Public Relations

Survey of Broadcasting: Assignment 1, Question 3: Describe in detail the four “core” departments usually found at most radio stations.

Posted on June 20, 2011. Filed under: Law, Music, News, Public Relations, Radio, Regulations, Technology, Uncategorized | Tags: Commercial Radio, Core Departments, Engineering Department, Operations Department, Programming Department, Radio Stations, Sales Department |

3: Describe in detail the four “core” departments usually found at most radio stations.

http://www.ablongman.com/stovall1e/chap06/radioorgchart.html

The four “core departments” usually found at most radio stations are sales, operations, engineering, and programming.

The sales department led by a sales manager is responsible for the sale of all commercial time to local, regional, and national sales advertisers. Larger stations may have a sales manager for local advertisers and a national sales manager of spot advertising accounts. The sales department usually includes a promotions director and research manager.

The operations department or traffic department led by an operations manager is responsible for placing the advertising on the air in compliance with the contracts executed with advertisers. This can be a complicated and difficult task in that there may be dozens of different contracts each requiring scheduled air time, position and length. Therefore many stations have automated their traffic functions to varying degrees using computer applications and systems.

The engineering department led by the chief engineer is responsible for keeping the station on the air with the best signal possible. The improvement of electronic equipment, competition from other businesses for engineering talent, and relaxed Federal regulations has led to smaller or streamlined engineering departments at most stations. Some stations also employ a part-time consulting engineer to keep the station operating optimally.

The programming department led by the program director is responsible for the audio sound and format of the station including news, music and public affairs coverage. Stations with a news/talk format may have a news director to coordinate news and public affairs coverage. Stations with a music format may have a music director to coordinate the development and implementation of the station’s music format.

The general manager or station manager has overall responsibility for leading the four “core departments” and the day-to-day operation of the radio station. The general manager must hire the department heads and establish their goals and monitor and evaluate their performance. The general manager has overall responsibility for the station’s business performance including profits and losses, business and financial matters, budgeting, and forecasting revenues and expenses. The general manager must maintain the station’s reputation in the community. Finally the general manager must run the station in compliance with all local, county, state and Federal government laws and regulations.

Background Articles and Videos

CBS Tour- On Air at WCBS Radio -Part1

Google Radio Automation Product Tour

Presenter Radio Automation Demo from ENCO Systems

iMediaTouch Radio Automation Broadcast Software by OMT Technologies

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 35, December 1, 2010: The Audacity of Grope: A TSA Exposé–Progressive Pervert Petulent Prevaricating President–Must View Video!

Posted on December 1, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Democratic Party, Digital Communication, Ethical Practices, Ethics, Issues, Law, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Policies, Political Parties, Politics, Print Media, Public Relations, Radio, Recordings, Republican Party, Society, Speech, Television, Web | Tags: Barack Obama, Bill of Rights, Crime, Full Body Scanners, Pat Downs, President Obama, Ron Paul, Security, The Audicity of Grope: TSA Expose, TSA, United States Constitution |

Campaign for Liberty launches a public relations campaign against President Obama’s TSA government interventionism:

“…Got questions about the TSA? This video’s got answers. Jam-packed with all the information you need to get up to speed on the 2010 holiday airport security uproar. Get the inside scoop on full body scanners, radiation health risks, pat-downs, screw-ups, underwear bombers, cavity searches, special interests, government officials, the Constitution (specifically, the 4th Amendment), scanner storage capability, and hear from some of the most engaged minds in the debate; including Congressman Ron Paul…”

Campaign for Liberty Mission Statement

“Our mission is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.”

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/about.php

http://www.youtube.com/user/campaignforliberty

One point that the above video failed to address is the spread of disease as a direct result of the TSA not changing their blue gloves after each pat down.

Instead the TSA screeners use the same pair of blue gloves most of the day.

Imagine going to a doctor or dentist who wore the same blue gloves while examining many patients during the day.

An unintended consequence of the government grope will be the spread of the various influenza (flu) viruses.

The time has come to stop this security theater nonsense and start profiling passengers and targeting individuals that are more likely to be terrorist bombers.

Flawless Airline Security on Israeli Planes

TSA: Enemy of the American People?

Ron Paul: TSA Has Gone too Far

Enough is enough.

Terminate the TSA peepers and pat downs.

President Obama responds:

President Obama explains the new TSA Airport Security Screenings

Wink

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 25, October 9, 2010: Obama Depression: 20 Months Of Unemployment Over 8% For Official U-3 Rate and Over 15% For Total U-6 Rate–Over 26 Million Americans Looking For A Full Time Job and 41.8 Million On Food Stamps!–Followed By 36 More Months Of Over 8% Official Unemployment U-3 Rate and 15% Total Unemployment U-6 Rate!

Posted on October 9, 2010. Filed under: Audio, Communications, Digital Communication, Ethics, Globalization, Issues, Law, Politics, Print Media, Public Relations, Society, Web | Tags: Balanced Budget, Christine Romer, Economic Policy, FairTax, Fiscal Policy, Food Stamps, Full Employment, Keynesian Econmics, Ludwig von Mises, Minimum Hourly Wage, Obama Depression, President Obama, Surplus Budget, Tax Policy, Unemployment |

“Government spending cannot create additional jobs. If the government provides the funds required by taxing the citizens or by borrowing from the public, it abolishes on the one hand as many jobs as it creates on the other.”

“True, governments can reduce the rate of interest in the short run. They can issue additional paper money. They can open the way to credit expansion by the banks. They can thus create an artificial boom and the appearance of prosperity. But such a boom is bound to collapse soon or late and to bring about a depression.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Economy Sheds 95,000 Jobs; 14.8 Million out of Work

RECORD 41.8 MILLION PEOPLE ON FOOD STAMPS 9-15-2010

Sept 2010 Employment Report

U.S. Recovering Jobs But Pace Has Slowed, Analyst Says

Goolsbee Sees Need to Get ‘Job Engine’ Growing Faster: Video

“Traders will look at the U6 unemployment rate…on Friday”

President Obama on September, 2010 Jobs Numbers

Ron Paul: Obama Stimulus Package Will Turn Recession Into Depression

The U.S. jobless ” recovery” continues and is getting worse.

While the official unemployment rate of 9.6% as measured by U-3 did not go up in September, the real total unemployment rate went from 16.7% in August to 17.1% in September 2010.

The official unemployment level is currently at 14,767,000 unemployed Americans and exceeds the 13 million unemployed during the worse year of the Great Depression, 1933.

The total unemployment level calculated as 17.1% of the civilian labor force of about 154,158,000 is over 26 million, twice the number of unemployed during the worse year of the Great Depression, 1933.

The Obama Depression is not over or improving but is in fact getting worse.

The Keynesian economics recipe for economic disaster of more and more stimulus spending, larger and larger budgetary deficits, financed by layer upon layer of government debt has been a big failure.

A failure made even worse by the Federal Reserves’ quantitative easing monetary policy of monetization of the debt by “printing” more and more money in exchange for the Federal Government’s debt.

Neither the fiscal policy of stimulus spending nor the monetary policy of quantitative easing will create more jobs.

Obama”s economic policies only increase the belief among consumers and business owners that the Federal Government is completely out-of-control.

Only when President Obama’s economic policies are reversed and the current regime in Congress and the President are elected out of office will you finally see job creation and low full employment rates of 2%% to 3% This will take not months but at least five years.

Dixion Says Fed Quantitative Easing Won’t Create New Jobs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Olz2h6ehM

The immediate result is the devaluing of the dollar

The Federal Reserves’ policy is a massive tax increase on all Americans as the purchasing power of their money declines daily.

This will only result in higher prices for all imports including gasoline and the costs of all goods and services to the extent they require imported goods and services such as petroleum.

Ron Paul vs. Ben Bernanke

Peter Schiff–Dollar Collaspse–Gold As A Hedge Against The Fed’s Committment To Raise Inflation

Who reappointed The Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke,–President Barack Obama.

Ron Paul : We Can’t Say Cut Spending For Food Stamps But NOT For The Military Industrial Complex!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whfopF8Xj8I

All Labor and Unemployment Statistics Are From

The Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ln

As Of October 2010

The Numbers In Red Are For The Obama Administration

U-3

Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9

2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7

2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0

2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7

2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4

2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9

2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4

2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0

2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 7.4

2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 10.0

2010 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.9 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	4.0	4.1	4.0	3.8	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.1	3.9	3.9	3.9	3.9
2001	4.2	4.2	4.3	4.4	4.3	4.5	4.6	4.9	5.0	5.3	5.5	5.7
2002	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	5.8	5.8	5.8	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	6.0
2003	5.8	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.1	6.3	6.2	6.1	6.1	6.0	5.8	5.7
2004	5.7	5.6	5.8	5.6	5.6	5.6	5.5	5.4	5.4	5.5	5.4	5.4
2005	5.3	5.4	5.2	5.2	5.1	5.0	5.0	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.0	4.9
2006	4.7	4.8	4.7	4.7	4.6	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4
2007	4.6	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4	4.6	4.6	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.7	5.0
2008	5.0	4.8	5.1	5.0	5.4	5.5	5.8	6.1	6.2	6.6	6.9	7.4
2009	7.7	8.2	8.6	8.9	9.4	9.5	9.4	9.7	9.8	10.1	10.0	10.0
2010	9.7	9.7	9.7	9.9	9.7	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.6

U-6

Series Id: LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	7.1	7.2	7.1	6.9	7.1	7.0	7.0	7.1	7.0	6.8	7.1	6.9
2001	7.3	7.4	7.3	7.4	7.5	7.9	7.8	8.1	8.7	9.3	9.4	9.6
2002	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.7	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.7	9.8
2003	10.0	10.2	10.0	10.2	10.1	10.3	10.3	10.1	10.4	10.2	10.0	9.8
2004	9.9	9.7	10.0	9.6	9.6	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.4	9.7	9.4	9.2
2005	9.3	9.3	9.1	8.9	8.9	9.0	8.8	8.9	9.0	8.7	8.7	8.6
2006	8.4	8.4	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.4	8.5	8.4	8.0	8.2	8.1	8.0
2007	8.3	8.1	8.0	8.2	8.2	8.2	8.3	8.5	8.4	8.4	8.5	8.8
2008	9.1	8.9	9.0	9.2	9.7	10.0	10.5	10.9	11.2	11.9	12.8	13.7
2009	14.0	15.0	15.6	15.8	16.4	16.5	16.4	16.8	17.0	17.4	17.2	17.3
2010	16.5	16.8	16.9	17.1	16.6	16.5	16.5	16.7	17.1

Series Id: LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	5708	5858	5733	5481	5758	5651	5747	5853	5625	5534	5639	5634
2001	6023	6089	6141	6271	6226	6484	6583	7042	7142	7694	8003	8258
2002	8182	8215	8304	8599	8399	8393	8390	8304	8251	8307	8520	8640
2003	8520	8618	8588	8842	8957	9266	9011	8896	8921	8732	8576	8317
2004	8370	8167	8491	8170	8212	8286	8136	7990	7927	8061	7932	7934
2005	7784	7980	7737	7672	7651	7524	7406	7345	7553	7453	7566	7279
2006	7059	7185	7075	7122	6977	6998	7154	7097	6853	6728	6883	6784
2007	7085	6898	6725	6845	6765	6966	7113	7096	7200	7273	7284	7696
2008	7628	7435	7793	7631	8397	8560	8895	9509	9569	10172	10617	11400
2009	11919	12714	13310	13816	14518	14721	14534	14993	15159	15612	15340	15267
2010	14837	14871	15005	15260	14973	14623	14599	14860	14767

In order to reduce the U.S. official unemployment rate by .1% in a single month requires the creation of between 250,000 and 300,000 jobs per month depending upon the number of new entrants into the labor market due to population growth and the labor participation rate or those seeking employment.

The labor participation rate goes down as an economy goes into a recession and goes up as the economy grows and prospers. The labor participation rate is currently 64.7%, well below the more normal range of 66% to 67.5% .

A higher labor participation rate means more individuals are actively seeking full-time employment and more jobs need to be created each month to absorb both new entrants and re-entrants into the labor market.

This is the reason why between 250,000 and 300,000 jobs need to be created each month to reduce the unemployment rate just .1%.

Series Id: LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.1	67.1	66.9	66.9	66.9	66.8	66.9	67.0
2001	67.2	67.1	67.2	66.9	66.7	66.7	66.8	66.5	66.8	66.7	66.7	66.7
2002	66.5	66.8	66.6	66.7	66.7	66.6	66.5	66.6	66.7	66.6	66.4	66.3
2003	66.4	66.4	66.3	66.4	66.4	66.5	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	65.9
2004	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	66.0	66.1	66.1	66.0	65.8	65.9	66.0	65.9
2005	65.8	65.9	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0
2006	66.0	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.3	66.4
2007	66.4	66.3	66.3	66.0	66.0	66.0	66.0	65.8	66.0	65.8	66.0	66.0
2008	66.2	66.0	66.1	66.0	66.2	66.1	66.0	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.8	65.8
2009	65.7	65.7	65.6	65.8	65.8	65.7	65.4	65.4	65.1	65.0	64.9	64.6
2010	64.7	64.8	64.9	65.2	65.0	64.7	64.6	64.7	64.7

It takes at between 100,000 and 150,000 jobs to employ new entrants into the labor market mostly high school and college graduates.

There are currently over 1.1 million new entrants into the labor force that have not found their first job.

Series Id: LNS13023569
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level – New Entrants
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Unemployed entrant status: New entrants

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	394	420	429	406	466	427	433	499	415	402	419	490
2001	444	396	378	457	468	467	448	485	473	481	495	515
2002	484	507	538	527	497	549	545	612	536	479	591	535
2003	599	584	630	635	630	661	669	652	686	636	593	693
2004	676	666	631	652	718	649	702	704	695	734	700	702
2005	621	753	712	764	710	650	630	626	607	638	673	633
2006	618	710	635	590	522	644	638	647	612	573	583	588
2007	628	599	614	621	536	634	599	590	668	700	661	688
2008	685	660	705	631	807	771	829	826	811	826	735	820
2009	792	1016	881	919	977	969	994	1096	1134	1114	1270	1270
2010	1235	1238	1197	1231	1206	1140	1188	1259	1187

The unemployment rate for the young, ages 16 to 19, is 26%!

The unemployment rate for the young is currently nearly double the usual unemployment rate for ages 16 to 19 of between 12% and 16% when the economy is growing.

Series Id: LNS14000012
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate – 16-19 yrs.
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 to 19 years

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	12.7	13.8	13.3	12.6	12.8	12.3	13.4	14.0	13.0	12.8	13.0	13.2
2001	13.8	13.7	13.8	13.9	13.4	14.2	14.4	15.6	15.2	16.0	15.9	17.0
2002	16.5	16.0	16.6	16.7	16.6	16.7	16.8	17.0	16.3	15.1	17.1	16.9
2003	17.2	17.2	17.8	17.7	17.9	19.0	18.2	16.6	17.6	17.2	15.7	16.2
2004	17.0	16.5	16.8	16.6	17.1	17.0	17.8	16.7	16.6	17.4	16.4	17.6
2005	16.2	17.5	17.1	17.8	17.8	16.3	16.1	16.1	15.5	16.1	17.0	14.9
2006	15.2	15.3	16.1	14.6	14.0	15.7	15.9	16.1	16.3	15.2	14.9	14.7
2007	14.8	14.9	14.9	15.6	15.9	16.2	15.3	16.0	16.0	15.5	16.2	16.9
2008	17.8	16.5	16.0	15.6	18.9	19.0	20.8	18.9	19.3	20.3	20.3	20.8
2009	20.9	21.8	22.0	21.8	23.2	24.3	24.5	25.7	26.1	27.6	26.8	27.1
2010	26.4	25.0	26.1	25.4	26.4	25.7	26.1	26.3	26.0

Both high school graduates and those who either dropped out or failed to graduate from high school are finding it very difficult to find their first job.

Illegal immigrants, mainly from Mexico and Latin America, of between 10 million to 20 million, has made it even more difficult for young inexperienced American citizens to find entry-level jobs.

Also the Federal minimum hourly wage law prevents many small businesses from hiring young workers.

Good Intentions 2 of 3 Minimum Wage, Licensing, and Labor Laws with Walter Williams

Good Intentions 3 of 3 The Welfare System and Conclusions with Walter Williams

It currently takes between 100,000 and 150,000 new jobs in addition to the 100,000 to 150,000 jobs for new entrants to reduce the unemployment rate by .1%.

The civilian labor force is currently about 155 million.

Series Id: LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status: Civilian labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	142267(1)	142456	142434	142751	142388	142591	142278	142514	142518	142622	142962	143248
2001	143800	143701	143924	143569	143318	143357	143654	143284	143989	144086	144240	144305
2002	143883	144653	144481	144725	144938	144808	144803	145009	145552	145314	145041	145066
2003	145937(1)	146100	146022	146474	146500	147056	146485	146445	146530	146716	147000	146729
2004	146842(1)	146709	146944	146850	147065	147460	147692	147564	147415	147793	148162	148059
2005	148029(1)	148364	148391	148926	149261	149238	149432	149779	149954	150001	150065	150030
2006	150201(1)	150629	150839	150915	151085	151368	151383	151729	151650	152020	152360	152698
2007	153117(1)	152941	153093	152531	152717	153045	153039	152781	153393	153158	153767	153869
2008	154048(1)	153600	153966	153936	154420	154327	154410	154696	154590	154849	154524	154587
2009	154140(1)	154401	154164	154718	154956	154759	154351	154426	153927	153854	153720	153059
2010	153170(1)	153512	153910	154715	154393	153741	153560	154110	154158

Multiply the civilian labor force of about 155 million by .1% and the result is 155,000.

This is approximate number of jobs that need to be created to reduce the unemployment rate by .1 with no growth in the labor force.

When you add in the natural growth of the labor force by new entrants from population growth you arrive at an estimate of between 250,000 to 300,000 new jobs that need to be created each month to reduce the unemployment rate by .1%.

In a robust economic recovery the private sector should be creating 500,000 to 600,000 jobs per month.

Unfortunately, the private business sector and particularly small and medium size businesses, are not creating anywhere near 250,000 to 300,000 per month.

In September the private sector created only a net total of 75,000 new jobs. This is far short of the 250,000 to 300,000 jobs needed to reduce the U-3 official unemployment rate by just .1%.

Even if 250,000 new jobs were being created each month and the unemployment rate declined 1.2% per year and over 3 million jobs were created in a year, it would take over five years to bring the official unemployment rate ( U-3) down to under a 3% rate of unemployment or a near full employment level.

The stimulus package of over $789 billion plus billions in interest payments was supposed to keep the unemployment rate under 8% and not above 8%!

Stimulus II: A Sequel America Can’t Afford

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/white-houses-stimulus-math-doesnt-add-up-100456089.html

The stimulus package has been an abject failure of the Keynesian economists including Romer and Berstein who advised Obama that this was what was needed.

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	136559(1)	136598	136701	137270	136630	136940	136531	136662	136893	137088	137322	137614
2001	137778	137612	137783	137299	137092	136873	137071	136241	136846	136392	136238	136047
2002	135701	136438	136177	136126	136539	136415	136413	136705	137302	137008	136521	136426
2003	137417(1)	137482	137434	137633	137544	137790	137474	137549	137609	137984	138424	138411
2004	138472(1)	138542	138453	138680	138852	139174	139556	139573	139487	139732	140231	140125
2005	140245(1)	140385	140654	141254	141609	141714	142026	142434	142401	142548	142499	142752
2006	143142(1)	143444	143765	143794	144108	144370	144229	144631	144797	145292	145477	145914
2007	146032(1)	146043	146368	145686	145952	146079	145926	145685	146193	145885	146483	146173
2008	146421(1)	146165	146173	146306	146023	145768	145515	145187	145021	144677	143907	143188
2009	142221(1)	141687	140854	140902	140438	140038	139817	139433	138768	138242	138381	137792
2010	138333(1)	138641	138905	139455	139420	139119	138960	139250	139391

President Bush’s Federal income tax rate cuts of 2001 and capital gains and interest rate cuts of 2003 worked and the negative impact on the economy of the September 11, 2001 Islamic Al-Qaeda Jihadist terrorist attack was mostly minimized and avoided.

However, President Bush failed to control Federal Government spending by not vetoing the massive Government spending increases of both the Republican controlled House and Senate in 2005 and 2006 and the Democratic controlled House and Senate in 2007 and 2008.

President Obama followed the lead of President Bush and the Democratic controlled Congress by more than doubling the Federal budget deficits in 2009 and 2010.

Dan Mitchell on the Deficit

Dan Mitchell discusses Reagonomics vs. Obamanomics

The result is the Obama Depression with more than twice the number of Americans looking for a full-time job than the 13 million Americans that were unemployed in March, 1933, the worse month of the Great Depression.

President Obama is following in the footsteps of Presidents Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George W. Bush by pursuing both the expansion of government with huge budgetary deficits (2009 was over $1,400 billion and 2010 is over 1,340 billion) and tax rate increases by letting the Bush tax rate cuts expire, supporting a massive cap-and-trade energy tax and imposing a mandatory health care plan on Americans that they must purchase or pay a tax penalty.

Feldstein Predicts Dollar to Weaken, Boosting Exports: Video

News Update: CBO Deficit estimates

The result is the same–massive unemployment–over 26 million seeking a full-time job and 41.8 million Americans on food stamps.

My recommendation made February 1, 2009 was to first have a six month payroll tax holiday on payroll and capital gains taxes and at the end of the six month period switch from the current Federal income tax system to the FairTax, which is a national sales consumption tax on the sale of all new goods and services.

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009! Revised and Updated

The FairTax would replace all Federal personal and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, capital gains taxes, interest and dividend taxes, alternative minimum taxes, estate and gift taxes.

The FairTax requires the repeal the 16th Amendment that gave the Federal government the power to collect an income tax.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

The FairTax is also progressive for it provides a prebate or check each month to every American to pay the sales tax on necessities of living such as food, clothing, housing, and energy (electricity and gasoline).

Had the FairTax been implemented with a six month payroll and capital gains tax holiday, the unemployment rate would have been significantly below 8% by now and the economy growing at a rate above 5%.

The FairTax: It’s Time

The recommended economic policy of cutting both Federal taxes and Federal Government spending and regulation had been tried and proved successful in the past when the United States entered the roaring twenties:

Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

While the above economic policy recommendations would still work, it will never happen under the existing ruling political class.

Unfortunately, the political ruling class based in Washington, D.C., both Democrats and Republicans, vigorously opposed those proposing the FairTax.

Comprehensive tax reform is opposed by the lobbyist and special interests on K Street in Washington D.C. who benefit from the complicated Federal Income Tax.

Professional politicians of both political parties need the campaign contributions of these special interests and lobbyists to run for re-election.

The real problem is simply too much Federal Government spending.

The high levels of Federal Government spending is what is driving the need for new and higher Federal taxation, every increasing borrowing to finance the deficits, and a reckless expansionary credit and monetary policy.

The solution is to cut Federal government spending by eliminating entire Federal Departments, agencies and programs.

That is why I recommended that Federal Government spending be limited to 80% of FairTax collections with the remaining 20% used to pay down the National Debt and fund entitlement (Social Security and Medicare) unfunded liabilities.

A Common Sense Political Agenda For A New Conservative and Libertarian Party: American Citizens Alliance Party (ACAP)–A CAP On Government Spending, Taxes, Debt and Regulations!

It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes

This solution is anathema to the progressive radical socialist of the Democratic Party led by President Obama.

Instead President Obama went with the failed economic policies of the Keynesian economists who always advocate more and more Federal Government spending, which is precisely what the progressive radical socialists want to impose on the American people.

Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Bigger Gov’t Is Not Stimulus

As a direct result of President Obama and the Democratic Party controlled Congress failure in cutting Federal Government spending, closing permanently many Federal Departments and agencies and ending hundreds of Federal Government programs, while proposing even more and higher taxes, more Americans are now unemployed and seeking full-time employment than any time in the history of the United States.

The number of unemployed are twice that of the Great Depression!

The U-3 official unemployment rate will remain above 8% and the U-6 total unemployment rate will remain above 15% for at least another 36 months.

By then the American people will vote President Obama out of office.

By then the American people will vote those Democratic and Republican Senators and Representatives who failed to institute deep and permanent cuts to the Federal budget, a balanced or surplus budget and the FairTax.

President Obama is a progressive radical socialist ideologue.

Obama wants to grow the size and scope of the Federal Government and use coercion and government intervention in the form of higher taxes and pervasive government regulation to redistribute wealth and limit consumer sovereignty and the liberties of the American people.

Paul Ryan on how to break the capital strike

Krauthammer: “We Are Having A Capital Strike”

President Obama’s economic policies created massive economic uncertainty for consumers and businesses resulting in tens of millions of unemployed and underemployed Americans.

President Obama is a regime that must be changed if there is any hope for the tens of millions of unemployed Americans to find a full-time job.

On November 2, 2010 the American people will vote the Democrats out of office who were responsible for this economic disaster by massive government intervention into the economy and expansion of the size and scope of government.

Most Americans cannot wait to vote President Obama out of office in 2012.

Mr. President, you know you are an economic illiterate.

Do the right thing Mr. President, resign for the good of the country and the American people.

Just think, Mr. President, you will have more time to play golf, smoke and be with your family.

Everbody wins.

Good-Bye and Good Luck.

“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individual’s life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Background Articles and Videos

Christina Romer explains a new report about job creation

The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan

By Christine Romer and Jared Bernstein

January 9, 2009

http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf

Christie Romer: The Only Surefire Way for Policymakers to Substantially Increase Aggregate Demand in the Short Run Is for the Government to Spend More and Tax Less

“…In a report that Jared Bernstein and I issued during the transition, we estimated that by the end of 2010, a stimulus package like the Recovery Act would raise real GDP by about 3 1⁄2 percent and employment by about 31⁄2 million jobs, relative to what otherwise would have occurred. As the Council of Economic Advisers has documented in a series of reports to Congress, there is widespread agreement that the Act is broadly on track to meet these milestones…. What the Act hasn’t done is prevent unemployment from going above 8 percent, something else that Jared and I projected it would do. The reason that prediction was so far off is implicit in much of what I have been saying this afternoon. An estimate of what the economy will look like if a policy is adopted contains two components: a forecast of what would happen in the absence of the policy, and an estimate of the effect of the policy. As I’ve described, our estimates of the impact of the Recovery Act have proven quite accurate. But we, like virtually every other forecaster, failed to anticipate just how violent the recession would be in the absence of policy, and the degree to which the usual relationship between GDP and unemployment would break down.

By February 2009, before the Recovery Act was passed, unemployment was already over 8 percent; and by June, before the Recovery Act could have had much of an impact, it was 9 1⁄2 percent… our projection turned out to be wrong even before the Recovery Act had a chance to get off the ground, which is about as clear-cut evidence as one could imagine that the problem was in our assessment of the baseline, and not in the effects of the Act….

I certainly don’t regret having done the study. During the Transition, the little paper helped to build the case both internally and externally for a stimulus of unprecedented proportions. Only in retrospect does saying that our best guess was that unemployment would rise to 9 1⁄2 percent without aggressive action look rosy. At the time, it was scary as hell. It helped convince both our team and the Congress to go for as big a program as possible. And laying down a firm marker that the legislation had to save or create 3 1⁄2 million jobs helped prevent the package from shrinking greatly during Congressional negotiations….

The thing I do regret is that there is still so much unfinished business. I would give anything if unemployment really were down to 8 percent or lower…. That the economy remains as troubled as it is despite aggressive action reflects the fact that this has not been a normal recession. Just as the downturn was uncharted territory, so is its recovery. Because the recession began with interest rates at low levels, we can’t just have interest rates fall and housing, investment, and other interest-sensitive sectors come roaring back as they typically do in recoveries….”

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/christie-romer-the-only-surefire-way-for-policymakers-to-substantially-increase-aggregate-demand-in-the-short-run-is-for-the.html

Democratic Pollster: GOP Poised to Seize House and Senate

By: David A. Patten

“…Republicans are on the brink of pulling off a landslide “of potentially epic proportions” that would bring them control of both Houses of Congress and a majority of governorships, Democratic pollster and Fox News commentator Douglas Schoen says.

In an exclusive Newsmax interview, Schoen says he now sees several indications that matters are going from bad to worse for Democrats in this election cycle.

He points to a RealClearPolitics.com analysis that now shows Republicans picking up a net gain of nine seats in the Senate, which would deadlock the upper chamber 50 to 50. And polls show several other GOP candidates, including Carly Fiorina in California and Dino Rossi in Washington state, remain within striking distance, he says.

Schoen, a pollster for former President Bill Clinton, is co-author of the new book “Mad as Hell: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System.”
…”

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gop-polls-lead-democrats/2010/10/08/id/373121?s=al&promo_code=AF37-1

Monetization

“…Monetization is the process of converting or establishing something into legal tender. It usually refers to the printing of banknotes by central banks, but things such as gold, diamonds and emeralds, and art can also be monetized. Even intrinsically worthless items can be made into money, as long as they are difficult to make or acquire. Monetization may also refer to exchanging securities for currency, selling a possession, charging for something that used to be free or making money on goods or services that were previously unprofitable. …”

“…Monetizing debtIn many countries the government has assigned exclusive power to issue or print its national currency to independently operated central banks. For example, in the USA the independently owned and operated Federal Reserve banks do this.^[1] Such governments thereby disavow the overly convenient ‘slippery slope’ option of paying their bills by printing new currency. They must instead pay with currency already in circulation, or else finance deficits by issuing new bonds, and selling them to the public or to their central bank so as to acquire the necessary money. For the bonds to end up in the central bank it must conduct an open market purchase. This action increases the monetary base through the money creation process. This process of financing government spending is called monetizing the debt.^[2] Monetizing debt is thus a two step process where the government issues debt to finance its spending and the central bank purchases the debt from the public. The public is left with an increased supply of base money.

Effects on inflation

When government deficits are financed through this method of debt monetization the outcome is an increase in the monetary base, or the money supply. If a budget deficit persists for a substantial period of time then the monetary base will also increase, shifting the aggregate demand curve to the right leading to a rise in the price level.^[3] When governments intentionally do this, they devalue existing stockpiles of wealth of anyone who is holding assets based in that currency. It is in essence a “tax” as the overall value of their assets decrease due to a loss in spending power. This is known as “inflation tax“.

To summarize: a deficit can be the source of sustained inflation only if it is persistent rather than temporary and if the government finances it by creating money (through monetizing the debt), rather than leaving bonds in the hands of the public.^[4]

Examples

Monetizing the debt can be used as a component of quantitative easing strategies, which involve the creation of new currency by the central bank, which may be used to purchase government debt, or can be used in other ways.

However, there can be an insidious effect. As one observer noted:

When governments reach the point where they are borrowing to pay the interest on their borrowing they are coming dangerously close to running a sovereign Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes have a way of ending unhappily. To get out of the Ponzi trap, governments will have to increase tax revenues, or cut spending, or monetize the debt–or most likely do some combination of all three. ^{[5] …”}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetization

Quantitative Easing

“…The term quantitative easing (QE) describes a monetary policy used by central banks to increase the supply of money by increasing the excess reserves of the banking system. This policy is usually invoked when the normal methods to control the money supply have failed, i.e the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero.

A central bank implements QE by first crediting its own account with money it creates ex nihilo (“out of nothing”).^[1] It then purchases financial assets, including government bonds, agency debt, mortgage-backed securities and corporate bonds, from banks and other financial institutions in a process referred to as open market operations. The purchases, by way of account deposits, give banks the excess reserves required for them to create new money, and thus hopefully induce a stimulation of the economy, by the process of deposit multiplication from increased lending in the fractional reserve banking system.

Risks include the policy being more effective than intended, spurring hyperinflation, or the risk of not being effective enough, if banks opt simply to sit on the additional cash in order to increase their capital reserves in a climate of increasing defaults in their present loan portfolio.^[1]

“Quantitative” refers to the fact that a specific quantity of money is being created; “easing” refers to reducing the pressure on banks.^[2] However, another explanation is that the name comes from the Japanese-language expression for “stimulatory monetary policy”, which uses the term “easing”.^[3] Quantitative easing is sometimes colloquially described as “printing money” although in reality the money is simply created by electronically adding a number to an account. Examples of economies where this policy has been used include Japan during the early 2000s, and the United States, the United Kingdom and the Eurozone during the global financial crisis of 2008–the present, since the programme is suitable for economies where the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

Consumer Sovereignty

“…Consumer sovereignty is a term which is used in economics to refer to the rule or sovereignty of consumers in markets as to production of goods. It is the power of consumers to decide what gets produced. People use this term to describe the consumer as the “king,” or ruler, of the market, the one who determines what products will be produced. ^[1] Also, this term denotes the way in which a consumer ideologically chooses to buy a good or service. Furthermore, the term can be used as either a norm (as to what consumers should be permitted) or a description (as to what consumers are permitted).

In unrestricted markets, those with income or wealth are able to use their purchasing power to motivate producers as what to produce (and how much). Customers do not necessarily have to buy and, if dissatisfied, can take their business elsewhere, while the profit-seeking sellers find that they can make the greatest profit by trying to provide the best possible products for the price (or the lowest possible price for a given product). In the language of cliché, “The one with the gold makes the rules.”

To most neoclassical economists, complete consumer sovereignty is an ideal rather than a reality because of the existence—or even the ubiquity—of market failure. Some economists of the Chicago school and the Austrian school see consumer sovereignty as a reality in a free market economy without interference from government or other non-market institutions, or anti-market institutions such as monopolies or cartels. That is, alleged market failures are seen as being a result of non-market forces.

The term “consumer sovereignty” was coined by William Hutt who firstly used it in his 1936 book “Economists and the Public”. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_sovereignty

Background Articles and Videos

Richard Lindzen, Ph.D. Lecture Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria (High Quality Version)

Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (1 of 5)

Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (2 of 5)

Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (3 of 5)

Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (4 of 5)

Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (5 of 5)

The Reset Button

U.S. Gift to Russia Lost in Translation

CO2 Rising (series), Professor Tyler Volk: 1. Where in the world is the CO2 increasing?

CO2 Rising (series), Professor Tyler Volk: 2. Does my exhaled CO2 go into a leaf I can hold?

10:10

“…10:10 is a global warming mitigation campaign calling for a 10% reduction in carbon emissions in 2010. The project aims to demonstrate public support, apply pressure to policymakers to commit to national cuts, and inspire success at the United Nations climate change negotiations.^{[citation needed]}

As of June 2010, 75,000 individuals, businesses, schools and organisations have joined the campaign and pledged to reduce their emissions by 10% in a year.^{[citation needed]}

The campaign was founded as a British campaign in September 2009 by Franny Armstrong, director of The Age of Stupid, with the aim of capturing the public imagination using individual action in a way similar to the Make Poverty History campaign.^[1] In mid-2010 the campaign went global, with campaigns launching in around 12 countries.

In October 2010, the group made headlines when a mini-movie produced for their campaign, entitled No Pressure, caused widespread outrage due to its gruesome content.^[2]^[3] Subsequently, several of 10:10’s major corporate sponsors disassociated themselves from the group and withdrew support.^{[4] …”}

^“…No Pressure

For more details on this topic, see No Pressure (film).

On Friday 1 October 2010, 10:10 released a short film in which schoolchildren and office workers are summarily and gruesomely executed for not pledging a 10% reduction in their carbon emissions to participating employers and educators.^[43] Although originally planned to be shown in cinema and television advertisements, 10:10 removed the film from their website and YouTube later on the same day following negative publicity^[44] and apologised for “miss[ing] the mark”.^[43]

10:10:10

10:10 and 350.org were jointly coordinating “a day of positive action on climate change”, on Sunday 10 October, 2010 (10.10.10). The day had been planned to include a wide range of events in a reported 180 countries, including sumo wrestlers in Japan, over 10,000 schoolchildren planting trees in Croatia and Russia, a telethon on national TV in the Netherlands and the president of the Maldives installing solar panels on his roof.^[43]^[45] However in the wake of the No Pressure controversy, 350.org disassociated themselves from 10:10, strongly condemning the film. 10:10 are no longer involved in the 10:10:10 day of action.^[46]^{[47] …”}

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10:10}

Sony pulls support for 10:10 initiative over contentious promo

“…In an official release on its corporate website, Sony said that it strongly “condemned the release by 10:10, the climate change campaign group, of a video entitled ’No Pressure’ that Sony considers to be ill-conceived and tasteless”.

The move is a blow to the initiative, just five days before its centrepiece day of action on 10 October, dubbed ’10:10:10′. The campaign aim is to cut global carbon emissions by 10% each year from 2010.

The electronics firm said it believed the video risked “undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions.”

The company insisted that the promo was released entirely without its knowledge or involvement, and violated the “thoughtful and collaborative philosophy” that it had consistently supported.

Although Sony said that it recognised that 10:10 had acted quickly to remove the video from its website and had issued a public apology, the company said it had “no other option” other than to condemn the video in “the strongest possible terms” and was “disassociating itself from 10:10 at this time.”

The film appeared on the 10:10 website, but was pulled down “within hours” of its appearance, according to the organisation. …”

http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/1033027/Sony-pulls-support-1010-initiative-contentious-promo/

Age of stupid – greens blow up school kids in ad to sell climate change

Chris Arnold

“…The recent 10:10 climate change campaign (founded by Age of Stupid director Franny Armstrong) has scored an own goal with a disastrous video ‘No Pressure’ created by Richard Curtis (of Blackadder fame) that features exploding school kids.

The humour is puerile and may well appeal to a drunken 19 year old student but as a piece of communications it has got it very wrong. So wrong they have had to withdraw the video following thousands of complaints.

The video (they call it an ad) features a series of patronising people – a teacher and a boss – asking everyone to sign up to 10:10 (you sign up to reduce your carbon emission by 10%). The script quotes “we cut our carbon emissions by 10%, thus keeping the planet safe for everyone,” which is factually rubbish, it’ll take a lot more than 10%. The teacher then asks the kids to volunteer to do something. All but two, Phillip and Tracy, raise their hands. The two who don’t get killed in a sick and disgusting way. She blows them up leaving the other kids covered in burnt flesh and blood.

There are two other scenes featuring X-Files’ Gillian Anderson (she too gets blown up), together with Spurs players – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola.

The message is, “No Pressure celebrates everybody who is actively tackling climate change… by blowing up those who aren’t.”
It will go down as the ultimate in poor and stupid judgment (a lesson to those who try and make their own ads). The green blog, An Englishman’s Castle, called it “an eco-terrorism film”.

This is not only embarrassing for 10:10 but for their supporters, O2, Sony, Eada, National Magazines (Esquire, Cosmoplitan, Bazaar, Company), The Guardian and many other brands and organisations, not to mention many celebs. One critic has published the email address of Sony’s CEO, encouraging people to write direct.

Can’t say I’d want to be part of an organisation that advocates blowing up kids. It comes across as ‘eco-fascism’, a tag that has been put against extremist green groups. …”

“…The 10:10 campaign was founded by Franny Armstrong, director of the climate change film The Age of Stupid. In the film an archivist in the devastated world of 2055, asks the question: “Why didn’t we stop climate change when we still had the chance?” He looks back on footage of real people around the world in the years leading up to 2015 before runaway climate change took place. London is now flooded, Sydney is burning, Las Vegas has been swallowed up by desert, the Amazon rain forest has burnt up, snow has vanished from the Alps and nuclear war has laid waste to India (not sure that’s anything to do with climate change but the politics of war). It’s doom and gloom with no positive message.

The idea for 10:10 came to Franny while walking through Regent’s Park on her way to a debate with UK Climate & Energy Secretary Ed Miliband (now Labour leader and probably keeping as far away from this as possible). With her connections she managed to amass lots of celebrities and get lots of PR.
Now’s she is getting all the wrong PR.
…”

http://community.brandrepublic.com/blogs/arnold_on_ethical_marketing/archive/2010/10/04/age-of-stupid-greens-blow-up-school-kids-in-ad-to-sell-climate-change.aspx

350.org

“…350.org is an international environmental organization,^[1]^[2]^[3] headed by author Bill McKibben,^[4] with the goal of building a global grassroots movement to raise awareness of man-made climate change, to confront climate change denial, and to cut emissions of one of the greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide,^[5] ^[6] in order to slow the rate of global warming, the cause of current climate change. 350.org takes its name from the research of NASA scientist James E. Hansen, who posited in a 2007 paper that 350 parts-per-million (ppm) of CO₂ in the atmosphere is a safe ^[7] upper limit to avoid a climate tipping point.^[8]^[9]^[10]^[11]^[12] The current record level is 392.04 ppm of CO₂, an almost 40-percent increase from the pre-industrial revolution level of 278 ppm.^[13]^[14]^[15] In 1988 the Earth’s atmosphere surpassed the 350 ppm mark,^[16] while global CO₂ emissions per capita rose.^[17]^[18]

The group reports that they organised the world’s “most widespread day of political action” on Saturday October 24, 2009, reporting 5,245 actions in 181 countries.^[19]^[20]^[21]

“…The organization was founded by author Bill McKibben,^[22] an American environmentalist and writer who frequently writes about global warming, alternative energy, and the need for more localised economies. McKibben promotes the organisation, for instance by writing articles about it for many major newspapers and media, such the Los Angeles Times^[23] and The Guardian.^[24]

The organising effort drew its name from climate scientist James Hansen’s contention in winter 2008 that any atmospheric concentration of CO₂ above 350 parts per million was unsafe. James Hansen opined that “if humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO₂ will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that.”^[25]

McKibben’s first started to organize against global warming with a walk across Vermont, his home state. His “Step It Up” campaign in 2007 involved 1,400 demonstrations at famous sites across the United States. McKibben credits these activities with making Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama change their energy policies during the presidential campaign. Later, the meltdown of the polar caps pushed him into starting 350.org, based on Hansen’s 2007 book Climate Code Red.^[26]

Rajendra Pachauri, the U.N.’s “top climate scientist” and leader of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has come out in favor of reducing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide to 350ppm.^[27]^[28]^[29] McKibben called news of Pachauri’s embrace of the 350ppm target “amazing”.^[30] Some media have indicated that Pachauri’s endorsement of the 350ppm target was a victory for 350.org’s activism.^[31]^[32]^[33]

The organisation had a lift in prominence after founder McKibben appeared on The Colbert Report television show on Monday August 17, 2009.^[34]^[35]^[36]

The organisation disseminates its message through social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.^[37]^{[38] …”}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/350.org

Franny Armstrong

“…Franny Armstrong (born 3 February 1972)^[1]^[2] is a British documentary film director working for her own company, Spanner Films, and a former drummer with indie pop group The Band of Holy Joy. She is primarily known for three films: The Age of Stupid, about climate change, McLibel, about the infamous McDonald’s court case and Drowned Out, following the fight against the Narmada Dam Project. Her most recent project is the UK-wide campaign 10:10, which aims to cut 10% of the UK’s emissions during 2010, has received an unwelcome reception from the audience because of propaganda of violence against global warming skeptics. In November 2009, Armstrong was rescued by London mayor Boris Johnson from an assault by a gang of girls in north London.^[3]

“…Armstrong’s first documentary, McLibel (1997, 2005), told the story of the McDonald’s libel trial, the longest-running court action in English history. Filmed over ten years with no commission, no budget and a voluntary crew – including Ken Loach, who directed the courtroom reconstructions – it shot to notoriety when lawyers prevented its broadcast, first at BBC1 and then at Channel 4 in 1997. Eight years later – after the ‘McLibel Two’ had defeated the British government at the European Court of Human Rights – it was finally broadcast on BBC2 at 10.30pm on a Sunday, to an estimated 1 million viewers. It was well received by critics, with Time Out crediting Armstrong with “gusto and wit” in telling a story that “will satisfy both head and heart”.^[5] It was then broadcast on TV in 15 countries – including Australia, Canada and the USA – and released on DVD worldwide. McLibel was released in cinemas and DVD stores in the USA in summer 2005 and this was followed in the UK in 2006. McLibel was nominated for numerous awards, including the Grierson Documentary Award and the British Independent Film Awards. It was recently picked for the British Film Institute’s prestigious series, “Ten Documentaries which Changed the World”.

Armstrong’s second feature documentary, Drowned Out (2002), follows an Indian family who chose to stay at home and drown rather than make way for the Narmada Dam. It also sold around the world, was nominated for Best Documentary at the British Independent Film Awards 2004 and was released theatrically in America and DVD worldwide in 2006.

Without backing from the UK TV industry, Armstrong’s films have been seen by more than 56 million people^{[citation needed]}. She has been working full-time on The Age of Stupid (formerly known as Crude) since December 2004. It’s a film that warns of the catastrophic effects of climate change using a mix of factual documentary and post-apocalyptic fictional styles. It was released in the UK on March 13 2009 and had its green-carpet global premiere on September 21 2009. During the Copenhagen climate change conference in December 2009 it was broadcast on BBC4 in the UK and on TV in seven other countries.

In October 2010, a short film, written by Richard Curtis and Armstrong, entitled No Pressure was released by the 10:10 campaign in Britain to spread awareness of climate change. The video was subsequently taken down from the organization’s website due to very negative reception and offence taken.^[6] However, it is still available in several places, including YouTube. It depicted a series of scenes in which people were asked if they were going to participate in 10:10. Those who indicated they weren’t planning on participating were told “no pressure” and then blown up in a gory explosion at the press of a red button. ^[7] In response to questions about the message of the film, she replied, “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,”^{[8] …”}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franny_Armstrong

Spanner Films

Franny Armstrong

“…In September 2009 Franny founded the 10:10 climate campaign which aims to cut the UK’s carbon emissions by 10% during 2010 and which has amassed huge cross-societal support including Adidas, Microsoft, Spurs FC, the Royal Mail, 75,000 people, 1,500 schools, a third of local councils, the entire UK Government and the Prime Minister. 10:10 launched internationally in March 2010 and, as of July 2010, has autonomous campaigns up and running in 41 countries, where some of the key sign-ups include the French Tennis Open, the city of Oslo and L’oreal. 10:10 estimates that organisations doing 10:10 have so far cut 500,000 tonnes of C02. Franny is a Londoner born and bred. …”

http://www.spannerfilms.net/people/franny_armstrong

Walmart SWOT Analysis

Strengths

World’s number one retailer in terms of sales revenues with over $400 billion in sales revenue in 2009.

An established and trusted retail brand with a reputation for lower price or value, convenience and a wide range of products in one retail store.

Largest private employer and grocery store retailer in the United States.

Recognized core competencies in information technology in support of its logistics and procurement systems.

Grocery items account for about 49% of Walmart sales revenues.

More than 8400 stores including about 800 discount stores, 3,100 combination discount and grocery stores (Wal-Mart Supercenters in the US and ASDA in the UK), and 595 Sam’s Club warehouses.

Reputation for low prices on manufacturer national brand products and Walmart private label brand products.

Over 40% of its sales are from private label brands through contracts with manufacturers.

Offers a wide variety of products in its stores.

World’s largest private brand, Great Value, with over 5,000 items.

Economies of scale in distribution because they can supply a wide range of products to the same customer base.

Walmart International is the fast-growing part of Walmart’s overall operations, with 4,112 stores and more than 680,000 associates in 14 countries outside the continental U.S.

The International division with 25% of sales is growing at a fast pace; it’s the #1 retailer in Canada and Mexico and it has operations in Asia (where it owns a 95% stake in Japanese retailer SEIYU), Europe, and South America.

People are a key resource and asset and Walmart invests time and money training and developing them.

Over 2.1 million employees worldwide and 1.4 million in the United States., the majority of which are full time employees.

One of the largest employers in United States and Canada, and the largest in Mexico.

Walmart Superstores offer twenty-four hour shopping.

Walmart Sam’s Club enable customers to purchase products in bulk at discount low prices

High customer satisfaction.

Family controlled company with Sam Walton heirs owning about 45% of the company.

Weaknesses

A global company with a presence in only fourteen countries worldwide.

Low market share outside of the United States.

Does not specialize in many product sectors and may not have the needed expertise in managing some of these product sectors as do their more focused competitors.

Big size stores may not work well in emerging markets, where customers may prefer small stores located in their communities compared to larger stores that may require travelling long distances outside of their communities.

Opportunities

Walmart currently operates in only 14 countries; and it has great opportunities to expand into other countries as well as grow within the countries they are currently operating in.

Form strategic alliances with other giant retailers in China, Europe and India.

The recession in the United States and the remainder of the world including those in which Walmart operates provides an opportunity for Walmart to switch their customers from manufacturer national brands to their own Walmart private and attract customer who normally do not shop at Walmart.

Acquire other discount retail and grocery stores in other markets for fast entry into other markets abroad.

Acquire manufactures of Walmart’s private store brand products.

Switch customers to higher profit margin Walmart private label brand, Great Value, from lower profit margin manufacturer national brands due to the recession.

Settle sex descrimination law suits that have merit to avoid unnecessary, costly and prolonged litigation, negative publicity and impact on customer and employee base.

Continue and expand successful growth strategy of large supercenters.

Threats

Faces competition from local, regional, national and international business firms.

Top competitors are Carrefour SA, Costco Wholesale Corporation, Kroger, and Target Corporation.

Intense price competition from falling manufacturing costs in lower cost regions due to outsourcing.

Target of lawsuits from litigants who perceive Walmart as a deep pocket financially.

Small companies can compete successfully by distributing specialty products or providing superior customer service

Many competing companies are outsourcing which leads to greater competition on price.

Many small towns do not want Walmarts to establish a store in their community because many small businesses cannot compete on price and subsequently close down once a Walmart store is openned.

Subject to political and foreign exchange currency risks in countries when operating abroad.

Background Information

In grocery sales, Wal-Mart sacks competition

“…While much of retail has experienced sharply declining sales for more than a year, food – especially if perceived as a good value – still brings customers through the door.

“It’s all about foot traffic, and foot traffic is just not happening unless you have the food to draw people in,” said Patricia Edwards, a retail analyst and founder of Storehouse Partners LLC in Seattle.

Wal-Mart gets more than half the grocery dollars spent in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Mississippi and is the top grocer in the other states that border Arkansas, according to Shelby Publishing Co. Inc. of Gainesville, Ga., which tracks the supermarket business.

Globally, Wal-Mart had $401.2 billion in sales for its fiscal year that ended Jan. 31, and grocery items accounted for 49 percent of that figure, according to the company’s annual report. …”

http://wakeupwalmart.com/news/article.html?article=2212

Private label plays off low-key, low-price approach – Wal-Mart, Target marketing strategies

“…Traversing a Wal-Mart store looking for proprietary brands isn’t as straightforward as it might seem. Unlike other discounters and supermarket chains this retailer doesn’t plaster the store name on house brands or make a big deal out of the product line as a point of differentiation. Rather, it simply and unobtrusively offers inexpensive product to its value-conscious customers.

Wal-Mart has long operated its merchandising programs in such a manner. It doesn’t advertise product in the traditional sense. Where other retailers spend hundreds of millions of dollars running Sunday circulars and using co-op advertising money from manufacturers to run product-heavy ads, Wal-Mart uses its every-day-low-pricing (EDLP) strategy to cut out that enormous expense and keep prices on both private-label and national brands as low as possible.

So it stands to reason that it would adopt a similarly low-profile approach to marketing its house brands. All proprietary product is positioned within its respective category based on price.

“Wal-Mart’s strategy is to reinforce their price leadership,” said Sid Doolittle of the consulting firm McMillan/Doolittle. “That’s their main theme; they’ve stuck with it for a long time, and it works. …”

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FNP/is_11_40/ai_75452808/

Private Label Trends

“…Private label describes products manufactured for sale under a specific retailer‘s brand. They are often designed to compete against branded products, offering customers a cheaper alternative to national brands. Though the public generally used to see them as low-cost imitations of branded products, private labels have overcome this reputation and achieved significant growth in recent years. The most commonly known private label goods are the “store brands” sold by food retailers, though this is just one example of many. Department stores, electronics stores, and office supply retailers all offer private label products or services.

Private labels offer several benefits to both retailers and customers, driving the segment’s rising popularity. For retailers, margins on private label goods are an average of 10% higher than those on similar branded products. Customers benefit from private labels’ lower prices, which are often significantly less than those of national brands. This combination, while beneficial to retailers and consumers, can put substantial pressure on the manufacturers of branded goods, who have to compete against their own customers (the retailers) for market share. …”

“…Private label goods are generally much cheaper to produce than branded goods, due to the lack of advertising and marketing expenses. As such, retailers are able to purchase private label goods for much less than they would have to pay for comparable branded products. The cost difference is usually large enough that retailers can offer customers lower prices while still making higher profit margins themselves. Lower prices can be enticing to customers and increase a company’s competitiveness. Small chains have a particular incentive to offer private label goods; they are often unable to match larger retailers’ prices for branded goods, but private label can allow them to price more competitively. …”

http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/Private_Label_Trends

“…Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (formerly branded as Wal-Mart, branded as Walmart since 2008) (NYSE: WMT) is an American public corporation that runs a chain of large discount department stores and a chain of membership required warehouse stores. In 2010 it was the world’s largest public corporation by revenue, according to the Forbes Global 2000 for that year.^[6] The company was founded by Sam Walton in 1962, incorporated on October 31, 1969, and publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange in 1972. Wal-Mart, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas,^[7] is the largest majority private employer^[8] and the largest grocery retailer in the United States. In 2009, it generated 51% of its US$258 billion sales in the U.S. from grocery business.^[9] It also owns and operates the Sam’s Club retail warehouses in North America.

Wal-Mart operates under its own name in the United States, including the 50 states and Puerto Rico. Wal-Mart operates in Mexico as Walmex, in the United Kingdom as Asda (“Asda Wal-Mart” in some branches), in Japan as Seiyu, and in India as Best Price. It has wholly-owned operations in Argentina, Brazil, and Canada. Wal-Mart’s investments outside North America have had mixed results: its operations in the United Kingdom, South America and China are highly successful, while it was forced to pull out of Germany and South Korea when ventures there were unsuccessful. …”

“…In March 2006, Walmart sought to appeal to a more affluent demographic. The company launched a new Supercenter concept in Plano, Texas, intended to compete against stores seen as more upscale and appealing, such as Target.^[35]^[36] The new store has wood floors, wider aisles, a sushi bar, a coffee/sandwich shop with free Wi-Fi Internet access, and more expensive beers, wines, electronics, and other goods. The exterior has a hunter green background behind the Wal-Mart letters, similar to Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets, instead of the blue previously used at its supercenters.

On September 12, 2007, Walmart introduced new advertising with the slogan, “Save Money Live Better,” replacing the “Always Low Prices, Always” slogan, which it had used for the previous 19 years. Global Insight, which conducted the research that supported the ads, found that Walmart’s price level reduction resulted in savings for consumers of $287 billion in 2006, which equated to $957 per person or $2,500 per household (up 7.3% from the 2004 savings estimate of $2,329).^[37]

On June 30, 2008, Walmart unveiled a new company logo, featuring the non-hyphenated name “Walmart” followed by a stylized spark, as it is referred to on store advertisements. The new logo received mixed reviews from some design critics, who question whether the new logo is as bold as competitors such as the Target bullseye or as instantly recognizable as the former company logo, which was used for 18 years.^[38] The new logo made its debut on the company’s walmart.com website on July 1, 2008. The new logo will eventually replace store logos at the company’s US locations throughout the year^{[clarification needed which year]}.^[39] Wal-Mart Canada started to adopt the logo for its stores in early 2009.

On March 20, 2009, Wal-Mart announced that it is paying a combined $933.6 million in bonuses to every full and part time hourly worker of the company. An additional $788.8 million in profit sharing, 401(k) contributions, and hundreds of millions of dollars in merchandise discounts and contributions to the employees’ stock purchase plan is also included in this plan. While the economy at large was in an ongoing recession, the largest retailer in the U.S. reported solid financial figures for the most recent fiscal year (ending January 31, 2009), with $401.2 billion in net sales, a gain of 7.2% from the prior year. Income from continuing operations increased 3% to $13.3 billion, and earnings per share rose 6% to $3.35.^[40] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart

List of Walmart Brands

“…Great Value

Great Value was launched in 1993 and forms the second tier, or national brand equivalent (“NBE”), of Walmart’s grocery branding strategy.

Products offered at Walmart through the Great Value brand are claimed to be as good as national brand offerings, but are typically sold at a lower price because of minimal marketing and advertising expense. In fact, in early 2009, Walmart had over 5,200 testers who failed to prove that the new Great Value revamp was better than the national brand. As a house or generic brand, the Great Value line does not consist of goods produced by Walmart, but is a labeling system for items manufactured and packaged by a number of agricultural and food corporations, such as ConAgra, which, in addition to releasing products under its own brands and for Walmart, also manufactures and brands foodstuffs for a variety of other chain stores.

As Walmart’s most extensively developed retail brand, covering hundreds of household consumable items, the Great Value line includes sliced bread, frozen vegetables, frozen dinners, canned foods, light bulbs, trash bags, and many other traditional grocery store products. The wide range of items marketed under the Great Value banner makes it Walmart’s top-selling retail brand.

The Great Value brand can also be seen in Canada, Mexico, Argentina and Brazil and some Trust Mart stores in Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, China through a partnership with Walmart.

By mid-summer 2009, Walmart had redesigned the Great Value labels to be predominantly white. The new redesign also includes over 80 new items including thin crust pizza, fat free caramel swirl ice cream, strawberry yogurt, organic cage-free eggs, double stuffed sandwich cookies, and teriyaki beef jerky. Walmart changed the formulas for 750 items including: breakfast cereal, cookies, yogurt, laundry detergent, and paper towels. The new brand was tested by over 2,700 people.^[1] Other retailers are following suit with their private label packaging as well.^{[citation needed]}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wal-Mart_brands

Wal-Mart says Castro-Wright leaving his current post

“…Walmart U.S. has lost some higher-income shoppers gained during the recession and is facing stronger competition from rivals including Target Corp. … and Dollar General Corp. …”

“…The chain has been remodeling stores to make it easier and more pleasant to shop. It’s also cut prices on thousands of items and is bringing back some products to its U.S. store shelves after a move to narrow product assortment alienated shoppers who couldn’t find what they wanted — something Castro-Wright described as “self-inflicted pain” earlier this month at the Wal-Mart annual meeting. …”

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wal-marts-promoting-from-within-for-key-us-post-2010-06-29

Wal-Mart plans to widen price gap, eyes more acquisitions

“…Wal-Mart has cut prices on thousands of products — its so-called rollbacks or price cuts for 90 days — in its U.S. namesake stores, and has made similar moves in its overseas chains, such as the U.K.’s Asda, as the retailing behemoth vied with rivals from Target Corp. /quotes/comstock/13*!tgt/quotes/nls/tgt (TGT 52.68, +0.79, +1.52%) to Family Dollar Stores Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!fdo/quotes/nls/fdo (FDO 39.51, +0.04, +0.10%) that also have been sharpening their price message, analysts said. Target’s sales have outpaced that of Wal-Mart.

“In some cases we’ve lost some of the promotional price intensity,” said the company’s U.S. Wal-Mart unit’s chief, Eduardo Castro-Wright. “Competitors in certain segments of the trade have become very price oriented. We’ve responded.”

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wal-mart-to-widen-price-gap-eyes-mobile-potential-2010-06-04

Sex Discrimination Lawsuit Against Wal-Mart Allowed to be a Class Action

“…The world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart, is squarely in the crosshairs of a sex discrimination class action lawsuit that may have far reaching implications on sex-based bias in the workplace. On April 26, 2010, a federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled that the lawsuit against the retail giant may proceed as a class action. Originally filed in 2001 by six female employees, the suit alleges that Wal-Mart systematically discriminated against female employees by denying promotions, paying women less than men and giving women smaller raises.

Prior Sex Discrimination Suits

Wal-Mart has settled scores of sex-discrimination lawsuits in recent years. It recently settled a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) where the Commission alleged that Wal-Mart denied jobs to female applicants at its London, Kentucky distribution center from 1998 to 2005. However, in the present case, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the Plaintiffs sought to certify a much larger class of potential plaintiffs: women who may have worked at any Wal-Mart store in the United States after December 26, 1998. This prospective class would include hourly and salaried workers in 3,400 locations who may have been subject to Wal-Mart’s allegedly discriminatory policies regarding equal pay and promotions …”

http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/press-release/sex-discrimination-lawsuit-against-walmart-allowed-to-be-a-class-action-157766.php