I was grateful for his email, because I really wanted this new address, but wasn't aware it had become available.

Last week, I received an offer for a marketable domain name.  It is somewhat aligned with my business.  If I had it, I would find something useful to do with it, but it does not have enough value (to me) that I would buy it from someone else.  Anyway, the pitch was that he was liquidating his domain names and discovered one that would be perfect for me.  He was willing to sell it for only $600!

(I discovered that he had just bought it the day before.  It would have cost him less than $10 to do so — and he was selling it for $600.  That would be quite a nice profit.)

Whenever a domain name is registered, there is a 5-day grace period, in which you can receive a refund of the registration fee.  I suspect that he may do that.  If so, it will become available again in a couple of days.  If it does, maybe I will register it for the $10 fee.  That would sure beat $600!

Last fall I ordered an inversion table online.  Part of the ordering process was to give them my email address.

Once they had my email address, they did the logical thing and began sending me email messages.  One or two of them were offers for complementary health devises and exercise equipment, but most were for inversion tables.  In case you are wondering what an inversion table is, it is essentially a device that allows you to hang upside down.  That might cause you to wonder why anyone would want two.  It sure makes me wonder.  Maybe I'm missing something.  Perhaps my enjoyment would be doubled if I had two.  Could it be that other purchasers of inversion tables turn around a buy a second one — two weeks later?  I think not.

Apparently, their marketing department wasn't thinking either.  Why else would they insist on trying to sell me something I had already bought from them?

Likely they reasoned that it costs next to nothing to send an email to me — no mater how nonsensical.  After all, I might decide that I need two: one for the basement and a second one for the living room.  Yeah, right!

Their logic is shortsighted, however, because it will cost them something — my business.  You see, in exasperation for their thoughtless barrage of messages, I opted out. 

Now, because of an ill-conceived email strategy, they have forever lost the opportunity to sell me something else.

On Saturday we had an open house for son Dan and new daughter Kelli.  In addition to celebrating their recent nuptials with family and friends, we were also treated to some wedding photos.  Here is the happy couple:

...and my bride with our four kids:Kelli and Dan, flanked by Laura and Chris

Today I heard President Obama say that addressing "cyber security" was a top priority for him.

I heartily agree that cyber security is an issue of paramount importance and urgently needs to be addressed.  I will not disagree that it should be a priority.  But how many other top priorities does President Obama have?

Let's see, there is the economy, the credit crisis, the auto industry, two wars, medical insurance reform, and I am sure a few more.

As I understand the word "top," there can be only one.  So how can more than one thing be a top priority?  Can two things simultaneously be top?  What about seven?  By calling everything a top priority, that really means nothing is a top priority, but instead that there are multiple issues all vying for attention.  That seems like a recipe for accomplishing nothing of substance.

To me, labeling everything a top priority makes as much sense as claiming everyone at your school is above average.  It might sound good, but it is meaningless and accomplishes nothing — other than to impress people who believe everything they hear.

I have been blogging since January 2008 and have made 315 entries to date — no wait, 316.  To organize these entries, I have concocted 30 topic categories, adding each post to at least one category, usually more.  This allows readers interested in the topics of, say, Computers and the Internet to read related posts, while skipping the Family or Movie Review musings.  This entry, for example, will be placed in the category of "Blogging," for which there are now 24 entries.

I have recently begun adding "tags" to words that often find themselves in my posts, but which do not rise to "category" status.  So far, I have six words or themes that I have tagged:

• Google, a company I love; 23 entries.
• Microsoft, a company that I love and love to criticize; 21 entries.  (Five entries are tagged with both Goggle and Microsoft.)
• Netflix, my fav; 13 entries
• USPS, 10 entries (there are 61 posts that use the work "mail," but I've yet to tag them).
• AARP, 9 entries
• NEA, 5 entries.  It is highly likely that all the AARP and NEA posts have been filed in the category of Rant.

Of course, this post will have to be tagged with all six!

If any of these tags interest you, click on the above links and check them out. 

Enjoy!

Earlier this week, I talked about my Netflix reviewer rating and my associated questions of how it was determined.  Aside from my love affair with Netflix, there was a greater purpose in sharing it, namely to pave the way for this post on a parallel business topic, my website search engine rank, aka Search Engine Optimization (SEO).  Since most people find websites via search engines, it is imperative that websites do everything possible to be accepted and loved by these search engines, especially Google, the king of search.

Just as I am unaware of how my Netflix reviewer rating is determined, I am likewise in the dark of how Google (and other lesser search engines) determines their rating for my websites.  I have theories as to what to do — and what to avoid — to improve my standing in the search engine results, but there is no way to verify them.  In fact, I can spend hours tweaking, adjusting, and improving the things I think will help, only to see traffic drop (correspondingly, there is sometimes there is a tangible improvement).  Other times I make little or no changes only to see usage improve.

Of course, there is no way to do a controlled test.  As I am tweaking my site for better results, competing sites are also making changes.  Therefore, I can improve my site in the eyes of the search engines, but if others improve their's more, then my results will actually be worse.  Although this seems like wasted effort, at least it keeps me from falling even further behind.

Another confounding thing is that no one knows for sure what Google really looks for and how they prioritize these parameters.  In fact, it is common for SEO "experts" to disagree on what to do and what to avoid, even to the point of making opposing recommendations.

Lastly, as people discover ways to "trick" search engines into giving better placement than warranted, Google and others correspondingly change their assessments of sites in order to not reward those who employ questionable tactics.  So, for Google, just as I surmised with Netflix, the rules can suddenly change and my ranking will be affected as a result.  Sometimes it improves and other times it doesn't, which can be exciting or disheartening, but that's life.