#the bill: episode: principled negotiation

[augustusaugustus]

Ted picspam from "A Nice Line in Plastic", "Principled Negotiation", "Runaway", "Last Night of Freedom" & "Human Resources".

[ckret2]

For those of you that still wanna try to meet my impossibly high standards for some reason, I'm still taking title suggestions but here's the updated criteria:

MANDATORY: must include the word Goldilocks, or a "Goldilocks" pun that's SO OBVIOUS it's nigh impossible to NOT hear it. If you have to stretch to hear it, it fails. If there's an unrelated word inserted between "gold" and "lock," fail.

MANDATORY: The Goldilocks reference must be about the Goldilocks principle, the Goldilocks zone, or something else like that and NOT about Bill or the fairy tale. If it's a Goldilocks & the Three Bears reference, automatic fail. If the word "Goldilocks" is being used to refer to Bill, Bill's appearance, Bill's name, Bill's ANYTHING, automatic fail.

"I don't feel like it should be mandatory. It wouldn't bother me if the title doesn't meet these criteria." It's not your title. Please don't send me asks like that, I didn't put those points up for negotiation.

Has to sound like it's about THIS fic. Think of a random different "human Bill's stuck in Gravity Falls and gets a redemption arc" fic. Could the title describe that fic just as well? It's out. Here's the general themes I've thought of if u wanna muse over them.

Bonus points if it's a funny/punny reference to some other phrase in a way that sounds like it would fit in as a Gravity Falls episode title; double major bonus points if the reference actually fits this fic.

The subjective points that still stand from the first criteria list: interesting enough to intrigue new readers; easy to remember (not too long/complicated); actually sounds like a title.

Short & snappy. If you read the title once, left for an hour, and tried to remember it, would you be likely to remember it word-for-word? Is it built in a way that facilitates being easy to remember (like, built on a common phrase or distinctive words)? Or are there a bunch of little prepositions & phrases that risk getting changed or getting their order swapped or left out?

Gotta be better at meeting these criteria than "Wasting Away Again in the Goldilocks Zone" is.

The rigid criteria list isn't to be a demanding dick; it's because I know y'all are nicely volunteering help and I don't want you to generously spend your time brainstorming helpful suggestions that I already know I wouldn't take. If you read all that and go "dang! I wanted to suggest something but I can't think of anything that fits," 1) i appreciate that you wanted to help and that's okay you're not obligated to send anything; and 2) you and i are in this boat together 🤝

Mainly I've still got my fingers crossed to the last minute that some stranger will come into my inbox like "lo, the gentle hand of the Greek Muse of Cartoon Fanfiction Titles has touched my mind, and like a prophet I pass this message on to you." Otherwise I don't expect much.

[your-ace-cousin-clover]

Different, But Same

[Part 1 of my Tomgreg Analysis Series]

TL;DR - Shiv and Greg tend to mirror each other a long in the sequence of the story especially in regards to Tom. This is interesting as Shiv is Tom's romantic partner which the same relationship is echoed very strongly with Tom and Greg.

One of my most interesting observations in regards to the whole Tom/Shiv and Tom/Greg situation is how Greg and Shiv's narrative arc seem similar in regards to their relationship with Tom. However, because of certain reasons, the relationship that Tom has with Greg is more stronger despite the same narrative followed for Shiv as well.

Also disclaimer : THIS IS TINHATTERY! THIS IS ME THEORISING! YOU CAN ALWAYS DISAGREE / AGREE WITH ME.

I'm just having some fun here.

1. Initial Circumstances of meeting Tom

In S01E01, we see the circumstances in which Tom and Greg meet each other for the first time. Yes, with the volatile reaction that Tom has of "would you kiss me if I asked you? if I told you to?" (That is a whole another topic that I'll later delve into about shame and queerness in Succession) However, but the time Greg dejectedly stands at the door Logan's hospital cabin with uncertainty about his job at Waystar, S01E02, Tom makes an important offer to Greg. He offers to "look after" Greg in his time of need and help him.

Interestingly, later in the series, in an offhand comment, Shiv mentions how she herself was not in a good state of mind or in a stable position of life when she met Tom. [I don't recall the exact episode where this conversation takes place - but I'm pretty sure this happens]

Regardless, in different times of the show, Shiv depends on Tom to help her through stressful circumstances.

Tom is a dependable person for both Shiv and Greg through his emotional support as well as professional support for these people.

2. RECNY BALL Incident

In S01E04, the notable RECNY Ball takes place which is overshadowed by the fact that Tom receives papers about the Cruises Scandal from Bill. There are two people that Tom informs about the papers : his assistant, Greg Hirsch and his wife to be, Siobhan Roy.

This is one of the multiple instances where Greg and Shiv are placed in the same context for Tom.

When Gerri confronts Tom about the holding a press conference. However, (this is the point where the Tomgreg subtext becomes stronger) when Greg defends himself, Tom seems to believe him which ends up casting strong suspicion on Shiv. This is interesting as this takes place, weeks? days? after having met Greg for the first time and despite, fact that Tom is going to be married to Shiv, he doesn't trust her.

Greg's subordinate status to Tom and his disconnect from the Roys (the situation happens to be opposite for Shiv) is what makes Tom believe him in the first place. Tom has never felt secure in his relationship with Shiv because of his perceived inferior status. However, in regards to Greg, he's in a more balanced position (even superior to Greg) which is why he feels strongly about protecting Greg as well as is comfortable in his relation (though he expresses jealousy? at Greg's closeness with Kendall professionally later on).

He assigns the job of burning the papers to Greg which brings the both closer as they have a secret between them. (Even Shiv doesn't know about the papers until their wedding) Greg and Tom can trust each other to some extend because of the Cruises burning incident because if one of them reveals it then the other goes down. (This analysis does not currently take into account Greg revealing the papers at the press conference - by that point he's reached a position where he can reach out for things other than what Tom can offer him)

3. They both betray Tom as well as Logan

Shiv joins Nate professionally which leads her to not only later cheat on Tom despite their ongoing engagement, but it also brings her into conflict with Logan Roy as she decides to align herself with Senator Gil Eavis who is extremely anti-Logan. Her alliance with Nate causes strong jealousy for Tom wherein he asks Shiv about Nate (which also later is apparent with how Tom humiliates him later with the wine).

In a similar vein, Greg encourages Kendall during the night of Shiv's wedding with "things have to change here". And later on, not only aligns himself such strongly with Kendall that prompts Tom to ask him about it during Hungary and says "a girl can start to wonder."

Both of these alliances are detrimental to Logan as they challenge his place in the throne. However, Shiv's alliance with Eavis collapses easily due to difference in views. It would be interesting if the Kenstar Gregco alliance lasts longer due to the consequences that might result if they try to break apart as well as the blood bond which makes the link more stronger.

4. They both negotiate with Gerri using the Cruises Papers

Tracking on the fact that Shiv and Greg are the ones that mainly know about the papers. They leverage this information in a way that benefits them or creates additional favours for them.

This is initially seen when Greg rats out Tom's plan to do a new conference exposing Cruises to Gerri which is how she shuts him down quickly. This gives Greg a favourable opinion from Gerri, a proximity to the power of Waystar and benefits him even though it screws Tom over.

In a similar vein, Shiv does the same thing when she negotiates with Gerri, Logan's spokesperson, during her wedding night to stop the attacks on Eavis. She uses it to benefit the person she is working for.

This is a very small similarity, but is also another way they both mirror each other in the arc of the story.

5. A sense of moral superiority

Again minor point, but interestingly, both Shiv and Greg have a sense of moral superiority over not being as involved in the business and their sense of doing the right thing.

(This may later diminish as both get more and more stuck with the core of the business, but this is at like early S2)

Greg brings it up first when Tom brings him to ATN with his whole speech on "principles". Tom admonishes Greg with "of course, we're trying to do the right thing. We all are, so don't go talking about principles."

A similar thing repeats when Shiv admonishes Tom about Logan's decision to purchase Pierce. She makes a point about how terrible ATN is the fact that she needs to get proper news from a "respectable" source.

Both of them throw Tom's involvement with ATN as well as Waystar by a way of sticking to principles while being incredibly hypocritical themselves.

6. "Open Marriage"

This is self-explanatory for the most part, but at the same time, it's one of the biggest points for this mirror as well as for Tomgreg.

As mentioned before Tom feels a sense of inferiority with Shiv, which is why he is the more meeker one in the relationship. Which makes him accept the "open marriage" idea with Shiv even though he is essentially being cheated on the entire time.

However, in regards to Greg, the same inferiority does not appear. And by the time, the famous "I will not let go of what is mine" scene, Tom and Greg are friends to a bit. They go out for the ortolan scene (which has a separate analysis about physical hunger and queerness as well later - food metaphors are strong in Succession), Greg tells Tom about Shiv's cheating and Tom has brought Greg into ATN.

[These small things cement the relationship between them and show that Tom and Greg enjoy themselves outside the confines of Waystar which Tom and Shiv struggle with as seen in the case of their honeymoon]

However, Greg's use of "open marriage" causes Tom to not only express his anger, but provides a space to express the anger. He publicly declares how upset he feels that Greg wants to leave and interestingly, uses relationship specific terms like "break up" to talk about Greg's proposal. He repeatedly asserts that Greg is "his" and this brings in a context of jealousy with Kendall when Tom questions about Greg spending more time with Kendall later on in Hungary.

7. They both ask favours from Tom which put him in trouble with Logan

In the Hungary episode, both Shiv and Greg ask Tom do certain favours (In case of Shiv, it is for Tom to ask Logan about the Pierce deal and convey everybody's dissatisfaction. And in case of Greg, it is to hide that fact that he met with Pantsil from Logan).

Now, Tom has been clearly established as a strong sycophant in regards to whoever is at the helm of Waystar (conveying Kendall about Ewan coming to the board meeting as well as cheering on Logan when he announces Pierce) so the only way he would take a risk for a person is if he's close to them. This makes sense in case of Shiv as she is his literal wife, however, this comparison is interesting when we think about Greg in this context. Tom goes lengths to protect Greg to the point he is humiliated by the employees and his in-laws only which is huge as throughout the entire series Tom has simply been trying to fit in with the Roys to the point, he wants to change his last name after marriage.

8. Both are put in position where they are can be the successor of the company and in turn, can become Tom's boss

This happens mostly at the end of S2, but, the entire time Shiv is championed as the Successor by Logan Roy himself which makes Tom assume that he will later on succeed her. However, this is turned to the head when Shiv proclaims that she does want to run the company. In doing so, she will become Tom's boss which is disappointing to Tom because, it will only emphasis on his sense of inferiority as well as the fact that he cannot take care of her (because as established before he is the person that cares for people, especially ones that he loves).

A same dynamic emerges as Greg aligns himself with Kendall. This exponentially increases his chances of being the Successor (especially if Kendall drops out somehow either due to drugs or any other circs) which would also untie the two Roys. This would similar draw the same conflict Tom faces with Shiv as the successor.

Therefore, in bringing Shiv and Greg together again and again, I feel like it enhances the romantic subtext between Tom and Greg (as it literally swaps out the man's wife for his lanky assistant) as well as brings out a stronger comparison as Tom and Greg have done things to each other as well as for each other which ties them together more closely than Tom and Shiv.

Just imho.

Tag List ❤️-

{Let me know if you wanna be added or removed}

@feuillytheflorist @finitevariety @dr-pamela-isley

@dawsonandpaceyareinlove @nickwilding @foreverjustvibing @houseocats

[princesssarcastia]

Cassandra Cillian: Hitter

this is titled “you don’t have to be a ghost here amongst the living” because I was going through a F+TM phase when I started writing it.  

remember like, a year and a half ago when I planned out a librarians-leverage fusion (and also a leverage-librarians fusion?) because I do!  And I finished the first bit.  

here’s 3k of not!fic about how Cassandra Cillian starts down the road to being a legend. 

              ________________________________________________________

my first concrete though when I started daydreaming about this was “oh my god Cassandra is the hitter”

no, really

I blame the apple of discord episode. her analysis of force needed to kick ass and take names and initiate a nuclear meltdown makes her perfect.  utterly ruthless, just hiding under a cutesy facade instead of Eliot’s dumb-hick one

with the tumor in her head ticking down, down, down to zero, her self-preservation is pretty low.  not necessarily in a death wish way, not yet.  but when she fights there’s no holding back, and no fear of what the other person can dole out.  what could they possibly do to her that she isn’t already doing to herself?  death looks like Cassandra Cillian staring in the mirror.

I’m willing to negotiate about anything else you find here but this.  in this house we stan Cassandra as the hitter in the leverage fusion au.

all this begs the question, of course: how does sweet cinnamon roll math geek Cassandra Cillian become a mean lean recently reformed killing machine?  and this is where our story begins.

Cassandra Cillian is a teenager who’s just been told she’ll never see the other side of 35.  there’s a tumor sitting in her brain sending her senses haywire, giving her visions that break down every aspect of the world around her to the smallest components.  math isn’t just like breathing, anymore: it’s her heartbeat.  even though its killing her, she can’t help but enjoy it a little. and it’s not just math.  everything around her is worth noticing, studying, learning.  the doctors are calling it hyper-vigilance, like her new fascination with her surroundings is just a way to channel all her rage and grief into something she can control; like since she can't cut her death out of her brain she’s going to make damn sure that nothing else gets to get near her without her consent.

they’re probably right, but she’s not going to admit that. all she knows is that the way her senses are linked to each other and her visions, there’s not a goddamn thing going on around her she doesn’t notice and catalogue immediately.

the next step, of course, is her shitty parents.  when they hear the news it’s like Cassandra’s already dead.  they take away her trophies, all those shiny pieces of proof that she was worth something, that mom and dad were proud of her sometimes, gone.   the pair of them loved their dreams for their daughter more than the person she was, and those dreams had just been crushed.  they pull her out of school, because her visions were “a disruption to the other students”

no one needs the crazy dying chick breaking down in the middle of calculus crying with a nosebleed, apparently.

maybe she could have lived with this.  maybe, in another life, another world, she could have buried all of her hopes and dreams deep inside herself and forgotten about it, until a man and a woman burst into the hospital looking to save her life (oh, the irony). this is not that world.

instead Cassandra gets furious.  

how dare they decide her whole life is over just because this tumor is going to cut it short.  how dare they take away everything they said made her special: her grades, her stem fairs, her college applications. no; no, they don’t get to do this.

so she runs away.  seventeen years old and in the wind.  fine.  if they won’t help her live her life, she’ll do it on her own.

she lands in Boston eventually.  crossing state lines helps confuse jurisdiction over her missing persons case, if her parents even decide to file a police report.  hiding in a larger city decreases her odds of being found, because cities are big places. easy to get lost in, to find a job in, and everyone seems to have a rule about asking questions.

where in Boston, you might ask, does Cassandra end up staying? where does she work?

well, funny story, actually

She ends up working at John McRory’s Place

god this is so long I'm sorry

it turns out mob bars don’t ask too many questions about why a just-18 young woman with no emergency contact needs a job.  Cassandra just gives them her bright, fake smile and says she's applying for classes at the local college and means to pay her own way.  they respect her secrets and her work ethic, and voila! a job busing tables and occasionally manning the bar when the owner has special customers to see to in the back room

her bright red hair and Irish heritage don’t hurt, either

it’s not an Ivy League school, nothing like what she imagined her future would be a year ago, but it’s something, which is more than she’d be getting at home.  all it took was a request for records from her old high school, some placement exams to confirm her genius level intellect, and the college was giving her a spot in their line of incoming freshmen.  

even with merit scholarships, tuition is a bitch to pay for.  it gets worse once she has another attack and needs some of her funds to go to the hospital bills, and the drugs the doctors there prescribe her.

Cassandra expects her boss to kick up a fuss at all that time missed, but he waves her off with a kind smile and says she can take all the time she needs to get back on her feet, because he’s never had someone so smart working for him before (she helps out with the accounts for the bar, sometimes)

one night after she starts back to work, it’s late, and the bar is empty of everyone except the Irish.  they’ve taken over the pub and the territory surrounding it.  Cassandra is cleaning up, closing down the unused tables and being as unnoticeable as she can

because let’s face it, she is not stupid.  by now, she knows exactly what’s going on here.  and maybe before it would have bothered her more, maybe her principles and respect for the rules would have had her out the door.  but she needs this job so she can continue her classes and pay rent on the space above the bar (which she’s getting at a discounted rate), and pay for her pills and the occasional overnight in the hospital.  besides, the owner is kind, even if his friends aren’t quite so nice, and his little girl is adorable.

anyway.  the Irish are here, letting off steam and worried, because their “accountant” just got put in jail.  everyone in the Family is prepared to play patsy, but losing an enforcer is nothing compared to losing the guy who keeps track of their money, their lifeblood.  those people aren't a dime a dozen, and pretty soon the Irish won’t have two nickels to rub together if they don't find someone new fast.

and cassandra just.  pauses.  just for a moment.  glances up to meet old McRory’s eyes behind the bar, just for a minute.  because.... she could do that.  Cassandra started balancing her father’s accounts for him when she was twelve, and they were hardly middle class: the Cillian’s had money in savings, but also tied up in investments and stock, and assets, too.  but that was nothing to her mind.  she could do it in her sleep near the end. hell, she’s been helping John with the bar’s funds for two months now, and not all of their revenue was clean , but she kept her mouth shut then and made the numbers work.

John wasn’t exactly a member of the Family, but he was a, a Friend of the Family.  so when she nods at him, I can do it, I need the money, just give me a chance, he casually picks up a glass to clean and mentions that she’s got a head for numbers, if they’re really that desperate

they are.

they take her to Callaghan, and he might be a little charmed by her bubbly smile and her red hair, but what really gets him is the way it takes her thirty minutes to decipher the codes the old accountant used for the ledgers, balance them out, shift funds between businesses and make sure to account for the statistical probability of amounts of cash-paying customers they can make up for car washes, bars, laundry mats, mattress firms, and movie theaters.  

that’s how she becomes the numbers guy for the Irish mob.  

Cassandra was never going to be Eliot, running away to the military with god in her heart and a flag on her shoulder and becoming disillusioned with doing dirty work for her country.  she needed to get slowly pulled into the criminal underworld.  I figured Irish mob was a good way as any to start, and what better way to pull her into that then math?

she spends some time doing that.  becoming more and more involved.  and she’s cute, like a little puppy, so the others like her.  enough to maybe give her a few self-defense lessons, because this is a dangerous life she’s leading now.

they go...okay??  taking care of her body is one of the first things the doctors recommended to her when she started getting sick, so she’s already in pretty good shape.  It’s just the basics at first; keep your thumb outside your fist, always go for the throat first—Cassandra calculates that three fingers-width above the hollow in a person’s throat would be the best place to strike, because then their voice box gets damaged, too.  

None of the lessons ever go much further than that, because these are brawlers who prefer to use a gun to send a message.  Sometimes the way they move when they show her something tickles the back of her brain, like there’s more to uncover there, but she can’t figure it out until the first time a brawl breaks out in the bar

Two of their patrons start throwing punches right in front of her and suddenly their movements are all angles: she catalogues their weight and height and how drunk they are and how much force they’re putting behind their swings and just…neatly steps out of the way, perfectly avoiding getting elbowed in the face. This…this has never happened before.  But, like everyone always says: there’s math in everything.  Even fighting—especially fighting.

When it looks like the two men are going to start breaking chairs, she hesitates for a moment, but…the knee is a hinge joint.  Thirty pounds of pressure pushing it the wrong way will snap it; twenty-five will seriously damage the attached ligament.  She blinks. Steps up to the closest one.

He’s on the floor before John can make the corner of the bar, screaming his head off, and the other guy is backing away with wide eyes, shocked sober by fear.  Cassandra pulls back, letting her right foot settle behind her and point away from them, and balances on the balls of her feet for a moment.

John gives her a startled look, because she’s never done something like that before. Someone calls the guy’s friends to pull him up off the floor and drive him to the hospital

She grabs a rag to wipe up the mess they made of the counter and thinks.  Because that felt…good.  Really good. Using her hallucinations to dosomething, to affect the real world, gave her a rush of adrenaline and satisfaction.  Not just theory, like in her classes, but real application of the way she sees the world.

Like any good academic, she does her research (in her mind, this is ostensibly still for self-defense—just in case something like that bar fight happens again.  She ignores the giddy little voice in her head talking about how much fun this will be).  Her upper-body strength isn’t great, so something that uses joints and core muscles would be best.  Her size is a disadvantage, too: she can’t afford to go to the ground grappling with someone twice her height and weight.  She’s not looking to compete in a tournament, and she can’t afford to buy any equipment.  The best technique for her will probably be Krav Maga.  (For now, the excited voice in her head whispers)

Her search turns up a little studio on the west side of town that teaches Krav Maga to women for self-defense.  Perfect. The instructor, Miriam Epstein, was a course instructor for the IDF for twenty years before she immigrated to America and got certification from the KMAA.

Cassandra goes to observe a class before she signs up, and the moment she steps through the door her brain is set alight:  everything she sees goes a deep, brilliant hue of scarlet, finding the angles of their feet and arms and their centers of mass based on weight and height; herfoot is seven centimeters too far to the right and that strike would give hermore leverage if she moved three centimeters up from the elbow.  She has to stop for a moment to breathe and process all the information her brain displays in front of her.

That becomes the hardest part: not the constant exhaustion, or the bruises everywhere, or her aching muscles, but the overwhelming flow of information about body movements and the correct place to strike.

She is tired, though; working at the bar takes time, if not mental energy, and her classes take both. Add in balancing the ledgers for Callaghan and now these lessons twice a week, and the exercise she does on her own to keep up, and her schedule is completely full.

The Irish start letting Cassandra layer their funds, obscuring where the extra profits in their businesses came from.  Turns out she’s pretty good at that, too, though it’s not like it’s hard given they own a bank in Boston.  Loans are a great way to integrate funds, and their interest rates are always better than the next three competitors.  She tries not to think about the other differences, how the people she’s working for go to collect that debt.  

Construction is another great way to hide their funds, and from what Cassandra can tell from watching the stock market (which is considerably more than most people) real estate is on the rise.  When she carefully suggests that Callaghan try investing more money in that area, he actually listens to her.  Puts her theories and calculations into practice because he trusts her to be right.  

It feels almost as good as tearing that man’s quadriceps tendon.  Practical applications, she muses.  Sometimes she lets herself wonder how it would feel to take her theories all the way down the rabbit hole

Meanwhile, it only takes her four months to move to P2 in Krav Maga.  The average time spent practicing moves for each level is six months; she’s learning 33% faster than that.  Her muscles are adjusting better than she expected, and her skin stops bruising as easily, but she suspects she’ll always tire quicker than everyone else.

Miriam pulls her aside after class one day and asks why she hesitates so much when they practice moves on each other.  Nothing but the lightest sparring, of course, and nothing dangerous.  But Cassandra can’t turn her brain off, and now that she’s starting to learn the more painful moves, she can’t help but see them every time she stands across from someone.  (thirteen pounds of pressure at 125 degrees from her back to hyperextend her arm; plant your foot six inches from her spine and pull to dislocate her shoulder; 3,300 newtons of pressure delivered at 1.5 seconds would have a 25% chance of cracking her rib and sending a fragment into her lungs.  All this would take less than thirty seconds)

None of this makes it past her lips, but she thinks maybe Miriam can see it in her eyes.  We’re moving on to fighting armed opponents next week, she says, maybe you’ll feel more comfortable with that than basic strikes and take-downs.  She taps the side of her head in farewell and Cassandra tastes copper and sees the spot on her temple where the cranial bone is weakest; a quick jab with the second knuckle of her index finger extended could put her on the ground.  Shaking her head, she dislodges the scarlet diagram and shoves down the curious voice of, but you could do it, you could actually do it.

In another four months she’s at P3, and Callahan is actively seeking out her opinion about investments because she’s been right every time.  

Another four months and she’s almost 20 years old.  She’s almost gotten her degree in mathematics, somehow, even though she can’t qualify as a full-time student.  Part of it is the half-ton of college credit built up during high school, part of it is testing out of a third of their program when they wanted to place her, and the rest is just her ruthless pursuit of academia.  

Her attacks don’t become less frequent, or less powerful, but Cassandra still feels better.  Maybe it’s because she’s actually living her life on her own, even if it isn’t what she thought it would be; even if what she’s doing is wrong.  Because not only is she learning more, but she’s usingit.  She’s using her brain to dothings and affecting the world around her instead of just living in it. No matter what happens, no matter how much she changes in the years to come, she’ll treasure that.

Enter Lamia, stage right

See, Dulaque is Damian Moroe; boogeyman and semi-god of the criminal underworld.  You can’t spend more than six months involved with dirty money without hearing about the man who bankrolls terrorists and buys countries to launder his money through. He’s a legend, untouchable.

Almost as infamous is his right-hand woman, Lamia.  A trained killer with no hint of a past before she showed up as Dulaque’s chief…well, he’s too classy for the word enforcer, and so is she.  But if they were anyone else, that’s what she’d be. As it is, just a whisper of her name will send some grown men running to give up whatever she wants in exchange for safe passage.

And see, Dulaque has caught wind of the irish mob’s sudden financial success and wants to know how it’s happening.  Take advantage of it if it’s luck, invest in it if it’s skill, and perhaps recruit whatever or whoever is responsible into his own enterprise.

Lamia doesn’t always like to trade on her name, though, so she comes to Boston quietly, and investigates how the Irish are doing so well—not just in the American markets anymore

(Callahan called his friends in the old country and told them about the redheaded accountant with a genius-level intellect who could analyze the stock markets to a T; suddenly Cassandra had a whole lot more to balance than a few local business and investments. Suddenly, she’s the lodestone to an entire financial criminal empire that’s only growing.  And that little voice in the back of her head sighs in contentment as her reach extends, her area of effect getting bigger and bigger. Whenever the air in front of her lights up blue and smells like oranges, she smiles a little and hums, because this feels right.  Follow the money and see where it leads, all the way down)

It doesn’t take long before she finds John McRory’s place, where a petite little redhead still waits tables and occasionally mans the bar; locks up more often than not, now, because her place is right upstairs.

There are a couple ways she can do this.  She can go from the top down, approach Callahan and demand to speak with the girl. She can have her brought directly to Dulaque, where he can make an intimidatingly persuasive offer the girl won’t be able to refuse.  Or…

Her eyes are rather striking, in the warm light of the bar.  

After Lamia finds Cassandra Cillian, she spends another week watching her, and the girl is interesting.  Balancing all that money, layering and incorporating it in three different countries and seven different cities, would be too much for any one person.  And yet she seems to slot all that work neatly into her afternoon, after her classes at the local college and before her shift starts at the bar.  What really draws her attention, though, is that little studio she visits twice a week for “defense lessons.”  

Krav Maga is brutal and straightforward, a beautiful Frankenstein of a martial art that takes the easiest parts of a handful of the others and sharpens them into something dangerous.

Lamia sits in on one of the sessions.  The instructor she immediately pegs as former military, that’s a very distinctive stance, but the way the girl holds herself…now that, that’s something to watch out for.

P3 after less than a year of training is impressive, but not unusual enough to matter.  What matters is the way the girl locks her eyes onto the instructor while she demonstrates a move, all cold and calculating; the way her gaze flickers over her sparing partner’s feet, hands, arms, shoulders, hips, like she’s finding every angle and weak spot there is to be found.  

Finally, Lamia smiles as she hesitates just before moving into action.  Oh, that look.  Not fear of her opponent; fear of herself.  And buried beneath it, a bone-deep desire and curiosity. Ah, she thinks.  Gotcha.

Cassandra is smarter than probably everyone Lamia has ever met, so there won’t be any straight-up conning her into what she wants, and that visit to the hospital had been unfortunately enlightening, because threatening probably won’t work either.

Dulaque, she knows, will want the girl’s head for numbers.  And he’ll get it.  But perhaps if Lamia asks very nicely, he’ll let her keep Cassandra to herself for a little bit and show her what she could really be capable of.  A little push, someone to tell her it’s okay to crave that violence, and Lamia can have danger thrumming under her skin right next to those numbers in her brain.

She waits until the class is over, nods to the instructor, and walks up to her.  Cassandra squints at her face for a moment, but it isn’t long before a bright and surprisingly genuine smile breaks out.  “Hi!  You know, you look really familiar.”

Lamia smiles; it’s more of a smirk, really.  Lying is a bad idea, so, “I think you work at that bar I was in the other night.  What was it…”

“McRory’s?”

“Oh, yes, that’s it.  I was kind of surprised to see you here, actually, you don’t really seem the type.”

“Well, knowing how to defend yourself is important!”  God, everything about her is bright and bubbly, isn’t it?  It begs the question how much of that is real, and how much is a front, a persona.

“Anyway.”  Lamia holds out her hand.  “Lamia.”

“Cassandra.”  The girl takes it, and she makes sure to grip her hand warmly.

“Cassandra,” she rubs her thumb over the back of her hand and curls her lips.  When she leans forward, Cassandra does, too.  Neither of them lets go.  “Have a drink with me.” Not a question, not a demand.

Her eyes focus intently on Lamia’s, something like real happiness lingering around her mouth. “Yes.”

And so it goes.

[gettingagriponthings]

Reading Through the First Half of 2018

The reading of books (beyond news and long-form journalism), has become a critical part of my adult life and is integral to the way I order my mind. Reading helps me formulate my opinions, create a sense of solitude, learn specific technical knowledge, and entertain myself. I enjoyed reading as a child and spent more than my fair share of time ripping through Hardy Boys mysteries, getting creeped out by the slimy details of the latest Goosebumps novel, reading YA biographies of so many great Black soldiers, engineers, and thinkers, and soaking in every detail of any book on soccer or drawing I could get my hands on. But my appreciation for reading as a dedicated and intentional practice grew significantly after I graduated from college. I learned that it’s actually not something many adults spend a great deal of time on (Pew Research), and is something that can serve to significantly distinguish and shape an individual. Reading books gives one a chance to form their own mind by directing their thinking, rather than having their brain completely subject to the whims of the loudest noises of the outside world.

In 2014 I worked on the first Congressional campaign for Don Beyer, who is now my representative in the US House (VA-08). In the general election campaign I ended up in the position of Deputy Finance Director, and found myself shut in a room with the candidate for several hours a day making phone calls to ask people for money. I learned many things from this experience, perhaps chief among them was the fact that Don was an incredible reader. He seemed to know at least something about everything, and had read an incredible number of books over the years. He could easily isolate the most important ideas from each book and use them effectively in conversation, while accurately citing the references. And in addition to this great historic recall, he was always reading something new, just about a book a week, and this was while he was running for congress (which, if you didn’t know, is an extraordinarily time-consuming pursuit). This showed me just how much importance he placed on the practice of reading and on the pursuit of new information.

For the last few years I’ve set reading goals for myself at the start of the year, and have recorded my progress on Goodreads with their annual “Reading Challenge” feature. I highly recommend using Goodreads if you enjoy books! For 2018 I set a goal of completing a total of 40 books (35 last year, 25 the year before that, 52 next year!). I’ve kept good pace and have reached the halfway point just before the middle of the year. I wrote a post about my 2017 reading at the end of last year, and was considering doing the same for 2018, but breaking it in half seemed like a much more manageable task. There are many books that I start but never finish, and some really big books that I may break into two or three spurts throughout the year - but here are the 20 books I’ve completed so far in 2018:

Meditations, by Marcus Aurelius - A Christmas gift from my girlfriend, I sought this book out because of the amazing amount of recommendations I’d seen, particularly from people in the technology and finance worlds. An emperor of Rome, Aurelius was an extremely powerful and thoughtful person. This book is essentially a compilation of his journals as emperor and includes his thoughts as a Stoic philosopher, as a leader, and as a man. Highly recommend to anyone looking for some words of wisdom or who has found herself in the midst of a seemingly uncontrollable situation.

“Men seek retreats for themselves, houses in the country, sea-shores, and mountains; and thou too art wont to desire such things very much. But this is altogether a mark of the most common sort of men, for it is in thy power whenever thou shalt choose to retire into thyself. For nowhere either with more quiet or more freedom from trouble does a man retire than into his own soul, particularly when he has within him such thoughts that by looking into them he is immediately in perfect tranquility; and I affirm that tranquility is nothing else than the good ordering of the mind.”

Hedge Funds: An Analytic Perspective, by Andrew Lo

The Underwriting, by Michelle Miller - Not my normal reading fare, but one of my most memorable selections of the year. A totally trashy, salacious novel about the IPO process of a fictional Silicon Valley dating app unicorn written by a Wall Street and Bay area veteran. If you don’t want to take the time to pick up the book then you should check out her infamous blog Why San Francisco Really Is That Bad, which caused a huge stir when she released in anonymously in 2012.

Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, by Roger Fisher & William Ury

Steve Jobs, by Walter Isaacson - A reread. I first read this book when the paperback edition was initially published in 2013.

Principles: Life and Work, by Ray Dalio

Tribe of Mentors, by Tim Ferriss

Charlie Munger: The Complete Investor, by Tren Griffin - Charlie Munger is an irreverent and original thinker, a brilliant investor and businessman, and a voracious reader. While little knows beyond the world of of finance, he is a giant within it. He’s the Vice-Chairman of Berkshire Hathaway. This book distills his investing ethos and describes his famous “mental models” mainly through Mungers own quotations, which are well worth the price of admission.

“You've got to have models in your head. And you've got to array your experience—both vicarious and direct—on this latticework of models. You may have noticed students who just try to remember and pound back what is remembered. Well, they fail in school and in life. You've got to hang experience on a latticework of models in your head.”

The Hard Thing About Hard Things, by Ben Horowitz

Becoming Steve Jobs: The Evolution of a Reckless Upstart into a Visionary Leader, by Brent Schlender and Rick Tetzeli - After I reread the Isaacson, book I was hungry for a bit more information on Jobs, particularly his time in the wilderness with NEXT. I sent a Tweet out communicating as much and immediately received a response from my Jobs crazy colleague who recommended this book and other, and subsequently brought the book into the office for me to borrow. This did not disappoint. It may eclipse, but definitely rivals the Isaacson book as the definitive Jobs biography in my opinion.

Surely You’re Joking Mister Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character, by Richard Feynman - A pretty amusing book by and about the life of an extremely interesting character. Ranges from his experience designing the bomb at Los Alamos to his experience as an amateur bongo player. Highly recommended by a lot of smart people.

Flow, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

eBoys: The First Inside Account of Venture Capitalists at Work, by Randall E. Stross - Not the biggest crowd pleaser on the list, but if you are particularly interested in venture capital, this is a must read. A 2000 business biography of the founding and early days of Benchmark, this book goes in depth on the personalities around the table, the details around their decisions, and even their responses to investments gone bad. An absolute must for any VC junkie.

aol.com, by Kara Swisher - Love Swisher, so when I came across this at a used bookstore, I snapped it up.

Measure What Matters, by John Doerr 

Hackers & Painters: Big Ideas From the Computer Age, by Paul Graham - Paul Graham’s essays, more than the work of any other individual, are responsible for my love of startup culture and tech investing.

Inside Steve’s Brain, by Leander Kahney

American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History, by Chris Kyle - If you’ve seen the Clint Eastwood movie then you should maybe take the time to read the book. It’s relatively short, simply and clearly written, and has next to nothing to do with story of the movie. A lot of really interesting technical information about military practices and weaponry.

Bobby Kennedy: A Raging Spirit, by Chris Matthews - Bobby Kennedy is a personal hero of mine, and I also loved Matthews’ book Hardball, which I was assigned to read in high school, so I knew I had to read this when it was published late last year. An excellent option if you have never read a book on RFK and want to try and get a good overall picture of the man. 50 years on from his death, I imagine there are many people for whom this new book was perfect. I’ve read a number of books on RFK and the Kennedy family and didn’t get much new information from this, but I did still enjoy reading the more personal perspectives and reflections offered by Matthews.

A Sense of Where You Are: Bill Bradley at Princeton, by John McPhee - I listened to an episode of the great podcast The Axe Files that featured Senator Bill Bradley. In the discussion they mention this book. It profiles Bradley when he was still just a college student and basketball player. I knew a little bit about Bradley as he has been a great mentor to my boss, and I was extremely intrigued by the idea of a book written about someone so early in his life. The book is all about basketball and through the sport gives a good bit of insight into the standout student athlete and who he would come to be.

“He went on to say that it is a much simpler shot than it appears to be, and, to illustrate, he tossed a ball over his shoulder and into the basket while he was talking and looking me in the eye. I retrieved the ball and handed it back to him. ‘When you have played basketball for a while, you don’t need to look at the basket when you are in close like this,’ he said, throwing it over his shoulder again and right through the hoop. ‘You develop a sense of where you are.’”

[thebestbusinesspodcast]

More Than Being a Business Owner: The Guide to Entrepreneurship with Carl Taylor

Entrepreneurship is about more than just being a business owner. It involves taking risks and finding potential in unfamiliar industries. The challenge that entrepreneurs face is knowing how to capitalize on opportunities presented by other businesses. 

By the end of this episode, listeners will gain a new perspective on how to thrive in business. Our guest, Carl Taylor, shares the blueprint for his transformation from introverted student to successful business strategist. He talks about the value of buying already existing businesses over starting from scratch. We also discuss common mistakes to avoid, struggles with self-doubt, and resources for aspiring entrepreneurs. Join us on this eye-opening and inspiring journey to reach your dreams.

Episode Highlights

Carl’s Beginnings

Carl was introverted and bullied as a child. He used this as motivation to improve his skills and find something to succeed in.

His grandmother lent him the money he used to start his first unofficial business venture. He learned his first lesson in business from this experience: without customers, you have no business.

Carl was always interested in computers. He learned how to code, which served as the foundation for much of his success. His first real business was doing web design and development. 

After selling his first business, he saw the potential of buying and selling businesses. He has since been sharing this strategy with aspiring entrepreneurs. 

He lives by the Tony Robbins principle of “you meet your musts.” Carl believes in the importance of understanding what motivates you. 

Overcoming Initial Challenges

The fundamentals of being a business owner remain constant: get people interested in your product, convert them into customers, and make sure they keep coming back. It’s only strategies that change, depending on your type of business.

You must believe in your ideas and fight self-doubt. Having the right mindset is crucial.

Having an initial success doesn’t mean you’ll continue to be successful.

Carl has two acronyms for fear: “False Expectations Appearing Real,” and “Finding Excuses And Reasons.”

Starting Your Business The Smart Way

Rather than starting a business from scratch, you can buy an existing one.

Buying an established business saves you the time and effort of building it, finding clients, and setting up systems for it.

If you negotiate properly, you can buy a business for less than the asking price, even with minimal capital.

Personal Development

Read and research on all the great thinkers of your industry.

When you’re stuck, learn something new.

The answer to a mental block is more research.

Avoiding Common Mistakes

When considering buying a business, look beyond your expertise. Don’t limit yourself to what’s familiar to you — look for what you can add value to.

Look beyond your budget. Don’t limit yourself to what you can afford. Remember that you can always negotiate.

Don’t get emotionally connected. Fact check, evaluate the business, and gather information from the business owner.

Don’t act out of desperation. Even when taking risks, make sure they are calculated.

There Are No Shortcuts

No guru has a secret to making money.

All that exists are systems and tools, but your success as a business owner will still require legwork and implementation.

Find out what you have an excess of — time, knowledge, or money — and leverage it to work for you.

Build a team.

Powerful Quotes

“One of the big myths in business is you think just because you’ve been successful once, means you’ll continue to be successful.”

“And that’s who my audience is. They’re the people who, they’re passionate about business, they see that this is how they can change the world. This is how they can achieve their dream.”

“I think when you truly become that serial entrepreneur, it’s no longer ‘I do business.’ It’s like, ‘I am business.’” 

“If I think I can, I can. If I think I can’t, I can’t, because I’ll give up.” 

“Business is a team sport. You know, business is not something you do solo.” 

About Carl

Carl Taylor is an entrepreneur, bestselling author, and business strategist. He was a business owner at 15 years old and has since gone on to buy and sell multiple companies. Carl also teaches aspiring and existing entrepreneurs how to save time, money, and effort by buying, building and selling businesses. He mentors other business owners through his business education company, Business Builders Academy. He also founded Automation Agency, an online marketing agency that helps small business owners implement the latest marketing strategies.

You can connect with Carl through his website, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube. You may also check out Business Builders Academy and Automation Agency. 

Enjoy the Podcast?

If this podcast inspired you to know more about how you can become a successful entrepreneur, then hit subscribe and share it with your friends.

Rate us! We would love to hear from you. Leave us a review and help us reach more people aspiring to become successful entrepreneurs.

For updates and more episodes, visit our website. Subscribe and tune in on Apple Podcast. You can find us on Facebook and Instagram.

P.S.

Do you already have a successful business, meaning you're up, running, and paying your bills with some profit left over?

Are you interested in growing your business, automating/streamlining things, and staying one step ahead of your competition?

Do you want to achieve your goals, get more things done in less time, and double your sales?

📨 If you can answer YES to all three questions, visit: https://www.members.bestbusinesscoach.ca/problems-we-fix/ To see if we can fix what's holding you back.

Check out this episode!

[toshootforthestars]

via Brian Beutler, posted Oct 2020:

In his opinion (on King v Burwell, 2014), Chief Justice John Roberts concluded with a veiled plea to right-wing activists to stop treating the judiciary as a workaround for their political failures. “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” he wrote. “If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.”

That would have been the end of the story but for some extraordinary luck and the help of FBI Director James Comey.

When Republicans won the presidency and concurrent congressional majorities in 2016, despite losing the popular vote, it breathed new life into their legislative and judicial schemes to abolish the ACA. They first heeded Roberts’s advice and sought to repeal the ACA by statute, but failed to muster the votes they needed to pass new legislation. Somewhere along the way, Obamacare had become popular. Bruised, Republicans turned to their other driving policy fixation—regressive tax cuts—but did so in a way that fueled yet a third legal challenge to the ACA.

In the years since the Trump tax cuts passed, this pending lawsuit has loomed in the background like a theatrical prop, its significance misunderstood as a mere symbol of frustrated Republican ambitions. The challenge presupposes that, in voting for the tax-cut bill, Republicans in Congress secretly also voted to eliminate the ACA’s constitutional underpinnings, making it ripe for the Court to nullify. One of the provisions of the Trump tax cuts zeroed out the tax penalty Democrats established to enforce the ACA’s individual mandate. In 2012, Roberts had agreed that the mandate only works as a tax. Without a tax penalty, they now argue, the mandate becomes a plain command. That makes the provision unconstitutional, according to this suit, and therefore the Court should eliminate the entire health care law.

The argument’s obvious opportunism, and Roberts’ enduring distinction as the Court’s pivotal vote, led most political elites to dismiss the legal threat—after all, even with the retirement of Anthony Kennedy and the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh there remained five votes to uphold the ACA.

But nothing is written. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in September, just weeks before the November 10 oral arguments in this long-shot ACA case.

Against Ginsburg’s dying wishes, Senate Republicans quickly made clear they intend to fill the vacancy before the election. President Trump followed suit by nominating one of the most openly anti-ACA judges in the country, Amy Coney Barrett, to take over Ginsburg’s seat.

[emphasis mine]

He openly mused that by confirming her as quickly as possible, she would be in place not just to strike down the ACA, but possibly to install him for a second term in office against the will of the public.

In anticipation of a coming defeat, Republicans at all levels of government have taken extraordinary steps to encumber emerging Democratic majorities. This has included efforts to reduce Democratic electoral margins by challenging ballots and making it harder to vote. At the federal level, Trump’s administration has cut the Census count short, so that he can certify a congressional reapportionment that omits millions of Americans.

The GOP has also deprived the public of relief from the Trump-coronavirus recession, which will saddle the incoming government with an economic emergency.

But Barrett is the crown jewel, the missing piece that Republicans believe will allow them to dominate national policy making without requiring them to adopt an agenda that can actually win popular majorities.

Barrett embodies the Republican dream of imposing conservatism on the masses without ever having to take difficult votes or admit to the right’s true beliefs.

She also represents what Republicans have been seeking in the courts since 2010: the power to destroy Obamacare without first receiving permission from the public, then pretending it wasn’t their doing. Thus the absurd spectacle of Senate Republicans distributing talking points to downplay the threat Barrett poses to health care, on the grounds that their own lawsuit is “ridiculous” and unlikely to succeed.

Republicans now head into the election appealing to voters with three deceptions: That they support the pre-existing conditions protections they’ve asked the Supreme Court to annul (in a lawsuit they apparently agree is frivolous); that their zeal to replace Ginsburg in the midst of an election they’re poised to lose has nothing to do with health care; and that any attempt by the Democratic Party to undo the GOP’s multifaceted theft of the courts would constitute an unacceptable breach of the norms they’ve spent five years gleefully sundering.

As the leader of the Democratic Party, Joe Biden awoke late to the nature of this opposition, and remains of two minds about it. He has adopted strategically wise negotiating positions on the kinds of reforms that would bring American citizens greater political equality, and force Republicans to compete for votes, rather than suppress them. At the same time, he remains committed, at least in public, to the view that Republicans can be persuaded to be loyal opponents. “What I learned a long time ago is that it’s always appropriate to question another man or woman’s judgment,” he said at a recent town hall event. “It’s never appropriate to question their motive.” Before Donald Trump’s presidency, this kind of boilerplate was bipartisan, the sort of thing even the most strident members of both parties repeated robotically to convey a largeness of spirit. But what if it’s wrong?

The Republican Party’s core rottenness��its dishonesty, corruption, pettiness, racism—is the defining political fact of our time.

Whatever we say about it, confronting all of us in the weeks and months ahead is the more important question of what we do about it. What do the rest of us—most importantly elected Democrats, but also journalists, political elites, and regular citizens—need to change about public life to account for the fact that one of the two major parties has embraced bad faith as an organizing principle?

As I sat down to write, I found myself daunted by the challenge of choosing a single episode to exemplify this scourge of right-wing nihilism.

Was it the time Republicans fanned conspiracy theories and otherwise exploited the 2012 deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, for political gain, only to completely abandon any pretense of caring once they won an election, then shrug off the preventable deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans on their own watch? Is it a greater irony that the very conservatives who now ask seniors to sacrifice their lives for the greater good of perpetual Trumpian rule once embraced the death-panels smear, or that they refer to themselves as “pro-life”? What about the fact that the GOP ran an entire campaign against the supposedly disqualifying, even felonious, email practices of a Democratic presidential candidate only to turn around and conduct foreign affairs over WhatsApp and dole out state secrets like candy? Is that worse than the fact that Republicans hit the fainting couches when a sitting attorney general and former president exchanged pleasantries on a tarmac, then cheered on Trump as he enlists all of the security services in his re-election campaign, and complained to reporters that Trump’s attorney general is screwing him over by not baselessly charging Democrats with crimes?

As a writer this problem presents itself as an embarrassment of riches, but as an American it’s really just an embarrassment.

Some amount of lying, and even more hypocrisy, is inevitable in politics. The Democratic Party isn’t immune. But it would be a mistake to confuse the acts of bad faith that have saturated Republican conduct for garden-variety hypocrisy or lying.

These contradictions don’t point to a lack of self-awareness or passing acts of shame-faced expediency. Republicans and professional conservatives revel in double standards because by embracing double standards they claim power over their opponents.

The Republicans have become a party that celebrates rulebreaking, because they have come to see rulebreaking as a show of strength. Their moral compass, inverted by their single-minded pursuit of self-interest, now points south.

[lahore2toronto]

Quaid-e-Azam with Master Tara Singh & Khizar Hayat Tiwana Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948) was undoubtedly a fascinating, striking and remarkable personality. Possessed of excellent qualities of pen and mind, he played a significant role in changing the course of history and destinies of men in South Asia. A born leader of men, an experienced politician, a dynamic parliamentarian and a far-sighted statesman, he valiantly fought against the British imperialism and Hindu chauvinism in India and single-handedly won the battle of Pakistan. More strikingly, the Quaid was not only a great defender of the cause of Pakistan, he equally struggled to safeguard the interest of all minority communities in India, irrespective of race, religion and colour. A moderate leader, he stood for a just and honourable treatment of them. Belonging himself to a minority nation, the Indian Muslims, he well understood the minority peoples. At the same time, he fully realized the dominating behaviour and mentality of majority people, the Hindus. A far-sighted politician, he did comprehend the future designs of Hindu majority raj in India. Anyway, the Quaid always remained anxious about the future of minorities in undivided India. “To live and let live” was the basic principle of his political philosophy. To support the cause of any community was an article of faith with him. He often sympathized the grievances of scheduled castes and frequently advocated the cause of Sikhs. Sikhs, the followers of Guru Nanak (1469-1538) emerged as a simple, rather saintly sect in the Punjab during the early period of Great Mughuls (1526-1707). The early Great Mughal rulers particularly Akbar (1556-1605), had immense regard of them and their religion, and helped them in their rise and growth in one way or the other. But with the passage of time, the Sikhs forgetting their founder’s simple teachings of love, toleration, fraternity and oneness of God became a militant sect subsequently having frequent military conflicts with the Mughal rulers. These conflicts were mainly the result of misunderstandings mostly created by the Hindus, between the Sikhs and the Mughal rulers. In fact, the Sikhs, though considered a martial community, are basically a simple people. They hardly distinguish their friends from their foes. Their characteristic implicit and inherent shortcoming of misjudging men and matters had often been exploited by the Hindus against the Mughal rulers in particular and the Muslim community in general. No wonder, the relations between the Sikhs and the Muslims almost remained strained throughout their co-existence in undivided India. Despite the strained rather hostile background of Sikh-Muslim relations the Quaid, throughout his political career, remained moderate and sympathetic towards the Sikhs. He never hesitated to assist them in any genuine struggle to vindicate their rights as is evident from religio-political developments of the modern Sikh history. For instance, the Jaito firing case (February 21, 1924) was a tragic event in the history of the Sikhs. A Jatha of 500 Akali Sikhs clashed with the police, which resulted in considerable loss of life.” The shooting aroused sympathy for the Akali cause throughout India.” On February 27, 1924, 47 members of the Central Legislative Assembly moved an adjournment to discuss the Jaito firing. Strikingly, the Quaid was among the movers. A more striking event of the mid-twenties was the enactment of the Gurdwara Act by the Punjab Legislative Council. It provided for the transfer of possession, control, management and internal administration of the Sikh gurdwaras and shrines from individuals (Mahants) to the Sikh community. A supplementary bill to the Gurdwara Act was moved in the Central Legislative Assembly by Alexander Muddiman, then the Law Member, to provide for a number of items that the Punjab Legislative Council was not competent to enact. On this occasion (September 1, 1925), Quaid-i-Azam took active part in the discussions. Supporting the Bill, he categorically remarked, “I am sure the House approves of this Bill…. there is nothing against it and we congratulate the Government upon having brought about this settlement and we willingly approve of this Bill…we rejoice that this great problem which affected the Punjab has been solved. During the Gurdwara agitation, under the impact of which, the Gurdwara Act was made, many Sikh agitators had been arrested and made prisoners. Now that the Gurdwara question had been solved amicably, the Akali leaders demanded unconditional release of the Sikh prisoners. The Government was ready to accept the demand but conditionally. It insisted that the prisoners who had been convicted of serious violence of law and order would not be released. But the Quaid, continuing his speech on the introduction of the said Gurdwara Bill, vehemently urged upon the Government to release all the Sikh prisoners unconditionally. Strongly appealing and supporting the Akali leaders’ demand in this matter, the Quaid spoke thus “Sir, I appeal to the Honourable the Home Member [Muddiman], I appeal to the Government of the Punjab, and I appeal to the Government of India to consider whether they think that, in view of the position taken up by the Akali leaders and in view of the position taken up by the entire Sikh community with regard to … Gurdwara Act, there is not the slightest apprehension that any of these men who are now in prison are likely to oppose this Act or likely to resort to any violence or force and destroy the effect of this Act.” Cogently advocating the cause of the Sikh prisoners, he remarked. “Well, personally I am convinced that none of them will resort to such a position or such an action. Thus, may I appeal to Government not to insist upon this condition? I do expect on this occasion, the Honourable the Home Member to give some expression of opinion in order to meet the situation it can be considered to meet – I do not suggest for a single moment. Sir, that it is intention of the Government –that Government desire to humiliate the Sikh leaders. I hope that the words of His Excellency Lord Reading (G.G.) which were uttered in the House in his address to the Members of the Legislature recently will be remembered, and if you really wish to give effect to those expressions and those desires, then I appeal to you not to insist upon this condition.” Likewise, we find him in February, 1927, asking the government about steps to make up the paucity of Sikh representation in services. He was really fighting for every genuine cause of Sikhs. The Communal Award of 1932, a landmark in the history of minority communities in India, gave special weightage to the Sikhs in the Punjab, though at the cost of the Muslims. The Award was mainly the result of the deliberations of the Round Table Conference (1930-32). At these conferences, the Quaid acted as a great champion of the cause of the minorities. He was solely responsible for getting the Communal Award approved by the Legislative Assembly, otherwise, the Congress had vehemently opposed it. The Sikhs had themselves played a negative role during the Round Table Conferences. Their delegates Ujjal Singh (b.1885) and Sampuran Singh had strongly opposed the Muslim demands, particularly that of the separate electorates. Instead, they unequivocally stood for joint electorates. So much so that they had in sheer retaliation of Muslim demands put forward a demand for partition of the Punjab according to their own wishes. At the same time, Master Tara Singh (1885-1967), then a rising leader of the Sikhs, had publicly. stressed this demand in India. But the Sikh demands received scant consideration. Nevertheless, whatever they received through Communal Award, they received mainly because of the efforts of the Quaid. Next came the famous episode of Masjid-i-Shaheed Ganj (1935-36) when the Quaid played the role of an impartial mediator between the Sikhs and the Muslims. The Masjid originally belonged to the Muslims. But during their political domination in the Punjab, the Sikhs had illegally occupied it. Consequently, in mid-thirties the possession was disputed by both communities. As a result, communal frenzy rose high. The whole of the Punjab appeared to be in the grip of imminent danger of communal riots. But thanks to the Quaid's wisdom and mediation, the situation was controlled. Fortunately, his help was sought in the matter by both sides in time. He came to Lahore in February, 1935, and stayed there for a number of days. He met the provincial authorities, negotiated with Punjab Muslim leaders and met their Sikh counterparts. The Sikhs were really impressed by his unbiased mediation in the dispute. He was warmly received and garlanded by them. He addressed their meetings. Particularly, he addressed the meeting arranged by Sikh Students Union of Dyal Singh College, in which the Quaid was greatly admired for his services. The Quaid showed more concern to improve Sikh-Muslim relations during the struggle for Pakistan (1940-47). The Pakistan Resolution (March, 1940), a great landmark in modern history of South Asia, envisaged Muslim domination in the Punjab as being the major Muslim majority province of would-be Pakistan. But Punjab had also exceptional significance for the Sikhs. It was the birth-place of their faith and community, major abode of their culture and society, main land of their past traditions and future dreams. Despite the fact, the Sikhs were politically in a weaker position, they were only 12-13 percent of the whole population of the province. Under democratic principle of majority rule on the basis of which the Pakistan Resolution was adopted, future seemed gloomy to the Sikhs. Hence they were naturally perturbed over the adoption of the Pakistan Resolution. The Quaid fully realised their anxiety. He assured them that they had nothing to fear. In the course of his presidential address he delivered on the occasion of the adoption of the Pakistan Resolution, the Quaid particularly spoke about the apprehensions created among the Sikhs by the Resolution. He said, "I have had an admiration and respect for the Sikh community and I want my Sikh friends to thoroughly study the constitutional problem of India as it stands today. I am sure that they would be much better in the North-West Muslim zone than they can ever possibly be in a united India or under one Central Government. For under one Central Government their voice would be negligible. The Punjab in any case would be autonomous sovereign unit. And, after all they have to live in the Punjab. It is obvious that whereas in a united India, they would be mere nobodies, in the Muslim homelands constituted in the western zone of the federated autonomous states, including the autonomous sovereign state of the Punjab, the Sikh would always occupy an honoured place and would play an effective and influential role". The Quaid continued to try his best to create mutual confidence between the two communities. But the Sikhs proved irreconcilable. They played in the hands of the Hindus and the British, who instigated them to put forward a parallel demand for a separate Sikh state only to thwart the Pakistan demand, when the fact is that the Sikh leadership themselves considered it as "impossible demand" and had rejected it. Ujjal Sing and Giani Kartar Sing (b.1905) once said explicitly that the "Azad Punjab" or the "Sikh State Scheme" was only a counterblast to Pakistan. Otherwise the Sikh leaders were not sincere in their demand for a separate Sikh State. The Sikh historian, Khushwant Singh, himself remarks, "Sikh leaders did not press the case for a Sikh state with sincerity. No one took their line of approach seriously'. While speaking with reference to the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946), over which the Sikhs were seriously perturbed, Khushwant Singh points out more clearly the absurdity of the Sikh demand, "The way the Sikh spokesmen", says he, "worded their demand for a Sikh state-not as something inherently desired, but simply as a point in an argument against Pakistan ____ robbed the suggestion of any chance of serious consideration. As a result, the Cabinet Mission took no notice of Sikhistan, Azad Punjab or Khalistan". The Sikh delegation interviewed by the Cabinet Mission was only serious and united in its opposition to Pakistan which continued to be augmented day by day. The fact is that the more Pakistan demand attained momentum the more the Sikhs became furious and violent. They made every possible effort to frustrate it. They considerably harmed the cause of Pakistan. It is asserted by writers including Khushwant Sing, Penderel Moon, Michael Edwardes, Ian Stephens and Kirpal Sing that Muslim League was only responsible for the increasing Sikh opposition to Pakistan demand. They assert that the League leadership in pre-independence days made no sincere effort to win over the favour of the Sikhs towards Pakistan scheme. This is absolutely a wrong thesis. The League leaders, particularly the Quaid made every possible effort to win the favour of the Sikhs and assured them of their rights. "Jinnah had time and again", as writes Ch. Muhammed Ali “assured the Sikhs that their rights would be fully safeguarded in Pakistan.” Speaking in the same context, Jamil-ud-Din Ahmad says, "Not once but on several occasions the Quaid-i-Azam made gestures to the Sikh community which, however, were not reciprocated". This was very much evident from his speeches and meetings with the Sikh leaders. In a speech at Jullundhur on November 15, 1942, Quaid-i-Azam spoke on the Sikh-Muslim question, remarking, "Since I am on the Punjab soil, I should like to say that the question between the Hindus and Muslims is an all India question and the question between the Sikhs and the Muslims is that of Pakistan and, for all practical purposes, it is a question between the Sikhs and the Muslims in the Punjab". He continued, "If our Sikh friends wish, and we wish, that there should be understanding and settlement between them and us, then I tell them. `Let us not talk at each other but let us talk to each other'. We have no design on our Sikh friends. I only appeal to them to free themselves from extraneous influences, meet us and I am confident that we shall come to a settlement which shall reasonably satisfy our Sikh friends". Similarly, while explaining the Pakistan question to some Sikh students on March 24, 1944, the Quaid declared, "I am of opinion that every community is entitled to the right of self-determination and I do not want to deny this right to the Sikhs. But you must send me some scheme showing that the Sikhs are in majority in such and such contiguous territory". He further declared that the League would certainly concede that right. But the Sikhs never responded positively. On the contrary they frequently accused the Quaid of hatred for the Sikhs. They charged that the Quaid considered them a sub-national group. But the Quaid always politely clarified his position. Rebutting the allegation of a sub-national group, in the course of a speech at the press conference in Lahore on August 5, 1944, he remarked, "It has been brought to my notice that the Sikhs think that I have described them as a subnational group, and they feel hurt. This is only a constitutional phrase, which means people belonging to a nation who are scattered all over a given territory or even islands, such as the Muslims are in the minority provinces, and at the time I used the expression sub-national group', I made it quite clear that so are the Muslims in certain provinces". He added "I think it was clear at the time I made that speech, and since this question has been asked, I again make it clear, if possible, more clear. Sub-national group does not mean that the Sikhs are not a nation. I do not dispute that the Sikhs are a nation. The recognised leaders of the Sikhs of their authorised organisation are welcome to send their proposals to me, if they like. They should give us their considered demand now and forget the past. So far as the Muslim League is concerned, we are ready and willing to meet them in every way". He further remarked "We want to give the minorities such a deal that afterwards they may not feel that they have been taken in, but that they should be happy. This is the spirit in which I want to approach the whole problem'. The fact is that the Quaid during the crucial moments of the struggle for Pakistan made every possible effort to placate the Sikhs and accommodate. He frequently met their top-class leaders and held negotiations with them, seeking an amicable settlement to avert the imminent partition of the Punjab. He held two settlement talks with Yadvendar Singh (1913-1974), Maharaja of Patiala, one of the greatest pillars of Sikh politics. The first meeting between the two was held on April 2, 1946, at the residence of Teja Singh, a retired chief engineer who had served as a Minister in Jaipur and Patiala states. The second meeting was arranged, a year later in early May, 1947 by Mountbatten (1901-1979), the last Viceroy of India. Two more meetings are said to have been held after the second meeting, the one at Quaid's residence at 10 Aurangzeb Road, and the other at the Imperial Hotel, New Delhi. The details of these meetings are hardly available. But the meeting which took place at the Quaid's residence at Delhi, has, however, beer mentioned by K.H. Khurshid, his private secretary, somewhat elaborately. According to him Maharaja Patiala, Yadvendar Singh, a swarthy, tall, nearly 61/2 ft, handsome young man, arrived at 10 Aurangzeb Road to keep his appointment with the Quaid. The 3rd June Plan had been announced. The Muslim demand for Pakistan had been accepted. Although they were not fully satisfied, their objective had been achieved in the main. The Hindu majority areas were already represented in a sovereign Constituent Assembly. Nehru (1889-1964) had kept his tryst with history. But the Sikhs found themselves in the doldrums. The Maharaja and his entourage, consisting of 3 or 4 other equal sturdy Sikhs, resplendent in their uniforms, Khurshid further writes, waited in the anteroom, opposite to his office. Their lively conversation and bonhomie indicated as they had not a care in the world. The Maharaja apart from running his own state, had recently been given an additional responsibility as Chancellor of the Chamber of Princes. He was burdened with fairly heavy duties. The Sikhs of the Punjab were disillusioned and confused. Their leadership was facing a serious crisis. A section of Sikhs looked up to the Maharaja for guidance. They also had a somewhat muffled feeling that the Congress had betrayed the Sikhs by accepting partition contrary to repeated assurances given earlier. He, therefore, could not but be a worried man. This was the situation in which Maharaja of Patiala, Khurshid goes on, had come to see the Quaid. Any cooperation, understanding or settlement had become well-nigh impossible. The Sikh had become leaderless, angry and uncontrollable. No one could accept any responsibility. The Congress had seen to it. The Maharaja asked the Quaid what the terms and conditions would be, if Patiala were to accede to Pakistan. The Quaid, in a characteristic gesture, handed -the Maharaja a writing pad and pen and said, "You write down the conditions, and I shall accept them". The Maharaja wavered and could not decide. The Maharaja, Khurshid continues to record, later admitted that the Quaid had offered him almost "everything under the sun." But the Brahmanic spell had been cast, the Sikhs were obfuscated to think clearly. Non-serious, wavering and irresponsible behaviour of the Sikh leaders can well be visualised from another meeting between the Quaid and Master Tara Singh said to have been arranged through some Sikh student leaders, as referred to .by Sardar Kapur in his well-known memoirs, namely, Sahi Sakhi written in Punjabi in Gurmukhi script. Sardar Kapur, an influential ICS and back-door player of Sikh political game in the Punjab, records in his said memoirs that this meeting was to be held in a bungalow in Lahore (on a certain date) at 11.00 a.m. Tara Singh reached the appointed place at ten. He was briefed. Apparently, he looked inclined to hold talks with the Quaid. But strangely enough, at about quarter to eleven, he all of a sudden changed his mind, having been struck with a queer panic, slipped away very mysteriously from the back door of the bungalow only ten minutes before the Quaid's arrival. A few days later, when he (Sardar Kapur) talked to Tara Singh with regard to Sikh-Muslim compromise, he said that reconciliation with the Muslims was out of the question because it were they who had martyred the (two) sons of Guru Gobind Singh (1676-1708). Such was the mentality of the top-most Sikh leaders at the time of the partition of India. Tara Singh perhaps did not know that Guru Gobind Singh, despite all his resentment whatsoever, was himself ever prepared to dialogue with emperor Aurangzeb with a view to reach an agreement him. Despite the irresponsible behaviour of Master Tara Singh, the influential leader of the Sikhs, the Quaid continued his efforts to reach a peaceful settlement with the Sikhs. He made every possible offer to them with regard to the establishment of their own homeland as is also evident from Sardar Kapur's memoirs. Sardar Sahib writes that in May 1947, the Quaid came to Lahore. With the support of Master Tara Singh, he wanted to get the following proposals accepted by the Sikhs. (i) The Punjab should not be divided and whole of it should be included in Pakistan, recognising the country lying between the Ravi and Jumana rivers as the motherland of the Sikhs. Within Pakistan, the Sikhs shall be a sub-nation and as such shall enjoy complete internal autonomy. (ii) The Muslims accept that the Sikhs shall have 33% and 20% reserved seats in the Punjab and the Central Legislative Assemblies respectively, having the same percentage of Punjab's High Court and Pakistan's Supreme Court. (iii) Either of the two offices, the Governorship or Chief Ministership of the Punjab be held by a Sikh. (iv) The Sikhs shall have 40% share both in the Pakistan's army and the military high command. (v) In Pakistan no Law or Constitution shall be implemented which is considered by the majority of the Sikhs as ultra vires to their interest unless, however, it is declared otherwise by the higher courts. These proposals prove eminently that every possible offer was made to the Sikhs. The question is why the Quaid was offering so much to the Sikhs. His considered opinion in this regard was that if the Sikhs agreed to live with the Muslims, neither Punjab nor Bengal would be divided because then it would not be possible for the Hindus to demand the partition of these two provinces. The division would take place only on the demand and for the sake of the Sikhs. But the division, if it came, would break the spine of the Sikhs as well as the back of Pakistan. The Quaid was told that the Sikhs were afraid of the Muslim majority. In this regard, their previous experience was not good either. According to Sardar Kapur, the Quaid smiled and said that it was in fact the Muslims who ought to feel frightened because Pakistan created with the help of Sikhs would provide statutory assurance and guarantee to their religion, worship places, life, property, land and other interests with the result that within a period of less than six months after the emergence of Pakistan all Hindus living in Pakistan would declare themselves to be Sikhs, thus making the Sikhs (in the Punjab) a majority and converting the Muslims into minority. Sardar Kapur records that he was tremendously impressed by the Quaid's farsightedness and pragmatic approach. He conveyed the Quaid's feelings to the top Akali leaders who instead of appreciating it behaved indifferently, rather ridiculously. Such indifferent and irreconcilable attitude of the top most Sikh leaders is further evident from another meeting between the Quaid and the Maharaja of Patiala which has been recorded only by Sardar Kapur in his memoirs. He writes that after the failure of Jinnah-Tara Singh meeting, which in fact did not take place as the later changed his mind at the last moment. It was decided that a meeting between the Quaid and Maharaja of Patiala should be arranged. The Quaid accompanied by some Muslim and Sikh ICS officers went to Patiala. He met the Maharaja and told him that the Sikhs, like the Muslims and the Hindus, were undoubtedly a separate nation but as they did not have a majority in any area, it was not possible for the British to create Khalistan for them, even though they did not intend to leave the Sikhs unshielded. The Quaid assured the Maharaja with full responsibility that the proposals which he was going to place before the Maharaja would not in any way be obstructed by the British Government. The Quaid, as Sardar Kapur records further, proposed that instead of a Sikh state, Greater Patiala should be demanded by the Sikhs, which should include all the Sikh states lying between the Jumana and the Ravi as well as some parts of the Punjab province, as the whole of this area was the ‘motherland' of the Sikhs. The Maharaja of Patiala being the undisputed commander of the Sikh community should be the ruler of this Greater Patiala which should join Pakistan and have all possible statutory rights. The Maharaja said, that he needed "some time so that he could think over the matter and that he would respond to the Quaid's proposal in due course of time". But the same night, the Maharaja, as Sardar. Kapur records further, secretly communicated, through his Sikh Prime Minister, the details of his talks with the Quaid to the Congress leaders in Delhi. This was, according to Kapur, a breach of the trust which the Quaid had reposed in His Highness. As a result the talks broke down. Despite all these untoward circumstances, the Quaid really left no stone unturned to seek a settlement with the Sikh leaders in general and Maharaja of Patiala in particular. But regrettably, the topmost Sikh Leaders including the Maharaja remained unchanged. Referring to his meetings with the Quaid at Vice regal lodge and at 10 Aurangzeb Road as referred to earlier, the Maharaja of Patiala himself admits in his reminiscences published in 1959 that the Quaid had offered a Sikh state about the time of Partition. While referring to his meeting with the Quaid at a dinner given by Mountbatten, the Maharaja remarks, “Talks started and offers were made by Mr. Jinnah for particularly everything under the sun [as quoted earlier], if I would agree to his plan. There were two aspects-one was based on the idea of a Rajasthan and the other one for a Sikh state-Punjab minus one or two districts in the south. I told Mr. Jinnah that I could not accept either of his two proposals. Two days later, I was asked by Mr. Jinnah to have tea with him. I accepted and went and had tea at his residence in New Delhi. After about half an hour, Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan came and discussions began very much on the same lines as those we had two nights before. We again parted unchanged in our own points of view.” But despite these facts, the Sikh historians like Kirpal Singh maintain that the efforts for Sikh-Muslim settlement in the Punjab failed only because of the unfavourable attitude of the League leadership. Referring to the meetings and negotiations held between the Muslim League and Sikh leaders for a Sikh-Muslim settlement, Kirpal Singh writes, "Mr. Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan agreed to the formation of the Sikh state with its separate military establishment within Pakistan, provided that Sikhs did not insist on the partition of the Punjab and agreed to join Pakistan. The Sikhs demanded the right of opting out of Pakistan for the Sikh state to which the Muslim leaders did not agree". Hence the Muslim-Sikh talks, claims Kirpal, broke down. No better comments can be made on Kirpal's assertion than those of Sardar Kapur Singh. Sardar cogently writes that an expectation from Quaid or the Muslim League that they would create a state for the Sikhs within Pakistan and then arm it with right of secession so that the Sikhs might break up Pakistan whenever they so desired could come only from a people too simple like the Sikhs. The fact is that it was only the Sikh leadership and not the Muslim League leadership, which utterly failed in demonstrating political wisdom and far-sightedness at the time of Partition, a fact which can be further well visualized by M. H. Ispahani’s views which he has aptly made in this regard. M.A.H. Ispahani had been a close associate of the Quaid. He took an active part in the Pakistan movement. He was a close eyewitness to all developments with regard to the Pakistan movement. His remarks on the matter under discussion are also noteworthy. He says, "It was during this critical period that the Quaid-e-Azam endeavoured his best to persuade the Sikhs to see reason, not to press for a tiny state but to join hands with the Muslims and share their good or bad fortune. He guaranteed them all the freedom that they wanted and assured them a life free from fear of overlordship, a life of peace and prosperity. But they refused to see reason and accept the hand of friendship which was being offered to them on behalf of the Muslims". Ispahani continues, "With the approach of Independence, Liaquat Ali Khan had several talks with his Cabinet colleague, Baldev Singh. Mr. Jinnah met Sikh leaders and assured them that if they joined us, they would receive a very fair deal. In the later stages, i.e. on the eve of Independence, he was even prepared to concede to the Sikhs a small homeland of their own within the borders f West Pakistan wherein they could be autonomous in the day-to-day life and administration of the State". When the Quaid was making his utmost efforts for an honourable settlement with the. Sikhs, when he was "offering everything under the sun" to conclude a Sikh-Muslim alliance for future, ironically, the Sikh leaders were making the matters worse by delivering fiery speeches. They were frightening the Muslims with genocide. Master Tara Singh was particularly furious. He repeatedly made explosive speeches in early March, 1947. On March 3, he declared, "Let the Khalsa Panth now realise the gravity of the situation. I expect every Sikh to do his duty. We shall not submit to Muslim domination. Oh! Khalsa rise and gird up your loins. The momentous hour has approached. May God be our guide and guard us". The following day (March 4), he stood on the steps of the Punjab Assembly Chambers, brandished his sword and shouted, "Pakistan Murdabad. Raj karega Khalsa bagi rahe na ko" (Down with Pakistan. The Sikh will rule, none else will survive). He roared further, "The time has come when the might of the sword alone shall rule. The Sikhs are ready. We have to bring the Muslims to their senses". Such provocative speeches and activities of the Sikh leaders led to violent communal riots in the Punjab. The Muslims suffered horribly. Their houses were burnt and their properties looted. They were massacred everywhere in East Punjab. They were forcibly driven out to West Punjab. Indeed, the Sikhs were mostly responsible for the complete destruction of Muslims in East Punjab. They had literally gone mad. Sikh and Hindu leaders instigated non-Muslims to migrate from Pakistan areas particularly from West Punjab. They wanted to cripple Pakistan economically. In the course of these tragic events, some Muslims thought in terms of retaliation. They begged the Quaid to release funds and approve the formation of a volunteer corps to fight the Sikhs. The Quaid was a moderate and civilised leader. He could never think of violent retaliation. His answer to such proposal was in harmony with his long history of honest dealing. He said "How can you expect me to approve of such a scheme? I am not a hypocrite. I have just signed the Peace Appeal (which was also signed by Sikh and Hindu leaders) and I expect the Musalmans to observe the spirit of the appeal". But the Sikhs did not pay any heed to the Quaid's assurances and his moderate and civilised political conduct. They again proved a simple people, and were again exploited by the Hindus and the British. By. rejecting Quaid's offer, they indeed committed Himalayan blunder. No better comments can be produced here than those of the Quaid. Talking to M. H. Ispahani about the Sikh tragedy, he remarked, "The Sikhs are not in their senses. By their unwise attitude, they are applying the axe to their own skins. Wait and see what happens after Hindu India and Muslim India become two independent nations. The Hindus, once they are comfortably settled down, will turn on the Sikhs and it will only be a matter of time before they cease to be an important, separate and influential community. The Sikhs will then rue the day but it will be too late.” The way the Sikhs were treated by the Hindu majority, particularly by the Congress leadership in the post-independence period, proved the prophetic words of the Quaid. The Congress leaders who mischievously used the Sikhs against the Muslim League or the Muslim community as a whole, now altogether changed their attitude. In Mid August 1947, aptly records Sardar Kapur, when the Sikhs and the Muslims were engaged in brutally killing each other in both parts of the divided Punjab, Mountbatten, now the Governor-General of India asked Sardar Patel (1875-1950): “What have you thought about the Sikhs?” Patel replied, “These imbecile people have cut their own throat. They have now missed the bus.” Sardar Kapur’s remarks perhaps are not incorrect when he says, “The fact is that Raja Gulab Singh Dogra, Gernail Teja Singh and Gernail Lal Singh the traitors of 1846 were reincarnated in the form of Maharaja Yadvendar Singh, Master Tara Singh and Sardar Baldev Singh in order to make the Sikhs slaves in 1947.” Source: Nazria Pakistan Trust

[dylan38sanders]

AV Pricing Part I: How To Save Money On AV Bills For Your Events

One of the most common questions related to organizing events is “How can I save money on AV?”. This is obviously a no-brainer, considering AV is one of the most expensive parts of an event. Here at Endless, we’re fully aware of this! As an AV company, we’ve spent our fair share of time providing information on the matter of AV pricing.

There’s always something new to add, especially when trying to understand all the little things involved. Why is AV priced the way it is? How can you save money on AV? How can you be sure you get the right equipment? Overall, how can the process be as smooth as possible for the client and vendor alike?

If any of these questions have been buzzing on your mind lately, you’ve come to the right place. On this week’s Event Tech Podcast, Will Curran and Brandt Krueger walk you through all you need to know to save money on AV. Join them for the hottest tips on AV Pricing!

Make sure you tune in next week for Part II of AV Pricing when Will and Brandt will be joined by Andrew Latimer, Design Engineer, and Endless Events’ AV Einstein, for a live AV audit. Subscribe to the Event Tech Podcast here and never miss a beat!

https://www.podbean.com/media/player/uya35-ac717d?from=yiiadmin&download=1&version=1

Click here to download the full audio transcription.

Education Is Key

Much like everything in life, the more educated you are on a matter, the better you’ll do. AV isn’t an exception! Take it from Chief Event Einstein himself, Will Curran – “for me, one of the number one best tips as far as how to save money is to start to get educated”. Let’s get to it!

Closing The Gap

“There’s definitely a gap between the vendor knowledge and the client knowledge”, says Will. This gap will inevitably translate into bad business making. Take the car analogy, for instance – “when you go in to buy a car, if you have no idea what you’re gonna be talking about, you tend to feel like you’re always being ripped off. But if you understand what you’re doing, you tend to know who’s ripping you off and who’s not ripping you off and you have a little bit better knowledge, and I think that’s the thing ultimately to, not only just saving the money on that side of things, but it’s also about the comfortability and the smoothness of the process”.

Anyone Can Do It – Including You!

It can seem scary or just plain uninteresting to get the gist of Av and what it entails. “I think we hear this all the time where someone is like, “Well, I’m just not a techie. I just can’t learn this stuff. I’m just not capable. I’m not a techie type of person”, says Brandt. Sounds familiar? Well, there’s always a way around it!

“For me, it’s kind of like learning a different language. You never hear someone say, “I’m not French so I could never learn French,” you know? It’s one of those things where there is a language and it just takes a little time and you don’t have to become fluent overnight. You can learn the basics”. For AV, it’s exactly the same principle!

There’s No Shame In Asking For Help

Where would any of us be without a little help from someone who knows what they’re doing and talking about? “Don’t be afraid to also get a guy, right? Find your guy who’s gonna be your techie person”, is one of Will’s pieces of advice.

There’s even a class you can take or offer someone at the Event Leadership Institute. “It’s the people that just want to learn more about it and just kind of add that to their toolbox. Not necessarily want to do it for a living but just be able to learn that language a little bit”, says Brandt. He’ll even throw you a discount code if you reach out to him!

Sit Down With AV Companies

Ask Them For The Walkthrough

“Basically always ask for what’s called a quote walkthrough. It might sound like it’s gonna take a lot of time (…) but ask your AV company to sit down with you on a screen share or in person and walk you through every single line item of the quote”, says Will. “If they can explain it in easy terms as they walk you through it, you will understand what’s on their quote but also as well you’ll start to learn mode names”.

Get Those Competitive Bids

“There are an awful lot of planners out there that still just get the quote from the in-house and go with it”, says Brandt. “For me, that’s kind of my next biggest thing is making sure that you get at least one more competitive bid, preferably more than that”.

“I’m happy to lose business when someone’s providing great quality equipment, the exact same labor staffing schedule and they beat me on price. I’m happy because it means they figured out how to do this more efficiently than me and I deserve to lose the business because I need to figure out how to do my business better”, Will adds.

Make Sure You’re Getting What You Need

Don’t just copy and paste material from previous years. “One of the things that I always do when I’m working with a new client is (…) I remove any references to specific equipment, any references to specific types of speakers or projectors or things like that”, says Brandt.

“If you get locked into cutting and pasting of equipment, the AV company is gonna try their best to provide that or something very similar to it and I would much rather get their initial take on, “Okay, we’ve got a room this big with this number of people in it. It’s a general session. What do you think we should have for sound?” That kind of thing rather than locking into specific types of gear”, he adds.

What Else To Look At?

Stakeholder Expectations

“We come in here, we want to obviously have a better stage than last year, a newer design, things like that. But we all have those stakeholders who see something crazy and say, “I want that,” but they have no idea what the cost is associated with it”, says Will.

“The biggest way that you can save money in that situation is to not say yes immediately and to involve those stakeholders in the conversation with the AV company”, he adds. “I have clients who could save so much money if they just manage the expectation of the stakeholders and we have conversations with them together”.

Pay Attention To Overtime

“What we find a lot of times is that this stuff doesn’t get shared and this expectation of, “Yeah, you’re probably gonna need a little bit of buffer time” doesn’t get shared so, therefore, it gets added in at the end for that extra invoice and it’s boom, it’s a huge overtime bill”, Will warns. ” The more accurate your schedule is from day one, the more accurate your final bill is gonna be”.

Dive Into The Regulations

Remember your AV teams doesn’t consist of mere robots, but actual human beings! “Sometimes they’re labor laws, but labor rules and understanding your company’s AV rules is really important. We had to do it as far as we had to start putting it in our contract because even though this stuff is pretty common across AV companies, people would always be shocked”, says Will.

Be Creative!

Another great tip by will is a bit towards getting creative – “when it comes to saving money on AV has to do with thinking of unique ways to implement technology and scenic design and things like that”.

“I think that your AV company should challenge you and that’s I think a little mini bonus tip as well. They should challenge you and challenge the idea of are you gonna utilize it?”, he continues. “Have a conversation about being open to ideas about changing and have your AV company challenge you but also at the same time as well, have that conversation about saving money from the get-go”.

The Power Of Negotiation

“It used to be like I said, everything was kind of negotiable and more and more often planners that do know better do know that, hey, we want to get rid of this clause that says that we have to use the in house AV. More and more venues are starting to say no, and it’s getting harder and harder to find venues that are willing to play ball”, says Will.

“It’s totally the way it’s gonna be and that’s the way I think things might shape out in the future, and that’s where, too, talk to your AV company too”.

Conclusion

Knowing how to save money on AV can also save you a fair share of headaches. Today, Will and Brandt shared some basic, and some unique tips on how to get the best value for money on your AV equipment. Did you find it helpful? What are your personal tips to save money on AV? Share your story with us in the comments below!

Resources:

Event Leadership Institute Courses

How to Win at Negotiating AV Prices for Events 

Welcome to the AV Audit

Tackling Commoditization In The Event Industry – #EventIcons Episode 157

11 Reasons You Need an Initial Consult for Event AV – Whiteboard Wednesday

How Do In-House AV Commissions Work? – Whiteboard Wednesday

Can I Negotiate Venue AV Charges? – Whiteboard Wednesdays

How Much Does Event AV Cost – Whiteboard Wednesdays 

https://js.hscta.net/cta/current.js hbspt.cta.load(430132, ‘d9fe7e93-b235-439e-b0e4-b647f4c1349f’, {});

from Endless Events https://helloendless.com/save-money-on-av/

[toldnews-blog]

New Post has been published on https://toldnews.com/politics/the-note-potential-2020-candidates-seek-out-the-quiet-middle/

The Note: Potential 2020 candidates seek out the quiet middle

The TAKE with Rick Klein

Interested in The Note?

Add The Note as an interest to stay up to date on the latest The Note news, video, and analysis from ABC News.

It’s not yet clear in this polarized political climate if the political middle will be heard from in the coming presidential campaign.

But prominent voices inside the Democratic and Republican parties — and outside of both — are making 2020 pitches that depend, at least in part, on making sure the center starts to have its say.

You see it in former Vice President Joe Biden, who used an audience of enthusiastic firefighters on Tuesday to push back on the notion he’s too nice to non-Democrats.

Andrew Harnik/AP

Former Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the International Association of Firefighters at the Hyatt Regency on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 12, 2019.

“I get criticized for saying anything nice about a Republican,” Biden said. “Folks, this isn’t who we are, this isn’t how we got here.”

You see it in Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, who is mulling what he acknowledges would be an uphill GOP primary fight against President Donald Trump, while thinking about what Trumpism has meant for political discourse.

Adam Kelsey/ABC News

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan is interviewed by ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl and ABC News Political Director Rick Klein for the “Powerhouse Politics” podcast, March 12, 2019.

“Most people are fed up with the partisanship and the divisiveness on both sides,” Hogan said on the “Powerhouse Politics” podcast Tuesday. “They’re somewhere in the middle.”

You also see it in Howard Schultz, the former Starbucks CEO who will be speaking in Miami on Wednesday to outline cornerstones of his potential presidential run.

“The center is not just a political label. The center is the heart of America,” Schultz plans to say, according to his political operation.

All three pitches may fail to soar in the Trump era — and none of these three men are actually running for president yet. But it’s notable that so many prominent potential candidates are aiming to give the middle some meaning.

The RUNDOWN with MaryAlice Parks

While disagreements abound, Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing pertaining to the budget next year: Drug prices should come down.

Democrats have pounced on the president’s budget proposals this week related to Medicare and Medicaid spending, accusing him of wanting to slash precious programs he promised to protect.

But on the Hill Tuesday, the acting White House budget director pushed back and said his team was working with agencies to “identify savings from common sense proposals like reducing drug pricing and costs,” and that has been a priority for Democrats too.

The president last year reiterated that fighting high drug prices was a priority for him and stood by the heads of the Department of Health and Human Services to present a possible, preliminary framework for letting Medicare negotiate more in some instances.

Still, like anything in Washington, the devil is in the details. During the budget hearing Tuesday, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., questioned why the White House team could not point to a specific piece of legislation that they liked that targeted drug pricing.

Democrats have introduced a few bills and Wednesday will hold another hearing titled, “Barriers to Prescription Drugs Market Competition.”

The TIP with John Verhovek

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s strong opposition to impeaching Trump sparked another round of Democratic bickering over how best to quell the growing chorus in the party who want to see aggressive action taken against the 45th president.

On Wednesday, billionaire activist Tom Steyer — who is using his fortune to fund a pro-impeachment crusade — is holding a town hall in the Massachusetts congressional district represented by Rep. Richard Neal, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has the power to request Trump’s tax returns, possibly a key in building a case for impeachment.

Richard Drew, File/AP Photo

April 2, 2018 file photo of billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.

Steyer slammed Pelosi’s comments on impeachment earlier this week, releasing a statement addressed to Pelosi that asked, in part: “Is defending our legal system ‘worth it?’ Is holding the President accountable for his crimes and cover-ups ‘worth it?’ Is doing what’s right ‘worth it?’ Or shall America just stop fighting for our principles and do what’s politically convenient?”

The calls for impeachment among some in the Democratic base are not going to stop. Look for those calls to start spilling into an increasingly crowded primary race.

THE PLAYLIST

ABC News’ “Start Here.” Wednesday morning’s episode features ABC News Senior Congressional Correspondent Mary Bruce, who tells us what happened when she asked Joe Biden about why he hasn’t announced whether he’s running for president in 2020. http://apple.co/2HPocUL

ABC News’ “Powerhouse Politics.” “Powerhouse Politics” went on the road and interviewed Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan — a re-elected Republican in a deep blue state. He says “all bets are off” in this “volatile” political climate when it comes to his potential challenge of President Donald Trump in the primary. He also talks about how surviving cancer has changed him. Later Wednesday, check out a fresh “Powerhouse Politics” podcast when ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl and Political Director Rick Klein interview Democratic Sen. Doug Jones who is in the fight for his political life in Alabama. He’s also written a book called “Bending Toward Justice,” about the civil rights era in Birmingham after the 1963 bombing that killed four black girls. http://apple.co/2vje5Oc

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY

Paul Manafort, a former Trump campaign chairman, faces his second court sentencing at 9:30 a.m. in Washington.

Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz delivers a speech on “policy and governing from the center” at 12:30 p.m. to Miami Dade College.

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education convenes to discuss the “HHS Budget Request” for 2020 with HHS Secretary Alex Azar at 2 p.m. on Capitol Hill.

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security discusses “Securing Federal Networks and State Election Systems” at 2 p.m. on Capitol Hill.

The Senate Budget Committee examines the “President’s Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Proposal” with the Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russel Vought, at 2:30 p.m. on Capitol Hill.

Billionaire activist Tom Steyer hosts an “Impeachment Town Hall” at 6:15 p.m. in Springfield, Massachusetts.

Download the ABC News app and select “The Note” as an item of interest to receive the day’s sharpest political analysis.

The Note is a daily ABC News feature that highlights the key political moments of the day ahead. Please check back tomorrow for the latest.

[clientsfromhell]

Charging clients and dealing with a client's deadbeat best friend

A freelancer wonders what to do after his best client's best friend refuses to pay his invoice; Bryce offers advice for charging clients. 

Do you have a question of your own? Shoot us an email! 

Want to support the show? Leave us a review on iTunes!

--

Freelance FAQ: How should I charge my client?

The basic answer is, “if you want to earn X this year, you need to be making Y for every hour you work.”

My rule of thumb: Take what you want to earn in a year and drop the zeroes. If you want to earn $45,000 this year, you need to be earning, at least, $45 for every hour you spend on your business.

The logic behind this rule of thumb: There are about 2,000 billable hours in a year (40 hours a week x 50 weeks in a year – we’re losing two weeks for holidays). You cut those billable hours in half, because at least 25% of your time will go into business upkeep, and the other 25% will go into taxes, insurance, and retirement (which adds up to 50% of your time – half). Thus, take what you want to earn in a year (e.g. $60,000) and divide it by the 1000 billable hours (e.g. $60/hour). Remember, these are ballpark estimates, not fine-tuned figures.

Besides hourly, there are numerous ways to charge a client:

Daily

Can begin charging for value (not time) and you get to focus on one thing at a time

You can’t be flexible with your day; this billing rate doesn’t work with every situation

Weekly

More flexibility to charge for value and not time; it is very results orientated.

Weekly rates are more applicable to consultants and results-based work; the time investment for some weeks can wildly exceed a typical 40-hour workweek

Monthly

A monthly rate offers regular income that bolsters a long-term relationship with clients

It’s similar to being a full-time employee, with the pros and cons associated with that. Typically, you’ll have to charge more than a full-timer would and it can be difficult to communicate to a client why that is.

Per deliverable

This style of billing is directly tied to a product or result; your rate and time commitment are completely irrelevant.

Scope changes and negotiation are commonplace

Per project

Your billing purely by value; there’s less need for oversight and micromanagement regarding your day-to-day activities

However, there’s an immense amount of planning involved; if you miss something, you eat the cost.

You should know your hourly rate even if you do not intend to charge by the hour. Your hourly rate informs all other forms of billing, typically as a bare minimum you need to be making.

Experience will teach you how you like to work, and how you like to work will influence the ideal way for you to bill your clients. Despite weekly billing having a higher potential income attached to it, monthly billing works better for my clients and me.

  Feedback from the Inferno: My best client's best friend stiffed me – now what?

(This segment originally premiered over at The Freelancers Union.)

My biggest client referred his best friend to me. That friend stiffed me on my invoice. What can I do without ruining the 15+ year relationship I have with my client?

In a nutshell, my best and biggest client referred me to his close friend for some IT work. It came as an emergency. I did my best, and I got my client’s friend up and running again.

Over two visits, the friend accumulated $1600 worth of time within a few days. Both of his checks bounced. His business went bankrupt, and he claimed creditors to be relieved from, but I wasn’t one of them. I got his word he would pay me and that he appreciated the work I did for him.

Time went by. Nothing happened. I asked my client about his situation and from what I saw, my client was also one of the people his friend borrowed from. I’m unsure if he was someone he was relieved from. When I asked my client if I should pursue it, he said I should drop it that I would probably never get the money back.

That $1600 isn’t chump change. With the economy like it is, I could sure use it. I don’t want to alienate my client, but it burns my ass that his friend got off, especially since he’s rich and lives in an exclusive neighborhood, nice cars, has another business which is flourishing, etc.

Additional context: the freelancer who wrote in has been in IT since 1994, and he started his business in 2004. There are no contracts involved in most of his work, as most of his clients have long and personal relationships with him – often spanning over a decade.

– A freelancer with a burnt butt

  Honestly, it seems like you've already reached the conclusion on this: it's frustrating, but that money is likely gone. A lot of time has passed, and there was no contract in place. It's certainly possible there's a route you can take to regain that lost $1,600, but I don't see a way that's worth that amount of money – almost all of them will cost you in much more damaging ways.

I respect the crap out of the style of work you offer – close relationships, time-honed offerings, constant support – but it's a style where a contract-free experience should only be offered to proven and qualified clients. As you stated (this was in a separate email), it's the newer clients that take advantage of your stalwart offering.

I'd suggest taking a look at how you qualify these new clients and if there's a way to offer an expedited contract or down payment.

Here's how I deal with this: I have a simply-worded and short contract template that I use for clients I'm unsure about. I fill in the blanks with the client, and that ensures we're both on the same page regarding it (e.g. what results do they expect? what services do they need? who's my main contact? who's in charge of payment?).

My first meeting or two with the client is spent gaining an understanding of their issue, offering my solution, and engaging them for the work. My third meeting is a 5-45-minute engagement where we fill in those contract blanks and ensure we understand each other. I'm protected, my client is protected, and we’re both clear what I'll be doing with them. Plus, that contract-creating experience is my built-in client-qualification system.

I also suggest you check out the Freelance Isn’t Free act. I think you’ll be interested in supporting it.

Otherwise, I wish you the best with your future clients. I know a principled business (with such a remarkable pedigree) will do just fine in the long run, so my final piece of advice is this: don't sweat the crappy experiences. They seem to be few and far in-between.

-- 

Questions? Episode ideas?

Talk to Clients From Hell or Bryce Bladon on Twitter. Or shoot us an email! 

Clients From Hell on iTunes | Soundcloud Subscribe on iTunes | Android | RS

Download here!

[augustusaugustus]

Donna Picspam

Damn did that red wig suit her.

[wewithus]

The Five Minutes for Freedom series is a collection of small, step-by-step walkthroughs designed to help you take concrete political action in support of the principles of We With Us. The articles in the series are designed to be read and their steps followed in order, as later posts frequently build on earlier ones. A chronological index of all posts in the series can be found here. While this information is targeted primarily at US readers, we welcome readers from all countries and encourage you to adapt these strategies as necessary for your jurisdiction.

5M4F 16: Demand Answers Request an independent commission investigation into President Trump's, and his campaign staff’s, ties to Russia. [Dependencies: 5M4F10.]

I’m temporarily putting the second half of the press series on hold because of the urgency of requesting an independent commission investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. If you somehow still need to be convinced that this is an urgent, nonpartisan matter in the national interest, read these four articles and/or, maybe even better, just listen to the “A Cry for Help” episode of Trumpcast. It’s cool, it’s only about half an hour long. I’ll wait. I’d also like you to take note of the fact that Trump launched his 2020 re-election campaign in Florida yesterday. Since he couldn’t get elected the first time without Russian help, it seems pretty fair to me to assume that he’s expecting it again in 2020, don’t you think?

This week we will be calling our representatives to request that they publicly fight for an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, to investigate Russian interference in the election and ties between Trump, his campaign staff, and Russia. You will see this phrase many times in this post, because it’s super, super important: we want an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power. Then we will be recruiting at least two people (each!) to commit to make calls asking their representatives to push for an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power. Political calling posse!! We will also be calling (separately) to ask our representatives to continue to pressure the White House to fire Steve Bannon, this time because he is a-okay with Putin’s kleptocracy, since Putin is “traditional” and stands with the “Judeo-Christian West” against Islam. I tried to figure out how to fit the word “racist” into that sentence in a way that felt natural but then I realized I’d already said “Steve Bannon” so it probably wasn’t necessary. Speaking of Bannon, I still haven’t written my postcard from last week, so I’ll have two this week: this time, we’ll be concern-trolling “President Bannon,” asking him for an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, because Bannon’s aide Donald Trump’s apparent ties to Russia seem to be casting doubts on the legitimacy of Mr. Bannon’s election back in November!

If you’d like to do this all in one go: there are at least two chunks to this one because there are two sets of calls (the first about the independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, and the second about Steve Bannon). However, other than your second set of calls, writing your scripts and your postcard is pretty easy to do all in one bunch and probably won’t take you much more than 30 or 40 min. How you assemble your political calling posse may be somewhat more time-consuming and may drag on longer, depending on how you live and socialize, but that’s very hard for me to predict without knowing you.

If you’d rather do this five minutes at a time: (1) - all three scripts requesting an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power - 5 min total. (2), (3), and (4) - call your senator, other senator, and representative requesting an independent commission - 5 min. each. (5) - write your postcard! 5 min. (6) snapshot and mail your postcard - 5 min. (7) - all three scripts requesting that Bannon be fired - 5 min total. (8), (9), and (10) - call your senator, other senator, and representative about Bannon - 5 min. each. (11) - assemble your political calling posse - no idea!! YDY

You’ll notice one structural change of significance in this post: I’ve added a section at the end of particular House representatives and Senators of interest, i.e., the ones whose seats were seen as particularly vulnerable in 2016. These representatives generally fall into two categories: one, they’re Tea Party hardliners who won’t help us out; or two, they’re moderates holding onto mixed or moderate districts. This last group is especially likely to cross party lines in the interests of political expediency, and that can help us, if we get together to put effective pressure on them to swing our way or thank them for holding our line. It can also hurt us, if we don’t. Get out there and call!

Section links:

Call your representatives.

Gather your posse.

Write your postcard to “President Bannon.”

Complain about Bannon to your actual elected representatives.

List of Senate and House Representatives of particular interest.

A note on how to protest amid breaking news.

How to write your scripts.

What to do if you can’t make calls.

Call your representatives: We need an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, to investigate ties between Trump, his campaign staff, and Russia. It’s way past time: Flynn’s resignation should have made that explicitly clear to everyone by now. Again: Trump launched his 2020 re-election campaign in Florida yesterday. It isn’t like this business of Russian election interference is somehow magically over.

This kind of investigation was originally proposed back in January, when it seemed like all we had to talk about was the email hack, but it didn’t get off the ground.  let’s be really clear about this: Flynn talking to Russian representatives about sanctions before Trump was even in the White House violates every norm we have about the transfer of power between successive administrations (we only have one president at a time! the incoming administration cannot negotiate with foreign governments until they are sworn in). We need for every single person reading this post to contact their representatives, and to get at least two other people to contact their representatives, too: demand that your congressperson publicly back the “Protecting our Democracy” bill introduced by Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD) and a bunch of other Democrats back in January, and newly backed on Thursday by Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC), which would establish an independent, nonpartisan commission to investigate Russian interference in the election; and push your senators to also start pushing for an independent commission right away.

The key thing here is the need for an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, not more fruitless hamstrung faffing from Congressional Republicans who think reducing taxes for corporations and the 1% is more important than the very real possibility that sensitive information is or has been moving directly from the White House to the intelligence agencies of a foreign government, which, oh, yes, also happens to recently have interfered with our elections. Again: the key phrase here is an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power. Once more with feeling: an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power. Say this over and over and over again until it just rolls off your tongue like “I’d like a tall vanilla latte” or “What a beautiful dog!” or “Would you like to go back to my place, Rupert Graves?”

Basically, just make sure to be really, really explicit, when you make your calls: we do not want standing committee investigations; they’re staffed by members of Congress and are therefore not independent, and they often keep information secret. Even a bipartisan select committee is not adequate: the cloud of illegitimacy of Russian interference falls, potentially, on every single official elected in 2016, and that includes every single member of the House, and also a third of the Senate. Make sure your representatives know that’s on your mind, especially if they were elected in 2016.

Gather Your Posse: There are only about a hundred people following this blog; that’s not enough, on its own, to swing anything on our own. But it is enough if each of us recruits two buddies to make these calls with us.

By “recruit” I mean that you talk to them directly, and that you get each of them to affirmatively commit, explicitly, to calling their representatives too. There’s a principle in marketing that if you get someone to give you an affirmative commitment to something small, it both makes them more likely to do the thing that they committed to and it makes them more likely to commit to bigger asks in the future, like, say, voting for anti-Trump pro-human candidates in 2018, and 2020, and 2022. So I’ll start with you guys, before I work offline on getting my parents to commit to call: reblog this post or send us an ask to commit to making your calls this week! It’ll help hold you to it, and we’ll cheer you on! Then get two people, on or offline, RL friends or internet friends, to commit to you that they will make their calls, too.

You don’t have to be an asshole about this at all—in fact, I encourage you to not be an asshole about this—but I will say, if you’ve ever wanted to learn how to be an asshole marketer just to shore up your supervillain powers for the future, this isn’t a bad place to start.

And now for our recurring series, What is Steve Bannon Breaking This Week?

Free and Fair Elections: because Bannon is less obviously and overtly involved with Russia than other parts of Trump’s campaign machinery (though, lbr, he’s still the brains of this operation, so it’s not like he’s totally uninvolved), we’re going to have to approach our postcards and our calls a little bit differently this week.

A bit of concern trolling never goes awry. Start by writing a postcard to “President Bannon” expressing concern about how his aide Donald Trump’s refusal to call for an independent commission, like the 9/11 commission, with subpoena power, to investigate Russian interference is casting a cloud over President Bannon’s legitimate election back in November.

Then complain about Bannon to your actual elected representatives: Take a different tack when you call real politicians. Steve Bannon has publicly lauded Putin’s “traditionalism” as a key “underpinning of nationalism”, while openly admitting the kleptocracy (he even used that word!!) of Putin’s regime. He just doesn’t think it matters, since Russia, like the U.S., is part of the “Judeo-Christian West.” (TRANSLATION: at least Putin is white / hates ladies / isn’t a Muslim!!!) Give your senators and house representative a call to let them know that Putin’s kleptocracy should be appalling to anyone who supports democracy, and that Bannon’s choice of racist ideology over democratic ideals is horrifying for someone on the National Security Council and with a hand on the the puppet strings of the ear of the president. Insist that they speak out publicly against Bannon’s influence.

New feature! I’ve compiled a summary of Senators and Congresspersons of particular interest, i.e., representatives whose seats that were considered “battleground” races in 2016 and are likely to have an especially hard time in 2018/2020/2022. Again, these people likely fall into one of two categories: one, they’re Tea Party hardliners who won’t help us out; or two, they’re moderates holding onto mixed or moderate districts. We want to press that second group, and press them hard, because that is how you swing mixed/moderate districts to the left.

In the parentheses after their names, I’m giving these representatives states, their parties, and their margins of victory in 2016. Note that the list is alphabetical first by state, then by the rep’s name. If your representative(s) is (are) on this list, especially if their margin was especially small, it is particularly important that you put pressure on them, and get other people in your district to put pressure on them too, because your vote could very well be their next swing vote—and they know it. If you contact these people, please either reblog or send me an ask letting me know how it went if you have a second (were they receptive? did you have to jump through hoops to get at them?) and I will compile (anonymously if you wish) that feedback to help other We With Us’ers put pressure where it hurts.

Congresspersons of particular interest (all info from Ballotpedia): Tom O’Halleran (AZ, D, 7.3%), Ami Bera (CA, D, 2.3%), Stephen Knight (CA, R, 6.3%), Darrel Issa (CA, R, 0.5%), Mike Coffman (CO, R, 8.3%), Stephanie Murphy (FL, D, 3%), Brian Mast (FL, R, 10.5%), Carlos Curbelo (FL, R, 11.8%), Brad Schneider (IL, D, 5.2%), Rod Blum (IA, R, 7.7%), Bruce Poliquin (ME, R, 9.6%), Jack Bergman (MI, R, 14.8%), Jason Lewis (MN, R, 1.8%), Don Bacon (NE, R, 1.2%), Jacky Rosen (NV, D, 1.3%), Ruben Kihuen (NV, D, 4%), Carol Shea-Porter (NH, D, 1.3%), Josh Gottheimer (NJ, D, 4.4%), John Faso (NY, R, 8.6%), Claudia Tenney (NY, R, 5.5%), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA, R, 8.9%), Will Hurd (TX, R, 1.3%), Barbara Comstock (VA, R, 5.8%). You can also refer to the lists of DCCC/NRCC targeted incumbents for 2018, though those are much longer and kiiiiind of like the Democrat/Republican letters to Santa, at this point in the game.

Senators of particular interest (all info from Ballotpedia): Marco Rubio (FL, R, 7.7%), Tammy Duckworth (IL, D, 15.1%), Todd Young (IN, R, 9.7%), Roy Blunt (MO, R, 2.8%), Catherine Cortez Masto (NV, D, 2.4%), Maggie Hassan (NH, D, 0.1%), Richard Burr (NC, R, 5.7%), Pat Toomey (PA, R, 1.4%), Ron Johnson (WI, R, 3.4%). Note that none of these senators are up for election again until 2022, and that Democratic senators, writ large, are, right now, feeling much more vulnerable than Republican senators, writ large. Engage thoughtfully if you live in one of the states that appears to have a state-wide rising Republican tide: try to focus on the bipartisan elements of the issues that you’re arguing for—for example, national security and the importance of the legitimacy of the American electoral process, when it comes to this specific issue of Trump’s Russia ties and Russian electoral interference.

Also, for now: don’t contact any of these people if they don’t represent you directly. That can have value when it looks like one of them might be about to make a broader run (e.g. for state-wide office, if they’re in the House; or for the presidency), but for now it’s just going to be a waste of your time.

A note on protesting amid breaking news: As always, I recommend searching a reputable news source, like one of those two news sources you picked in 5M4F15 or The Guardian if you haven’t done that one yet, shortly before you make your calls, for any breaking-news updates that may require you to tweak your scripts. It’s often also useful to check your representatives’ website to see what press releases they have on a given subject, so you know whether (for example) they have already gone on-record as opposing Steve Bannon. If they have? Ask them to do it again. Make it clear that this stuff is important to you.

How to Write Your Scripts (excerpted from 5M4F-5): The basic phone script for calling your representatives goes something like so:

Hi, {can I ask who I’m speaking to? <, if they don’t say when they pick up>} [Jot their name down.] Hi, <their name>. My name is <your name> and I’m one of <your representative’s name>’s constituents in <where you live>. I wanted to let <your representative’s name> know that I strongly <support | oppose> <the thing you’re calling about>, because <succinct explanation of reason why you’re calling>. Is <your representative’s name> planning to <do the thing you want>?

Then you have to plan for a few different responses:

They’re with you: Thank you. Could you please let <appropriate pronoun> know that <expression of gratitude> and <indication that you will continue to watch your representative’s behavior and hold them accountable>?

They’re neutral: This subject is very important to me because <longer, more in-depth and emotive reason why you’re calling>. I would very much appreciate it if you could let <your representative’s name> know that I feel very strongly about this and would really encourage <appropriate pronoun> to <do the thing you want>. Is there any way I could follow up with you or <appropriate pronoun> later?

They oppose you: This subject is very important to me because <longer, more in-depth and emotive reason why you’re calling>. Can I ask why <your representative’s name> is <not doing the thing you want>? [Let them give you a reason, and write it down.] Okay, thank you. I understand <appropriate pronoun> concerns, but as one of <your representative’s name>’s voting constituents, I would really appreciate it if <appropriate pronoun> revisited <appropriate pronoun> decision because <alternate succinct explanation of reason why you’re calling>. Is there any way I could follow up with you or <appropriate pronoun> later?

<expression of gratitude>! <polite send-off>!

I want to point out that you probably don’t actually really need to plan for all of these responses. You can probably make a pretty good guess where your representative stands based on their party affiliation. However, especially if your representatives are moderates and often vote across the aisle, it’s not a bad idea to spend a little time planning for all three cases, because then your behind is covered, and you can recycle this language over and over on later calls, to different representatives. And yes: we will be calling other representatives.

This is the sample script that I wrote back in November, on a different issue and to Barbara Boxer, who has been replaced by Kamala Harris, but it gives you an idea how the Mad-Libs-filling process works:

Hi, {can I ask who I’m speaking to? <, if they don’t say when they pick up>} [Jot their name down.] Hi, <their name>. My name is <Ginny Washington>, and I’m one of <Senator Boxer>’s constituents in <West Hollywood>. I wanted to let <Senator Boxer> know that I strongly <support> <her resolution to amend the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College>, because <I think every American’s vote should count equally>. {I just wanted to thank her for all her hard work on behalf of the principles of equal representation and equal protection under the law.}

<Thank you so much for your time>! <Have a nice day>!

If you can’t make calls: I recommended before that if you can’t make calls, you copy down snail mail addresses so you can send snail mail letters, and that you grab an email address or online contact link no matter what. Calls are the most effective, if you can make them, but please, do send snail mail letters if you can’t, or an email if you also can’t swing a stamp or get to a post office. You can use the script above as a template for your letter, but you’re probably going to want to default to assuming that your representative opposes you, and you’ll have to of course make it sound like a letter and not a phone convo.

If you care about correct forms of address: weirdly, because these things are super arcane, technically the correct way to address your senator or representative is still “The Honorable <whoever>”, as in, “The Honorable Barbara Boxer.” That goes on the envelope. You can then write “Dear Mr./Mrs./Ms. <whoever>” as your salutation.

As always, the link at the top of the post goes to a poll on Google which makes a great checklist, and where you can check in and let your fellow humans know you’re standing up for them!

[blainerollins]

361 Capital Weekly Research Briefing: March Madness…

March 13, 2017

How is your bracket doing? Before the ACA Repeal and Replace plan hit the court last week, it already looked like its odds of passage were longer than Mount St. Mary’s chance to win the Men’s NCAA Basketball Tournament on April 3rd. We all know that this is just the first pass in a long negotiation, however, you had to think that the odds were immediately stacked against it when no one wanted to put their name on it. Many supporters started to hedge on its ability to pass immediately while some GOP’ers came out against it right away. As we wait for the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to score it and calculate what it will do to the budget, we are already counting the individual winners and losers in the market. Without a forced larger pool of insureds, the quality of the pool will decline as younger, healthier people leave coverage. Thus, remaining insureds should have higher prices. For those who leave because they can’t afford insurance, the individual hospitals and health care systems will need to figure out how to pay for the uninsured or absorb the losses. And if you live in a state who expanded Medicare, then you can expect your taxes to rise very quickly to pay for the Federal Government assistance (which will stop in 2019). Lots to think about in this first version, but given all the politicians, voters and special interest groups who are against it, you have to think that the final version will look very different.

Meanwhile, the financial markets are watching this first game closely and continuing to hedge their post-election bets. It makes sense that if the ACA Repeal and Replace gets delayed, or even arrives DOA, then everything else will get pushed back. It seems like the Republican Administration should have started with some easier moves (like Infrastructure and Tax Reform) to help put Americans back to work and clear up business uncertainty. But maybe this was all inside an episode of ‘Game of Thrones’ or ‘House of Cards’ which I forgot and will all work out. But for now, the credit markets are acting worrisome, bank stocks have paused and infrastructure plays are rolling over. Meanwhile, it will be a very busy week of new data and info coming from every part of the globe: elections in the Netherlands, the FOMC meeting, new economic data (CPI, Retail sales), Bank of Japan meeting, Bank of England meeting, some debt ceiling hike talk, the CBO score of ACA Repeal and Replace in addition to the storm scheduled to whack the East coast. Have fun trying to keep one eye on the tape and one eye on the basketball game.

No one is rushing to put their name on this new piece of landmark legislation…

The grounds for the right’s opposition is that the House bill would replace Obamacare with a “new entitlement,” albeit one funded almost entirely through cuts to an old entitlement (Medicaid) and which would provide such meager benefits as to be useless to large numbers of its purported beneficiaries.

What makes this revolt so confounding to the party leadership is that the House bill, while too liberal for the party’s right flank, is also almost certainly too conservative to pass the Senate. Senators Lisa Murkowski, Cory Gardner, Rob Portman, and Shelly Moore Capito signed a letter yesterday opposing the bill’s repeal of the Medicaid expansion. A fifth, Dean Heller, has raised concerns about protecting Medicaid. Susan Collins and Bill Cassidy have proposed a much more moderate replacement bill, which has also been co-sponsored by Capito and Johnny Isakson. Additionally, Lamar Alexander, Jeff Flake, and Lindsey Graham have urged caution and deliberation — all of which run counter to the leadership’s strategy of ramming a bill through as quickly as possible in order to enable the passage of a big tax cut later in the year.

That makes 11 Republican senators who have, in some form or fashion, expressed reservations about the party leadership’s preferred health care strategy. Even assuming the three senators who object to the law from the right — Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee — can be corralled, Trumpcare seems to be very far from corralling the necessary 50 Senate votes. And this is before the Congressional Budget Office produces its score, which will probably show millions and millions of people losing coverage, and may possibly also show the deficit blowing up.

(NY Mag)

However, the House did legislate these new bike lanes for all GOP Senators who live in states that expanded Medicare…

(@_youhadonejob1)

Even the fiscally responsible have their knives drawn on this one…

Of course, in hindsight, Democrats were perfectly right to want to keep Americans from hearing about what had been done to the health-care system; when voters did find out, they didn’t like it. And that, in turn, offers clues to why the Republicans’ bill is so bad.

There is no sensible thing that you can do to our health-care system that will not offend huge numbers of voters. Thus we got Obamacare, a program which, to a first approximation, 0 percent of Democratic policy analysts would have put forward if asked to design a rational program to extend coverage and improve health-care delivery. It was a gigantic Rube Goldberg contraption, deliberately complicated and opaque to avoid openly angering any important constituency, and arguably, fatally flawed for that same reason.

Now that Republicans have their turn in the spotlight, they’re resorting to all the same tricks: the secrecy, the opacity, the long implementation delays (the better to get a good score from the Congressional Budget Office, and oh, yes, also, get them past the next election before voters meet their program). The inability of either party to make a principled stand for sensible policy is a problem, a very big one. And Republicans sure haven’t fixed it.

(Bloomberg)

This is increasingly alarming…

Corporate loan growth has frozen as companies wait for direction out of D.C. on tax reform, capex changes, interest deductibility, etc.

(WSJ/Daily Shot)

I have always pointed to credit as being one of the most important thermometers for the equity market…

While we have had a flood of new corporate bonds hit the market (about $15b last week), we also saw some significant redemptions from the large junk bond ETFs. This is not a healthy sign and should make the hair on the back of your neck stand up.

To read the full 361 Capital Weekly Research Briefing, please click here

Subscribe Now to receive the Weekly Research Briefing in your inbox Follow Us on Twitter @361Capital Follow Us on LinkedIn

[samuelfields]

The Best Way to Save Money

There’s really only one way to save money. You have to spend less than you earn. For most people that means cutting back on lattes and going out less, but there are actually much better strategies for spending less than you earn. 

At IWT, we believe the best way to save money is by utilizing the CEO approach.

The CEO Approach: The Best Way to Save Money

C- Cut Costs

The A La Carte Method

The Envelope Method

E- Earn More 

Ask for a Raise

Get a Higher Paying Job

Start a Business/Start Freelancing

O- Optimize Spending 

Traditional advice about saving money only focuses on restricting. By looking at other ways to improve your finances, such as earning more and optimizing your spending, you open up a plethora of new avenues for saving more. 

That’s what makes the CEO approach the best way to save money. We’ll show you how to get started today.  

Money Saving Tip #1: Cut Costs

Most of us know what it means to cut costs. But cutting costs doesn’t have to mean giving up everything you love. 

The best way to save money is by focusing on cutting costs only on things you don’t really care about or don’t use. This way, the change is more likely to be permanent. The two best ways to save money by cutting costs are with the A La Carte method, or the envelope method.

The A La Carte Method

The A La Carte Method helps you save money on services for which you have a subscription, like:

Netflix

Gym memberships

Spotify

Amazon Prime

Magazines

There’s a good chance you’re WAY overpaying for these things.In fact, a conservative estimate shows that we spend over $1,800/year on subscriptions alone.

The convenience is undeniable — subscriptions are a fantastic way to automate our lives.

But when was the last time you scrutinized your monthly subscriptions and canceled one?

Probably never. Yet compare this to any time you went out shopping, saw something you liked, but didn’t buy it.

Read that again. It’s the key to cutting your spending on subscriptions. 

The basic idea of this system is to cancel all your discretionary subscriptions — magazines, Spotify, Netflix — and buy what you need a la carte.

Instead of paying a big monthly fee to companies like Netflix, buy or rent only the shows or movies you want to watch on Amazon or iTunes. Most episodes of T.V. shows are only $1.99. 

Buy a day pass for the gym each time you go (around $5 – $10).

Buy songs you want from Amazon or iTunes for $0.99 each.

This FORCES you to be conscious with your spending. By utilizing the same principles that make automating your finances great, you will have to actively think about each charge you make when it comes to buying a song or TV show.

If after a while, you find yourself spending enough money on these items to justify the subscription, by all means pick it up again. If not, then you’ve saved yourself some major cash.

Another great system for cutting costs? The envelope method. 

Ready to ditch debt, save money, and build real wealth? Download my FREE Ultimate Guide to Personal Finance.

Back to Top

The Envelope Method

The envelope method works by putting cash for all your monthly expenses (e.g., gas, going out, shopping) into dedicated envelopes.

For example, you might have an envelope for “Restaurants,” so everytime you go out to eat you’ll take money from it to spend. Once you’ve used all the money in the envelope, you’re finished for the month!

This method is flexible in terms of being able to dip into other envelopes if there’s an emergency. However, there’ll be less money to spend for the month on that category of expenses.

You don’t need to use physical envelopes either. One of my friends who started tracking her spending a while back had a great system: She set up a separate bank account with a debit card.

Whatever system you decide to use, you just need to make sure to decide how much you’re willing to spend in each category (and that’s all up to you).

If you think this system will help you be more conscious about your spending, you can read more about it in this post on how to set up your envelope system. 

If you’re worried about your personal finances, I have a simple step-by-step system you can follow to put you at ease. Check out my Ultimate Guide to Personal Finance for tips you can implement TODAY.

Back to Top

Money Saving Tip #2: Earn More (the BEST way to save money)

As Ramit always says, there’s a limit to how much you can cut, but there’s no limit to how much you can earn.

Before you roll your eyes and skip this step, it is ALWAYS possible to earn more. Even if there’s a recession, even if you’re broke, or busy, or don’t know where to start. 

According to Ramit, there are several ways to start earning more. You can ask for a raise at your current job, find a higher paying job, or start a business or pick up freelance work.

Ask for a Raise 

With just a five-minute conversation you can make thousands more and, what’s better, the gains add up year after year.

This is one of the best ways to make money through a single conversation. It’s essentially quick money that — unlike taking surveys or selling your body to medical studies — gives you a LOT of money over many years.

Check out this chart demonstrating the effects of ONE $5,000 raise:

Ramit wrote a huge, comprehensive post on how to negotiate your salary. It’s got a ton of information, and the steps are easy to follow. If you’re ready to start getting paid what you deserve, go check it out. 

BONUS: I also created a free guide with everything you need to start earning more at your current job. Download the Ultimate Guide to Getting a Raise and Boosting Your Salary to start earning more TODAY.

Find a higher paying job 

Should you change jobs? Change industries? How do you know whether to stay put or to take a risky move that may result in more money? 

Some jobs just don’t provide the opportunity to earn more or move up the ladder. If you want to start making more money, you may have to find a better job. If you find yourself in this situation, Ramit has a ton of great resources on finding a better job on YouTube.

Start with this video:

Writing a winning resume is the first step to finding a higher paying job.

(We also have an entire course dedicated to Finding Your Dream Job. To learn more, click here.)

Back to Top

Start a business or start freelancing

Finding a new job or changing careers takes time. But in the next few days, you can set up your first side hustle. Once you get your first paying client, it’ll be easier to get more clients and make more money.

First thing: Many other websites will tell you to troll for freelance gigs on places like Fiverr or Mechanical Turk. These places work if you want to compete with people all over the world in a race to do the most work for less. No thanks.

Instead, look at what you’ve already got. 95% of jobs can translate into some sort of side gig. Ask yourself:

What do I enjoy?

What do I do with my free time?

What do people ask me to do because I’m so good at it?

Start off by assessing the skills you use every day at home or at work. Remember, people pay for solutions, not your skills. How can you take your skills and turn them into a solution for someone else’s problem? 

Here’s a very simple example:

Skill: You’re good at math 

Problem you can solve: With schools shut down in most states, many parents are struggling to help their kids with distance learning, and would happily pay for tutoring. 

Your New Side Hustle: Tutoring kids in math over Facetime or Zoom. 

Now imagine if by tutoring for a few hours a week, you suddenly had an extra 500 hundred dollars a month. 

That money can go straight to savings without reducing any of your spending. And this is just one small scale example, it can work for virtually any skill.  That’s why earning more is one of the best ways to save money. 

If you want to turn your skill into extra cash, check out this post with everything you need to know about starting a side gig. 

Making more money is easier than you think. Download my FREE Ultimate Guide to Making Money to get started today.

Back to Top

Money Saving Tip #3: Optimize your spending

A lot of people don’t know that they can save thousands of dollars in one day with just a few phone calls. You can call up a company you spend money with, and ask them to waive fees or interest charges, or lower your rates. 

And yes, these companies will be willing to offer you a discount. You have to understand that these companies spent a lot of money to acquire you as a customer, so they don’t want to lose you (especially in the current circumstances). 

Many companies are also thinking long term. If they can retain you as a customer (even if you’re not spending as much right now), over time they can get you to spend more in the future.

You have a lot of power as a renter, tenant, and customer, and you should use that leverage.

Below is a video on how you can save $1,000 with just 5 phone calls. This is what we mean when we say, “only make the changes that have the biggest impact”. 

Instead of saving $3 by not buying a latte, you can negotiate your bills and save $1,000 while still buying all the lattes you want. That’s why using the CEO approach is the best way to save money. 

Don’t be intimidated by negotiating, even if you’ve never done it before. Here are some of the messages Ramit has received from students who used these exact techniques to save money.

By using all the tactics outlined in this post, this could be you in just a few hours. 

Remember, the best way to save money is by cutting costs on things you don’t need, earning more by improving your salary or starting a side hustle, and optimizing your spending through negotiation. 

It sounds like a lot, but it’s really just three steps to save more money without giving up everything you love. 

If you use this strategy and it works for you, feel free to send your story to @ramit on Instagram. We love hearing from you.

The Best Way to Save Money is a post from: I Will Teach You To Be Rich.

from Finance https://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/best-way-to-save-money/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[andrewdburton]

The Best Way to Save Money

There’s really only one way to save money. You have to spend less than you earn. For most people that means cutting back on lattes and going out less, but there are actually much better strategies for spending less than you earn. 

At IWT, we believe the best way to save money is by utilizing the CEO approach.

The CEO Approach: The Best Way to Save Money

C- Cut Costs

The A La Carte Method

The Envelope Method

E- Earn More 

Ask for a Raise

Get a Higher Paying Job

Start a Business/Start Freelancing

O- Optimize Spending 

Traditional advice about saving money only focuses on restricting. By looking at other ways to improve your finances, such as earning more and optimizing your spending, you open up a plethora of new avenues for saving more. 

That’s what makes the CEO approach the best way to save money. We’ll show you how to get started today.  

Money Saving Tip #1: Cut Costs

Most of us know what it means to cut costs. But cutting costs doesn’t have to mean giving up everything you love. 

The best way to save money is by focusing on cutting costs only on things you don’t really care about or don’t use. This way, the change is more likely to be permanent. The two best ways to save money by cutting costs are with the A La Carte method, or the envelope method.

The A La Carte Method

The A La Carte Method helps you save money on services for which you have a subscription, like:

Netflix

Gym memberships

Spotify

Amazon Prime

Magazines

There’s a good chance you’re WAY overpaying for these things.In fact, a conservative estimate shows that we spend over $1,800/year on subscriptions alone.

The convenience is undeniable — subscriptions are a fantastic way to automate our lives.

But when was the last time you scrutinized your monthly subscriptions and canceled one?

Probably never. Yet compare this to any time you went out shopping, saw something you liked, but didn’t buy it.

Read that again. It’s the key to cutting your spending on subscriptions. 

The basic idea of this system is to cancel all your discretionary subscriptions — magazines, Spotify, Netflix — and buy what you need a la carte.

Instead of paying a big monthly fee to companies like Netflix, buy or rent only the shows or movies you want to watch on Amazon or iTunes. Most episodes of T.V. shows are only $1.99. 

Buy a day pass for the gym each time you go (around $5 – $10).

Buy songs you want from Amazon or iTunes for $0.99 each.

This FORCES you to be conscious with your spending. By utilizing the same principles that make automating your finances great, you will have to actively think about each charge you make when it comes to buying a song or TV show.

If after a while, you find yourself spending enough money on these items to justify the subscription, by all means pick it up again. If not, then you’ve saved yourself some major cash.

Another great system for cutting costs? The envelope method. 

Ready to ditch debt, save money, and build real wealth? Download my FREE Ultimate Guide to Personal Finance.

Back to Top

The Envelope Method

The envelope method works by putting cash for all your monthly expenses (e.g., gas, going out, shopping) into dedicated envelopes.

For example, you might have an envelope for “Restaurants,” so everytime you go out to eat you’ll take money from it to spend. Once you’ve used all the money in the envelope, you’re finished for the month!

This method is flexible in terms of being able to dip into other envelopes if there’s an emergency. However, there’ll be less money to spend for the month on that category of expenses.

You don’t need to use physical envelopes either. One of my friends who started tracking her spending a while back had a great system: She set up a separate bank account with a debit card.

Whatever system you decide to use, you just need to make sure to decide how much you’re willing to spend in each category (and that’s all up to you).

If you think this system will help you be more conscious about your spending, you can read more about it in this post on how to set up your envelope system. 

If you’re worried about your personal finances, I have a simple step-by-step system you can follow to put you at ease. Check out my Ultimate Guide to Personal Finance for tips you can implement TODAY.

Back to Top

Money Saving Tip #2: Earn More (the BEST way to save money)

As Ramit always says, there’s a limit to how much you can cut, but there’s no limit to how much you can earn.

Before you roll your eyes and skip this step, it is ALWAYS possible to earn more. Even if there’s a recession, even if you’re broke, or busy, or don’t know where to start. 

According to Ramit, there are several ways to start earning more. You can ask for a raise at your current job, find a higher paying job, or start a business or pick up freelance work.

Ask for a Raise 

With just a five-minute conversation you can make thousands more and, what’s better, the gains add up year after year.

This is one of the best ways to make money through a single conversation. It’s essentially quick money that — unlike taking surveys or selling your body to medical studies — gives you a LOT of money over many years.

Check out this chart demonstrating the effects of ONE $5,000 raise:

Ramit wrote a huge, comprehensive post on how to negotiate your salary. It’s got a ton of information, and the steps are easy to follow. If you’re ready to start getting paid what you deserve, go check it out. 

BONUS: I also created a free guide with everything you need to start earning more at your current job. Download the Ultimate Guide to Getting a Raise and Boosting Your Salary to start earning more TODAY.

Find a higher paying job 

Should you change jobs? Change industries? How do you know whether to stay put or to take a risky move that may result in more money? 

Some jobs just don’t provide the opportunity to earn more or move up the ladder. If you want to start making more money, you may have to find a better job. If you find yourself in this situation, Ramit has a ton of great resources on finding a better job on YouTube.

Start with this video:

Writing a winning resume is the first step to finding a higher paying job.

(We also have an entire course dedicated to Finding Your Dream Job. To learn more, click here.)

Back to Top

Start a business or start freelancing

Finding a new job or changing careers takes time. But in the next few days, you can set up your first side hustle. Once you get your first paying client, it’ll be easier to get more clients and make more money.

First thing: Many other websites will tell you to troll for freelance gigs on places like Fiverr or Mechanical Turk. These places work if you want to compete with people all over the world in a race to do the most work for less. No thanks.

Instead, look at what you’ve already got. 95% of jobs can translate into some sort of side gig. Ask yourself:

What do I enjoy?

What do I do with my free time?

What do people ask me to do because I’m so good at it?

Start off by assessing the skills you use every day at home or at work. Remember, people pay for solutions, not your skills. How can you take your skills and turn them into a solution for someone else’s problem? 

Here’s a very simple example:

Skill: You’re good at math 

Problem you can solve: With schools shut down in most states, many parents are struggling to help their kids with distance learning, and would happily pay for tutoring. 

Your New Side Hustle: Tutoring kids in math over Facetime or Zoom. 

Now imagine if by tutoring for a few hours a week, you suddenly had an extra 500 hundred dollars a month. 

That money can go straight to savings without reducing any of your spending. And this is just one small scale example, it can work for virtually any skill.  That’s why earning more is one of the best ways to save money. 

If you want to turn your skill into extra cash, check out this post with everything you need to know about starting a side gig. 

Making more money is easier than you think. Download my FREE Ultimate Guide to Making Money to get started today.

Back to Top

Money Saving Tip #3: Optimize your spending

A lot of people don’t know that they can save thousands of dollars in one day with just a few phone calls. You can call up a company you spend money with, and ask them to waive fees or interest charges, or lower your rates. 

And yes, these companies will be willing to offer you a discount. You have to understand that these companies spent a lot of money to acquire you as a customer, so they don’t want to lose you (especially in the current circumstances). 

Many companies are also thinking long term. If they can retain you as a customer (even if you’re not spending as much right now), over time they can get you to spend more in the future.

You have a lot of power as a renter, tenant, and customer, and you should use that leverage.

Below is a video on how you can save $1,000 with just 5 phone calls. This is what we mean when we say, “only make the changes that have the biggest impact”. 

Instead of saving $3 by not buying a latte, you can negotiate your bills and save $1,000 while still buying all the lattes you want. That’s why using the CEO approach is the best way to save money. 

Don’t be intimidated by negotiating, even if you’ve never done it before. Here are some of the messages Ramit has received from students who used these exact techniques to save money.

By using all the tactics outlined in this post, this could be you in just a few hours. 

Remember, the best way to save money is by cutting costs on things you don’t need, earning more by improving your salary or starting a side hustle, and optimizing your spending through negotiation. 

It sounds like a lot, but it’s really just three steps to save more money without giving up everything you love. 

If you use this strategy and it works for you, feel free to send your story to @ramit on Instagram. We love hearing from you.

The Best Way to Save Money is a post from: I Will Teach You To Be Rich.

from Finance https://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/best-way-to-save-money/ via http://www.rssmix.com/