BX Blogger

When Did Elections Become So Unimportant?

2006-03-07T22:17:00.000-07:00

One more quick look around the websites of the 4 major TV stations across New Mexico before I begin...Nope not a mention anywhere of any election results or even an election for that matter, save for a 1/2 paragraph blurb on the New Mexico Fox channel website. In fact, minus the useless and incredibly vague scroll bar across the bottom of Channel 4's broadcast during the 8 o'clock hour, there wasn't even a peep about the STATEWIDE round of elections going on today, until the various evening news broadcasts began.

First on the scene at 9pm was the Fox channel who dedicated a whopping 3 minutes at the top of their show to a few scattered results of assumed importance. I'm sure the people in the 3 or 4 areas that they mentioned felt important, but as I don't live in any of those areas they meant squat to me. SO off I go to the website, confident that at least now after they have been able to report some of the results that some of that information, and hopefully more would be reflected on their website....I would be wrong.

I then begin flipping back and forth between the show I want to watch and the Fox channel thinking surely they will mention more results throughout the hour...again I would be wrong, but it is now the 10 o'clock hour and the rest of the news broadcasts are coming on. Results on the races around the state are mentioned in various amounts of detail and more assumed importance, but I am not worried since surely NOW there must be some information on at least one of the 4 stations websites...once again I am wrong.

In fact as I sit here at the computer now at just past 10:30pm and over 30 minutes past the time each of the stations has reported election results, I have yet to see one mention of any of them, or even the fact that there was an election today on any of their websites. (save the previously mentioned 1/2 paragraph blurb on the local Fox channel's website)
In their defense, I was able to find a link on all of the stations websites, with varying degrees of difficulty, to the Secretary of State's election information page. However, from the time I began to check around 7pm to approximately 10pm it only led to a "Page could not be displayed" error page. Shortly after 10pm there was a page available, but only referencing the June 2006 primary and various other voting information.

So my questions is the same as the title of this article...When Did Elections Become So Unimportant? After all, are these not the future Governor's, Senators, Members of Congress and other various higher positions of authority in the state we could be electing into office? Surely, the residents voting for the officials that will interact with them on an almost daily basis deserve to have the same level of coverage as an election for an offical who they may never meet in person in their lifetime? (and I'm not just talking about Presidential candidates here)

A brief moment as another screen I have open on my computer flashes that a webpage has been updated...Could it be actual results? I'm excited as one of the news story headlines now references the statewide elections, but my excitement is wasted as the 'full story' version reveals a similarly useless 1/2 paragraph which I will quote for you below...

**As seen on TheNewMexicoChannel.com**

Voters Head To Polls In Several Cities
POSTED: 9:38 am MST March 7, 2006 (My computer read approx. 10:40pm when I was notified of the update, but will give them the benefit of the doubt here)

There are mayoral elections Tuesday in Rio Rancho and Santa Fe as well as in several other cities.

There is no election in Albuquerque on Tuesday.

Polling places in areas where elections are taking place will be open 7 a.m.- 7 p.m.

**End of story**
(The Fox Channel story previously mentioned was not much better, but did at least mention a couple of the candidates names)

I'm not sure you can even call that a story, but then I'm not a journalist by trade.

It is entirely likely that I could contact each of the television stations and ask them why they felt the elections were so unimportant and would most likely get some seemingly heartfelt apology and a promise to do better next time, or may even be told where to stick my opinion. I will be sending a letter to each of the stations anyway, but anything said now does not excuse the fact that a state as small in population as New Mexico has 4 major news networks who don't respect their own viewers enough to give them the information that could potentialy change their lives.

As I close this off, it is 11:15pm and I see that KOB-TV, Channel 4, now has results for "most of the larger races" (their words and complete with number typos/errors), TheNewMexicoChannel.com KOAT Channel 7 has now taken down the headline previously quoted, KRQE Channel 13 still has no mention of the election at all, and KASA Fox Channel 2 has also apparently taken down the short story they had posted on their website. Freedom of the press is a wonderful thing...If it is actually used that is.

The Real Reason for Alternative Fuel Sources

2006-02-04T08:14:00.000-07:00

The debates are seemingly endless these days on the reasons we should be looking for ways to use alternative sources of fuel. It occurred to me recently though, that there is an even more important reason, that being the HUMAN cost. The steady and high cost to run your vehicle and heat your house, are certainly spurring public opinon in this direction, but stop for a moment and think of just how many people's lives are lost each year in attaining the traditional sources of fuel we use to today.

It goes without saying that the mining industry loses it's share of workers each year, which can apparently be attributed to negligence by the mine owners in many cases. While mining deaths in general seem to be at their lowest levels in many years, safety issues and the bottom line still seem to be butting heads. The oil industry is yet another dangerous fuel source industry where people are lost. Many workers have lost their lives in the various methods used to extract oil from the places it resides. One could argue that all of the soldiers who have died during the conflict in Iraq could be included in this group, but that is for another time.

The underlying reason behind these deaths, both for the worker and the companies that employ them, is money. This is no big secret as mines and oil companies rake in huge profits, although the oil industry is the clear winner, and new workers are lured in by high wages which supposedly compensate for the dangerous conditions. How many times though have you heard of a disastrous Solar panel catastrophe or a horrible Wind generator accident? I would venture a guess that most of you would say none. I'm sure there are accidents in every job field each year, just not with the same frequency or severity.

It is possible when considering the Ethanol fuel source as an alternative, one could include farming accidents in the mix, but even there the number of incidents are smaller and less severe. The point here is that above ground, clean energy would also appear to be safer to produce. Electricity, as it relates to a fuel source would also appear to be safe, although the electric industry has it's share of deaths each year as well.

With the current government administration now focusing on clean energy, if only to avoid war with other countries, the end result should be a safer environment for energy workers in the future. As these jobs become safer, their respective salaries may also go down, but alive with a few less dollars in their pocket is most likely something many would prefer over the alternative.

Forced Apology - The Bode Miller Story

2006-01-14T07:18:00.000-07:00

Let me start out with a clear statment here. I DO NOT condone the actions taken by Bode Miller, however...

For the Olympic athlete fans out there, Bode Miller is a household word, but to those of you who aren't, this story may have passed you by. Recently, Olympic Skier Bode (pronounced Bodee) Miller was profiled on the CBS television show '60 Minutes'. During this interview he was asked questions about his lifestyle, including drinking and partying which he is known to take part in.

Keep in mind that he was ASKED these questions by the interviewer and answered them honestly. This apparently prompted outrage within the various associations involved in professional skiing where Mr. Miller competes, ultimately ending with what can only be considered a forced apology to the public for the statements he made. So what's the problem here?

The problem is that these were questions he was asked directly by the interviewer and which he answered honestly. No doubt, Mr. Miller could have chosen to give some none-of-your-business type response or maybe even a political style 'non-answer' answer, but he did not. Bode Miller answered honestly and openly the questions posed to him and for this he has to apologize? What sort of example is this to other athletes who are interviewed or asked questions in the future, publicly or privately?

If this was as serious an issue as the powers that be in skiing are making it out to be, than why did nobody go to Mr. Miller directly and say, "Hey, you need to straighten up..." This is really just the equivalent of the skiing world saying, "Go ahead and do what you want on your own time, just don't tell anyone about it, because it will embarrass us."

In hindsight, perhaps Mr. Miller should have declined the interview, as I'm sure he knew he would be asked about his lifestyle. Whatever the right thing to do would have been, the wrong thing to do is punish someone for answering questions honestly. Punish the actions sure, but if that was the goal in this case, it should have been done while it was happening, not only after it was brought into the public eye. Honestly, nobody in the various skiing associations knew he partied and drank? Give me a break.

Sure I was appalled when I heard that Bode Miller had competed while still intoxicated, but nobody noticed and said "Give me your Skis"? Sure they noticed, but the paying public came to see Mr. Miller ski so they let him. At the end of the day, this was simply a matter of public embarrassment and someone being the scapegoat for it. Hopefully, Mr. Miller will compete responsibly from this point on and perhaps the skiing associations will become a little more proactive with their competitors now.

Resolving to Change is Just the First Step

2005-12-31T07:16:00.000-07:00

Have you made your New Year's resolution yet? Many people take this time of year to make decisions about their life and how it could be better. It must have something to do with the whole idea of starting fresh at the beginning of a year and the guilt for all the things done or left undone, in the past year.

Whatever the reason, people all over the world will make promises to themselves, that will be broken within days, weeks or sometimes months from now, but they will be broken in most cases. How can we stop this cycle you might ask?

The first step is to make resolutions that can be accomplished quickly. This differs somewhat from the standard goal setting techniques. However, setting short, and even easy goals and accomplishing them is only the first step. For many people, the list of resolutions goes on and on, and if they are lucky, one or two may be accomplished by the end of the year. By setting a few short term and easily completed resolutions, the person gains a set of successes that in turn build up their spirits and motivate them to do even more. This is not to say that common goal setting techniques do not work, just that people need to feel accomplishment in order to stay motivated.

Think of your standard weekend to-do list and let's say you have 10 things on it that need to be accomplished. Starting is actually the first accomplishment that many people never get past. Sometimes they look at the whole list (i.e. the goal), become overwhelmed and never even start for fear of failure, which in this case would be not getting the entire list of items completed. At the end of the day though, how would you feel if all you accomplished were two or three of those items? Most people by nature would feel guilty for not completing them all. So imagine how hard it would be to even get started the next time they attack the list?

By accomplishing even part of the list you have succeeded and herein lies the reason for most people's failure to keep resolutions. They assume failure when the whole task is not completed and failure is most definitely not a motivator, or at least not a very good one. We've all heard that you have to fail to learn how to succeed and this is true, but perception of failure or success is a key player. So back to the list again... If you sat down at the end of the day, or even the end of time you had devoted to accomplishing the tasks and had actually started AND completed even one of the items, you have succeeded.

This is now where step 2 comes in, and one most usually missed...Start Again. The phrase "If at first you don't succeed try, try again" really should be "If at first you don't accomplish everything, but did accomplish something, start again where you left off", of course in much more eloquent wording.

One definition of a resolution is, "A course of action determined or decided on", so decide on a course of action this year (your resolutions), and remember it is a journey and that the first step is getting started. If you accomplish only part of it and lose focus, stop; acknowledge your success to date and start again from there and repeat this until the journey is complete. All the best in the 2006 and may your journeys all be completed.

My Apologies to Mr. Letterman

2005-12-22T06:48:00.000-07:00

So here we are, on the near Eve of Christmas and what should we hear? A Santa Fe woman accusing 'Late Night' television show host, David Letterman of talking to her in code through her TV, wanting her to marry him and become his co-host on the show. Not such a big deal you might think, as there are all kinds of people out there in the world, with ALL kinds of ideas of their own.

The issue here is that she actually filed for a restraining order against David Letterman, based on these, what can only be considered delusions, and it was granted. So now the question begs to be asked, who is more delusional, the woman or the judge who granted the restraining order without even a shred of proof of any wrong-doing on the part of Mr. Letterman?

Perhaps if the woman in question had a record of some questionable contact, other than the 'code talking' through her TV, or some history of contact with Mr. Letterman, the restraining order could have been granted on at least something tangible.

There is more on the story here...
http://kobtv.com/index.cfm?viewer=storyviewer&id=23369

Everyone does indeed deserve their day in court, but this is just plain laughable. The end result here will be a lasting impression of how our beloved State of New Mexico not only has questionable characters living in it, but even worse, how a member of our judicial system somehow found this person's story as credible enough for legal action.

At the very least it's a great headline for the scandal sheets..."David Letterman proposes to woman through her TV". Sorry Dave, and please don't hold this against our great state.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to ALL!

Cool Cast Radio is LIVE!

2005-12-07T09:23:00.000-07:00

As of December 1st, 2005, our venture into the field of podcasting is up and running in the form of an online radio station broadcasting podcast content. Don't know what podcasting is? Internet Tech types have known for a long time, but you can get an full explanation here --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcasting.

While previous attempts have been made at organizing podcasts, more times than not, a good quality podcast, only lacking in exposure, will get buried deep amongst the myriad of podcasting content available through podcast directories. Itunes, Yahoo and others have developed large collections of freely available podcasts for download. The problem being, how do you decide on even just ONE that is worth downloading and then listening to?

CoolCast Radio strives to help alleviate this problem by playing this 'middle' section of podcasts within it's 24/7 streaming broadcast of podcast content. Up and coming podcasters looking to reach a new market can have their podcast inserted into the station's schedule, which can then be discovered by real-time listeners to the station. If a listener chooses, they can then download the podcast and any other podcasts from that show.

In the interest of appealing to a wider audience, the CoolCast stream broadcasts at levels low enough for even the low-end dial-up user to listen to the stream. This makes the ability to preview a podcast, that much more valuable, as downloading audio content can be very cumbersome and time consuming on even the best dial-up connection and often users on these lower end connections don't even bother to try.

As the first station of the recently formed BX Radio Network, this stands to become an innovative means to promote otherwise unknown podcasters to the online world as well as promote podcasting in general. The website also provides a Writer's Section where podcaster's and other writers can submit articles to be posted on the BX Radio website. If you would be interested in becoming a member of our podcast family or writing articles for the website, please contact Peter K Yanke at info@bxradio.net for more information.

The Minimum Wage Debate

2005-10-12T05:43:00.000-07:00

If the additional cost to employers could be addressed properly, there probably wouldn't be anyone who would vote against the minimum wage being raised. Unfortunately that is the biggest problem with raising minimum wage. The government earns more tax dollars from the employee, the employee earns more money, but the business has to almost immediately find a way to absorb the additional cost of the wage increase.

Most of the time businesses plan for raises and implement them at an appropriate time to do so, and when they have the revenue to support it. However in this case, there is no guarantee the business can afford it. The recently proposed increase to $7.50 per hour from $5.15 per hour would mean that the average business would have to shell out an additional $94.00 a week or almost $4900.00 a year PER full-time employee. For a small company with 5 - 10 employees that is nearly 25 to 50,000 dollars a year in extra overhead for the business. How many small businesses do you now that can absorb that kind of increase?

Another consideration is the employee who has already put in their time and earned seniority at their place of work and is already earning $7.50 or more an hour. How would you feel if you had put in 2,3, 5 or however many years in a job, only to have Joe/Jane Somebody start next week at the same rate of pay you make? Shouldn't all employees be given the same increase to maintain equality? Of course, this won't be the case and in fact, my educated guess would be that people of a higher wage may even be laid off, benefits may be cut, part-time hours may be reduced for higher paid employees, etc., to allow the company the ability to pay the higher minimum wage.

For the larger companies with hundreds of employees or even thousands, it only gets worse and who really gains here anyway? Lets start with the business side of things where most businesses will be forced to raise prices for goods and services to handle the additional overhead. Then you have the consumer who now has to pay those higher prices, so are they really gaining anything? Then you have the government tax rolls who now receive increased employee taxes, increased gross receipts tax from businesses, but may end up paying even more themselves for goods and services, which translates into a higher burden being placed on the taxpayer over the long haul.

Don't get me wrong here. I have longed believed the minimum wage issue should be addressed, but what is the reasonable solution? Perhaps a gradually decreasing government subsidy over the next 5 - 10 years would help businesses absorb some of the additional cost and not place an immediate burden on their bottom line. Another way may be to gradually increase the minimum wage over the next 5 years. Maybe an increase in minimum wage isn't even needed, but rather take a look at the major industries and daily costs people have like fuel, groceries, utilities, etc., and see if they can be adjusted/controlled to make the current minimum wage actually a decent living wage?

Whatever the solution is, it is more than just a simple matter of raising the amount. The economy is such a fragile thing and the whole picture needs to be looked at before making any decision of this magnitude. The bottom line is that people generally just want to do their job well and get paid a decent wage for doing so and be able to afford to pay their bills and buy groceries. There are entreprenurial types who want more out of life, but at the end of the day, if there is food on the table and your bills are paid, what more could you ask for?

UPDATED - Looting Should be made a Felony Offense

2005-09-04T01:00:00.000-07:00

Found this link after the fact: (http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/97/017/0065.htm) and I'm sure there are others.

(original post below)

While looting at it's base is really just theft and should probably be covered under normal law for a crime of this nature, there is a special circumstance when theft occurs after a major disaster, such as the recent Hurricane Katrina which devastated New Orleans among other communities.

Of course in cases like these, there are always special circumstances where the act may be considered looting, but is done to survive. For example, a father or mother takes from a store, water, canned goods, food items, shoes & clothing for their family whose personal belongings have been destroyed by a natural disaster. Whether they should be punished for this kind of act is for a judge to decide, but common sense would dictate otherwise in my opinion.

However, when the 'perpetrator' commits such an act with the intent of personal gain, I believe it turns into a completely different level of criminal act. Let's say that a person takes 15 pairs of Nike shoes from a store, or 50 pairs of denim jeans, or even basic supplies such as water or food items, and then turns around and sells them to people who are obviously in need after a natural disaster. This is the level at which looting should become a felony offense in and of itself and in addition to any other criminal charges.

This would be quite similar to say a convenience store or bank robbery where the person uses a weapon to aid in the criminal act. Additional charges are typically added to, or made more serious by the fact a weapon was used. This is also similar to the difference between regular assault and sexual assault, or even DWI and aggravated DWI, where the intoxication is found to be beyond a certain level and therefore treated as a more serious crime.

Additional charges and/or more serious penalties could be handed down by the judge trying a case as looting. Obtaining proof of the crime after/during a natural disaster could prove difficult, but as in most cases, the threat of punishment is supposed to be the purpose of having laws and should act as a deterrent to would be perpetrators.

I personally, am appalled by the level of looting that is going on in New Orleans and that entire region after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. Given that there was so much advance notice of the pending disaster and it's inevitable level of destruction, one would have thought the national guard or some other level of troops, would have been deployed prior to the disaster, or AT LEAST prepared to deploy the next day to maintain order and provide security in the area as well as help with evacuations. While this gets somewhat off the topic of this article, it is worth mentioning as it would have surely prevented the level of chaos we are seeing in the affected areas now.

Unfortunately, all we can do now is deal with the people and acts that have been committed, and certainly making these people an example by making looting a separate felonious act in the eyes of the law would act as a deterrent the next time something like this happens. Looting would still happen I'm sure, as crime is more often the result of opportunity rather than intent, but the average person would most likely think twice knowing the level of punishment they would incur ahead of time.

Pro's and Cons of a New Judge

2005-07-24T18:40:00.000-07:00

As many of you may or may not know, there has been a vacancy at the post of Seventh Judicial District Judge in New Mexico. The 7th Judicial district actually includes 4 counties; Catron, Sierra, Socorro and Torrance and was previously covered by Thomas G. Fitch, who resigned in April after being arrested for DWI. This position has since been filled by Matthew Reynolds of Truth or Consequences, NM, who was recently appointed by Governeor Bill Richardson.

There are some good things that come along with a change in the Judiciary, not the least of which is that the old ways of doing things come under review while the new judge gets acclimated into his new position. However this does not always lead to a major change in results as the grunt work is done by the same staff as before. Add to this, the immense workload of judiciating FOUR counties and one has to wonder if it can be done effectively at all.

One has to wonder if these counties would not be best served by ONE Judge each, and one who actually resides in that county? There are budget constraints to consider at the county level yes, but the end result would most certainly be for the better of the residents of each county.

Of course another factor to take into consideration is the 'learning curve' of a new judge. Yes, the law is still the law, but it takes on an entirely different view from behind the bench, rather than in front of it. Certainly the job will get done, one way or another, and this post is not to suggest that it won't, but when it's all said and done, what can really be expected from a new judge in this stuation?

The fact that a judge must be elected into office, is actually one that makes little sense to me. Perhaps being chosen by a committee of their peers would better fit the the bill. This is afterall how our Supreme Court Justices are chosen. How can a judge be truly impartial when they know that at some point they will need to massage the public opinion at some point in the future to remain in office? In fact, how can ANY member of the judiciary, police, sheriff or other enforcers of the law, be impartial, and run for office at the same time? There are always some that are, but wouldn't it be much easier to do so when public opinion didn't depend on who you let off with a warning and who you give a ticket to?

These are of course only MY opinions, but it is nearly a guarantee that when votes that determine someone's livelihood are on the line, corruption will follow. No one can say who or where, and it may even go completely un-noticed to the voting majority, but it will most definitely happen.

Renter's Insurance...Need we say more?

2005-07-05T21:25:00.000-07:00

It seems only fitting to write in regards to the pitfalls of leasing office space for your business, given the recent events of one of our local multi-business buildings which burnt to the ground.

In this instance, as the story goes so far, none of the eleven businesses housed in this building had any form of insurance for the contents of their offices, including the building's owner. (If I am wrong please correct me and I will write a retraction) However, even if only ONE business, carried on day-to-day activities without any form of liability or content insurance, it would be one too many. This should be a requirement of ANY commercial lease and residential lease for that matter, in my opinion, and while commercial building owners are required to have insurance for the building they are renting out, why is there no such stipulation for a lessee to be insured? (again if I am wrong please advise)

Please understand, I am not trying to make it harder for small businesses to get off the ground by adding to their startup costs, but one tragedy is all it takes to ruin a business, a career, even a life's work in some cases, and while insurance can only replace items with a monetary amount, REPLACEMENT is the key here. For business-owners, replacement is never fun or easy, but is made MUCH easier when money is not a factor, or at least not as big a factor when starting over.

The age-old adage applies of how 'that can never happen to me', and then it does and you best have a back up plan. As I stated, starting over is never pleasant or easy, but wanting to start over and not being able to because of a simple precautionary step not taken, I guarantee you is MUCH worse. So if you are running your business, or even just renting an apartment/home without some form of insurance, you best put it in your budget, before it's your story on the front page of the newspaper, with enough shoulda, coulda, woulda's to go around for a lifetime. A lesson learned before it happens to you is much more valuable than one learned after the fact.

Drugs, Crime and the Common Man

2005-04-24T14:15:00.000-07:00

SO you think drugs and crime don't affect you, because you don't use drugs or do anything illegal? Well this is where you would be wrong. This is no huge epiphany to the common man or woman. However, I recently lost a friend and business associate to these very things and it opened my eyes to the real affect they have.

Of course, one always thinks this kind of thing could 'never happen here' and then BAM there it is on the front page of the local newspaper and you're left wondering 'How DID this happen here?'. These things actually very rarely happen out the blue and almost always there is a history of events that if analyzed at the time, may have stopped it from happening. Even more rare though does the required intervention occur and before you know it, you are left pondering what could I have done.

Sometimes it is just an inevitable occurence and nothing you could have, would have or even did do would have changed the outcome. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try though, within the limits of personal safety, to say, do, or have someone else say or do something. I won't make this some long lament of the shoulda, coulda, woulda's, but the short point here is that if you are assuming it will take care of itself, it probably won't.

Does this mean you should protrude into other people's business at every opportunity, certainly not, but if you see a situation developing that may be harmful, you should at least try to say something. There will be cases more times than not, that you are told to mind your own business, but SOMETHING said, is always better than NOTHING said, regardless of the eventual outcome.

Perhaps it is inevitable to feel guilt in these situations, especially when you knew the people involved, and perhaps that is even a good thing, so that the next time, something WILL be said. It certainly doesn't take the pain of loss away, but if a lesson is learned from a situation like this, and that lesson prevents a similar occurence the next time, then something good has come from the experience.

So if you are thinking that drugs and crime aren't your problem, perhaps you should rethink your position before someone close to you is lost. While it may not seem so, it is MUCH easier to say something beforehand, than wish you had after.

Why EVERYONE Should Have a DNR Agreement in Place.

2005-03-25T10:04:00.000-07:00

This week we're going a little off the beaten path from usual topics to discuss DNR's or as they are more commonly known, DO NOT RESUSCITATE orders. First let me say that you do not need to have a DNR in place if you wish for doctors to use extraordinary measures to keep you alive. This includes feeding tubes, breathing machines or any other artificial means by which to keep a person alive. However, you most definitely should have a legal document spelling out in plain english exactly what you wish to happen should you ever end up in this situation. The recent Schiavo case is just one example of why.

Putting ethical questions aside for the moment, you MUST have something in writing to ensure YOUR wishes are followed under extreme circumstances where you are no longer able to clearly speak for yourself. Now you may be thinking, 'my health is okay right now' or 'I can do it once I'm sick' or some other similar reasoning. These statements might make sense if you are thinking strictly about illnesses, but understand that something as simple as a fall in your own house, a car accident and a whole variety of other unplanned events can suddenly incapacitate you and then what happens to you is no longer up to you if it is not legally documented somewhere.

Ethically speaking, I do not wish to force my own opinions on the subject onto you the reader. You should consider though, the feelings of the people you care for and the agony and grief that go with the inevitable fight over 'what you would have wanted' and who gets to make those decisions, as well as the aspect of financial responsibility.

There are several options available in cases like these, but the most commonly used tool is a Living Will. A quick search of the Internet can find you a long list of resources for this type of document, but whatever you choose, be sure to make it legal by getting it notarized. It would not hurt to have an attorney look it over either, but as long as your intentions are CLEAR, most any reasonably drawn up document will do. You must also be sure to let your feelings be known to more than one person so that there is no confusion when the time comes. Talk with your family and friends and let them know as well what YOU would like to have happen should the worst happen, even if you don't want to put it writing. If you have an attorney, at least inform him and even give him copy of your notarized document for your file, as well as your primary physician.

If you do not have any kind of documents in place, the default is for the doctor to use whatever reasonable means necessary to keep you alive. If this is what you want then perhaps you feel there is no need for such a document, but you may regret it. The purpose of a document like this is to not only speak to your doctor for you, but also to your family and friends. Decisions like who will look after the children, who will make financial decisions and even who will decide when enough is enough when it comes to trying to keep you alive.

Most people already have a decision made in their heads, now it needs to be put to paper. If you don't feel the need for yourself, do it for your family and friends. While they may not agree with your position, they will respect it if it is in writing and this will make the entire experience much easier for them.

Advertising Small Business in a Small Town

2005-02-26T01:25:00.000-07:00

I thought I would take a few minutes this week and talk about the ups and downs of advertising in small town media. In a normal scenario, media advertising is typically valued by the estimated number of readers (print), or listeners (radio). With a larger populace, such as a major city, this model woks well for the media outlet, but makes it difficult for small business to enter this arena. Large capital investments with little or no guarantee of return, keep many good businesses from advertising in these larger markets even though they exist in them.

From the standpoint of the consumer, there is some stigma attached to the fact of whether or not you advertise, and even moreso in a large population, where the number of businesses in any given field is higher. Advertising, whether a business can 'afford it' or not, seems to at least say; "We are in business, come see what we have to offer." That being said, it is easy to get lost in the crowd when the number of advertisers per capita goes up, and unless you set yourself apart somehow from the rest, the effectiveness of your advertising dollar can be diminished or even non-existant. This is where 'word-of-mouth' advertising works well, as it costs little or nothing at all, and in most cases reaps greater rewards than traditional advertising.

Most of this process is the same in a smaller community, however, the mindset of the consumer is slightly different. Decisions to buy are not necessarily swayed as much by location, as most shops are all accessible within roughly the same time frame from the consumer's home or office. This would appear to give the business that advertises a distinct advantage over the one that does not, but there is another dynamic in play here.

Small communities are more closely knit together, with smaller social circles, nepotism, etc. to deal with. As a business owner, it can be a longer process to build up a regular clientelle than in larger market where location is more a factor than anything else, at least for common items and services. However, in a small town, customers tend to be more loyal, often trading lower prices for familiarity, customer service and personal relationships. These things combined with regular advertising, paid or otherwise, make it easier for the small business owner to break into the marketplace in a small community.

Of course this same theory can work against a business much more quickly in a small town when things 'go wrong'. Where a larger population offers more potential new business, and mistakes can be more forgiving to the bottom line, a small town business mistake can have quick and often crippling affects if not handled correctly and quickly.

SO what is the answer to whether a business should advertise in a small town or not? Well, there are many effective ways to advertise in a small town, aside from traditonal methods (print/radio), that don't offer the same exposure or rewards in the larger areas. For example, sponsoring a local sports team, charitable giving and donations, taking part in community activities and associations. Generally speaking, these methods are quite affordable and may only have a time committment involved, but the rewards can be plentiful. Advertising with local media in a small town, dollar for dollar, is more affordable, and does raise the bar for small businesses that do it. Perhaps on a per capita basis the numbers of it all are the same, but if a small business is selective and regular with their advertising, and then backs it up with a quality product or service, the 'business relationships' that are built should sustain them for years to come.

Walmart and it's effect on the Small Town

2005-01-08T20:49:00.000-07:00

In the first weekly discussion on the BX Blogger, we will discuss the effects, perceived or otherwise, that the opening of Walmart in Socorro, NM will have on business and the local community.

Views locally and nationally are not that far apart from each other on the topic of Walmart, and while there are some real truths to the effects they have on businesses in it's immediate vicinity, there are also many assumptions made by shoppers and business owners alike.

It is true that product and service pricing come into play, but only to the degree of what the local market will bear. Any business who has done their homework, and can find a happy medium between what the market will pay for an item, and what price will still afford them a profit, shouldn't be that concerned. There is a caviat to this however, with respect to customer service and of course, the quality of the product or service being purchased. In light of this, the small business has an advantage, and even more so in a small town setting, where reputation and ties to friends and family play a much larger role in where people shop than they do in larger urban centers.

There is always the novelty factor when a new Walmart opens in a small town, and assumptions take shape here as shoppers assume prices will be lower than other places. This is true on certain items, but these items change constantly, and smart shoppers know where the specific items they buy cost the least, and will buy just those items at those places. This concept is similar to that of coupon clippers, who buy only certain brands, for the simple reason they have a coupon for it. The only difference here is that there is no need to clip coupons anymore, just read the weekly flyer from each store and plan out your shopping trip ahead of time.

Businesses like Walmart know of course that once they have you in their store for one item, they can count on convenience to get you to buy at least some of the other items you need, even if they are a few cents more. Many times, they will put one item on sale at a loss for just this reason, which isknown as a lost leader. So how does a business compete in this scenario?

Small businesses can be more flexible and react faster to market conditions if they pay attention to the market. For example, Walmart puts some select bicycles on sale one week. The local bicycle shop, most likely can't compete with the pricing on those specific items, but could run a matching special on cycling accessories for the next two weeks as there will most likely be a market for those items during that period.

This is only one example, but the key is here is not necessarily to try and compete with a store like Walmart, rather to find a way to co-exist with it. Businesses that can do this, will succeed where others will not. The items you sell and the way you promote and sell them will most likely need to change, but there is life after Walmart.

Comments and opinions expressed here are those of the person posting them and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this website. Members of the BX Blogger are welcome to post comments and opinions on this subject, but please keep it clean. Inappropriate and unrelated posts will be edited for content and/or deleted.

Please contact BX Internet at blog@bxinternet.com to become a contributor to the BX Blogger. We hope to bring you valuable, informational and insightful views on issues affecting Socorro and the surrounding area.