Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Anxiety or Aggression? When Anxiety in Children Looks Like Anger, Tantrums, or Meltdowns

Anxiety or Aggression? When Anxiety in Children Looks Like Anger, Tantrums, or Meltdowns

375,783 views 
Anxiety or Aggression? When Anxiety in Children Looks Like Anger, Tantrums, or Meltdowns

  

 

    

    

    

   

      

     

  flight fight 

        

   

   

  

   

   

    

     

  

     fight 

   

    

  

     

   

    

   

  

         

Is that hot cocoa you’re holding?!

   

Find yourself a breathing buddy.

   

  

  before              

  

     

 

  

 

     

        

       

      

  

  

Free Today

Free Apps

Now in your city!



Sent from my iPhone

Monday, December 26, 2016

Why Obama Failed

Why Obama Failed

No presidency in my lifetime was greeted with such enthusiasm and unhinged hope as that of Barack Obama. At the start of his first term, a cult-like following had already developed among the intellectual and media elite. It was the dawn of a new age, marked by exuberant anticipation of justice, fairness, equality, peace, and sea-to-shining-sea happiness, all of it predicted as a certainty once you consider the sheer intelligence, erudition, and good intentions of the great man. 

Salon sums up the Obama era thusly:

Obama campaigned on hope in 2008 and it helped turn out a large and diverse electorate, excited at the idea that this charming man who could be the hero of a feel-good movie would give us our happy ending. He spent the next years cultivating that image….. through it all, he radiated hope and racked up some impressive victories — passing universal health care legislation, killing Osama bin Laden, getting the federal bureaucracy largely working as it should again — that justified his heroic image.

Now two months following the greatest political upheaval most of us will ever witness, we are seeing the dawning of a new reality: Obama failed. The supposed successes such as the Affordable Care Act have become a handful of dust, and we are left with a huge amount of executive orders and signed legislation that seem destined for repeal. 

Eight years in office, and there’s not much to show for it. Economic growth never did take off. Hope and change ended in frustration and fear. The last month of the Obama years has been spent in a frenzy to do something, anything, important to secure his place in history: releasing prisoners, imposing new regulations, putting on the final spin. 

Why He Flopped

What was the source of the failure? It was the same at the beginning that it was at the end. Despite his intelligence, erudition, earnestness, and public-relations genius, and the mastery of all the Hollywood-style theatrics of the presidency, Obama’s central problem was his failure to address the driving concern of all of American life: the economic quality of our own lives. 

In other words, despite his hope and charm, his highly credentialed brain trust, his prestige cabinet, and all the enthusiasm of his followers, he did not end persistent economic stagnation. The movie has ended. We leave the theater with an empty popcorn-bag, a watery soda, and once again deal with the real world instead of the fantasy we watched on the screen. 

Now, you can chalk this up to many factors but let’s just suppose that Obama and his team truly did have the best intentions going into this. What was the missing piece? He never understood economics and he had very little appreciation for the power of freedom to create wealth and prosperity. 

The Greenbergs, not intending to make the same point, describe the problem:

His legacy regrettably includes the more than 1,000 Democrats who lost their elections during his two terms. Republicans now have total control in half of America’s states.

Why such political carnage?

Faced with the economy’s potential collapse as he took office, Mr. Obama devoted his presidency to the economic recovery, starting with restoring the financial sector. But he never made wage stagnation and growing inequality central to his economic mission, even though most Americans struggled financially for the whole of his term.

Which is to say that his failed economics agenda drove the party into the ground. 

At the same time, Mr. Obama declined to really spend time and capital explaining his initiatives in an effective way. He believed that positive changes on the ground, especially from economic policies and the Affordable Care Act, would succeed, vindicating his judgment and marginalizing his opponents.

He truly did believe it would work, whereas anyone with basic economics understanding could foresee that the ACA would fail. Anyone familiar with the history of socialism would know failure was baked into the entire command-and-control apparatus. 

Absent a president educating the public about his plans, for voters, the economic recovery effort morphed into bailouts — bank bailouts, auto bailouts, insurance bailouts. By his second year in office, he spotlighted the creation of new jobs and urged Democrats to defend our “progress.”

When President Obama began focusing on those “left behind” by the recovery, he called for building “ladders of opportunity.” That communicated that the president believed the country’s main challenges were unrealized opportunity for a newly ascendant, multicultural America, rather than the continuing economic struggle experienced by a majority of Americans.

Which is to say that he took wealth creation for granted, as if it were a machine that would run on its own without necessary fuel. His administration saw its job as the one the media and academic elite cheered on: achieving cosmetic gains for the gauzy causes of social justice, cultural inclusion, and progressive government management. To be sure, there are policy changes that could have been pursued on this front – such as ending the drug war and penal reform – but these were both too little and too late. 

Economic Ignorance

The first extended treatment I read of Obama’s economic outlook was from David Leonhardt in August 2008, based on a series of interviews with the candidate for president. As usual, Obama was compelling throughout. Concerning his actual views on economics, however, he became vague, defaulting back to a technocratic center that rejected both free markets and socialism. 

Leonhardt caught on quickly and commented: “He can be inspiring when talking about how the country ended up being the envy of the world. But when he comes to the part about what he wants to do next, how he wants to keep America the envy of the world, it can sound a little like a State of the Union laundry list.”

 A laundry list of policies is pretty much the whole of Obama’s economic thought. He never had a big idea, a mental framework for thinking about economic fundamentals. All the interviews in this period illustrate how brilliance does not come prepackaged with economic understanding. He simply had none. 

Obama never figured out where wealth comes from, the contribution of freedom to its creation, the role of property rights in securing prosperity, much less how government controls and mandates hold back growth. Every time these ideas were brought up, he would dismiss them as Reagan-era fictions. Moreover, denouncing trickle-down economics always elicited cheers from all the fashionable people. 

Technocratic Takeover

He took office in 2009 in the midst of a financial meltdown. He had to deal with a fantastic mess of bailouts and monetary interventions that he could not begin to understand. He continued his predecessor’s policies, agreeing with Bush’s zero-tolerance policy toward an economic downturn, however brief it might have been. He packed his economic team with technocrats and bailout masters and never looked back. 

To some extent, this was all understandable. The mainstream of the economics profession has long rendered the problem of generating prosperity as a matter of engineering. Scientific management of macroeconomic aggregates could manipulate outcomes, provided the right experts were in charge and given enough resources and power. Lacking independent convictions on the topic, Obama outsourced his knowledge to these mainstream conventions with all their pomp and conceit. They failed him and the rest of us completely.  

Eight years later, in an April 2016 interview in the same venue, Obama seems just as lost on the topic. “I can probably tick off three or four common-sense things we could have done where we’d be growing a percentage or two faster each year,” Obama said. “We could have brought down the unemployment rate lower, faster. We could have been lifting wages even faster than we did. And those things keep me up at night sometimes.”

To this day, he still has no ear for the topic. Precisely how might he have brought down unemployment? How was he going to lift wages? There is no control room in Washington, D.C., that you can enter and turn some dial to lower unemployment and boost wages. If there were, he surely would have done that. The relation between cause and effect in economics continues to elude him. 

In another interview in 2016, faced with failure in health care and jobs, his frustration on the topic yielded this bit of honesty. “One of the things that I've consistently tried to remind myself during the course of my presidency is that the economy is not an abstraction. It's not something that you can just redesign and break up and put back together again without consequences."

It's amazing that he would have to "remind" himself that no one can redesign an economy. Still, it's good that he figured out that much. Would that he has followed up further and earlier on the implications of that statement. He would then know that the government cannot create outcomes; it can only hinder them. 

Ruling Cannot Create Wealth 

In some ways, this highly educated man with impeccable credentials and all the right friends, was a victim of a system of education that suppressed the great truths about economics.  

Despite his vast knowledge on seemingly everything, and endless amounts of charm to sell himself to the public, he missed the one crucial thing. He never understood wealth is not a given; it must be created through enterprise and innovation, trade and experimentation, by real people who need the freedom to try, unencumbered by a regulatory and confiscatory state. This doesn’t happen just because there is a nice and popular guy in the White House. It happens because the institutions are right. 

That most simple lesson eluded him. Had it not, he might have turned failure to success. Instead of imposing vast new regulations, passing the worst health care reform in American history, saddling industry with endless burdens, he might have gone the other direction. 

Obama wisely said at the DNC convention that “we don’t look to be ruled.” “America has never been about what one person says he'll do for us,” he said. “It's always been about what can be achieved by us, together, through the hard, slow, sometimes frustrating, but ultimately enduring work of self-government.” 

It was supposed to be an attack on Trump. It might also be an attack on his own administration handled the economy. Would that he have seen that this is not just true in politics; it’s the core principle of economics too. 

And so he leaves office, confused about what went wrong, worried about his legacy, alarmed at the destruction of his party, and fearful about the forces of reaction that his health care reform and persistent economic stagnation has unleashed. There is an element of tragedy here. It is the fate of a man who knew everything except the one thing he needed to know in order to generate genuine and lasting hope and change. 

You can have all the highest hopes, best aspirations, vast public support, and all the prestige backing in the world. But if you can't get economics right, nothing else falls into place. 



Sent from my iPhone

Sunday, December 25, 2016

It's My Pleasure a Testament to the Value of Simple Wisdom

It's My Pleasure a Testament to the Value of Simple Wisdom

Chick-fil-A has long been celebrated as a company that does things a little differently. From the familiar phrase “It’s my pleasure” ringing through its restaurants to being closed on Sunday, this fast food favorite has developed one of the most powerful and distinctive cultures in American business.

Chick-fil-A Vice President Dee Ann Turner believes much of the company’s success can be found in concentrating on the small details. Instead of focusing on success at any cost, the Atlanta based company has chosen to focus on honor, dignity, and respect in everything that they do. Simply put, it’s much more than selling a tasty chicken sandwich.

I recently sat down with Turner to discuss her new book, It’s My Pleasure, why Chick-fil-A is America’s favorite fast food restaurant, and why her company finds it of the highest importance to incorporate biblical principles into their business.

You have had a successful career as a corporate executive for one of the largest restaurant chains in America. I’m not sure author was on your list of career pursuits. I understand this book originated from a blog post. What inspired you to write It’s My Pleasure?

It was a combination of things that happened at the same time. I had lost the two biggest mentors in my life – my dad and Truett Cathy. Truett, of course, is the founder of Chick-fil-A. During the course of those 12 months I heard an Andy Stanley sermon about Joseph. His question in that sermon was, ‘God, what would you have me do in these circumstances?’ So, I started praying that prayer. The other part for me was I said if you say so, I will. This meant that if God told me to go meet somebody or to something I would do that. Through all of that a publisher that asked me whether I was interested in publishing a book contacted me. I told them I didn’t know. But then I poured out the first half of it while sitting on a beach over Christmas vacation. It was through that that I realized I had a lot to say. The two things that are the most important to me about it is that I wanted the people who didn’t know Truett and didn’t know his people principles to never forget them and the people who came after him would never forget them and also know. He would say, ‘We are not in the chicken business. We are in the people business.’

From a real high level, what do you think the key to success has been for Chick-fil-A over the years?

I think the single most important thing is, and Truett always said this, people decisions are the most important decisions we make. And the single most important people decision we make is who we give the key to the restaurants to. That restaurant leader, I believe with all my heart, and the consistency of the selection of those leaders and what they have done in their restaurants is to model a lot of things that Truett did with his very first restaurant. I think that is the key to the whole thing.

That leads me right into my next question. What does it take to create a compelling culture? Is there a set formula or does it differ from franchise to franchise?

I think there have been four key parts for Chick-fil-A. It all starts with knowing why you are in business at all. For Truett, the corporate purpose did not come about until Chick-fil-A had existed for about 20 years. It really came about in a time of crisis. We had hit our first sales slump ever which was in 1982. He had just opened a new Chick-fil-A campus in the southern part of Atlanta. He was heavily in debt. They were trying to figure out what they were going to do about this. Truett took his executives and went on a retreat. A lot of companies would come back with a reduction of job force plan, a new marketing plan for selling more chicken, a greater incentive plan, or a cost reduction plan. But they didn’t do that. They came back with a purpose for why we were in business at all. That is … to glorify God by being a faithful steward of everything entrusted to us and to be a positive influence on everyone who comes in contact with Chick-fil-A. That changed everything. We haven’t had a sales slump since then. In fact, we have had positive sales increases every year since. Amazing results happen when you just decide that business is something bigger than ourselves. It’s not just about selling chicken. It’s about the impact we can have on lives. Second is knowing your mission, what you are in business to do. And missions change over time. At one time, we were focused on being America’s best quick service restaurant that satisfies every guest. When we accomplished that we needed to have something new. Our current mission is really simple. Anyone can remember it. It is, “Be Remarkable”. That phrase is really important because what it really means is that we would be so remarkable in our food, service, and the guest experience that guests would want to remark about us in a positive way. Quickly, the last two are establishing your core values and lastly, a set of guiding principles.

In your book you write about nurturing an abundance mentality. Why is this important?

As a leader, I see this everyday. You can get so much more done when people don’t care who gets the credit. Or that they believe there is enough for everybody. In environments where there is a scarcity mentality you see it. People snitch behind people’s backs because somebody got a promotion and they didn’t. Or they are constantly doing things to claw their way to the top. We have tried to create a culture where there is enough for everybody. We want everybody to be wildly successful. There is a focus on the individual both at the corporate level and also among our franchisees. When everyone is successful we are all successful.

Recently, Chick-fil-A was voted America’s favorite fast food restaurant by the American Customer Satisfaction Index Restaurant Report. Earning this type of award just didn’t happen overnight. From your view, why does your restaurant have such an appeal with Americans?

I go back to what we were talking about a little while ago. Meticulous, careful selection of who receives the keys to our franchises. Truett used to say, ‘If I’m going to do this (quick service concept) I’ve got to find people who will run these restaurants like I would run them.’ He looked for people who had a heart to go into business for themselves but not necessarily the financial outlay required. He looked for people who had a servant’s heart. He looked for people who were leaders and could engage their employees and guests. He meticulously selected them and made sure everybody who did that work after him was just as careful. For instance, when I was doing corporate talent acquisition the last thing I would ask potential franchisee owners is why would I want my children to work for you? If I wouldn’t want my children to work for you then no one else would want their children to work for you. I wanted to hear that answer. That was one of the ways I used to make my decision about a franchisee on that basis. This has permeated throughout our business because Truett did it right from the start. It’s so much easier when you start your business that way. It’s the foundation for everything.

An important concept that Chick-fil-A stresses is something called Second Mile Service. I understand it is based on a biblical principle. Can you explain?

If you go back to the New Testament of Matthew, Jesus teaches, and He explains that if a Roman soldier asks you to carry his pack one mile then carry it for two. That was the premise for the whole thing. It actually came from Dan Cathy (Truett’s son), this idea of if we want to endear people to us than we have to go above and beyond the others. With first mile service, you come into our restaurant and you expect your order to be correct, you expect to receive it in a timely manner, you expect the team members to be reasonably friendly, and you expect the restaurant to be clean. But with second mile service that’s where we become remarkable. What you might not be expecting is that large orders are going to be carried out to your car for you. Or somebody is going to come by and refresh your beverage at your table. They might bring a big pepper grinder and put fresh ground pepper on your salad.

As an author, what is the one thing you want your readers to get out of reading It’s My Pleasure?

Everything we do is an opportunity to impact the lives of others. Some are called to sell chicken but that doesn’t mean we sell chicken for chicken sake. We try to impact lives all over the world. In the book, I write about some of the things we do internationally in places that have never heard of Chick-fil-A or Truett Cathy. We are impacting lives through this trickle down effect in our organization. When you commit yourself to doing something that’s impactful for generations to come I think that is much more significant and fulfilling.



Sent from my iPhone