Simple Pleasures Include Financial Security
by Ben Stein
A few weeks ago, one of my favorite human beings, a handyman in Malibu, was fixing a balky kitchen cabinet door when he told me excitedly about his new car. "It's a Bentley," he said. "I've always wanted a Bentley. It's about 20 years old and needs so work, so I got it pretty cheap. I got it online at eBay."
"Great," I said. "Did you sell your Corvette or your Chrysler Sebring?"
"Neither," he said "The Bentley is my third car."
Consumer Debt Peonage
My heart sank. This fellow is a great handyman. He's a great guy in general. But he has no regular income of any size, works freelance, has either no savings or almost no savings, and isn't young.
Buy that car is placing himself into a form of peonage. He's made himself drastically more susceptible to downward mobility by having an extra monthly bill to pay for car costs, and he's deprived himself of money he could have saved. In a word, he's harmed himself.
If the Bentley breaks, as it will, his repair bills will be astronomical. I tried to gently point this out. He answered simply, "I love cars."
"Then good luck to you," I said and shrugged.
Lives Well-Lived
On the other side of the spectrum, I dined last night with an old friend from the glorious street of my childhood, Harvey Road in Silver Spring, Md.
Gene Daumit, who was accompanied by his beautiful wife, DeeDee, is a super-smart guy with a Ph.D. from MIT, a major job at a huge chemicals company, a spouse with a great job in real estate, a home and a vacation condo that are both paid for (or mostly paid for), a substantial pension, and impressive savings.
As they told me about their life, especially their wildly successful daughters, I said to them, "Your lives have been exemplars of prudence."
"No," said DeeDee. "We just kept it simple."
This showed staggering wisdom. People who can keep their lives simple are so far ahead of the game it's ridiculous: a steady job or a good business; saving money regularly starting at an early age; great self-discipline about health (Gene and DeeDee are thin and fit); instilling the same discipline in your kids -- it all adds up to a life well-lived.
Set Yourself Free
Gene and DeeDee's example weighed on me heavily, because in my own life and in the lives of those around me there's so much complexity: too many cars, too many houses (my main curse), too much of an image to have to show off, too much keeping up with the Joneses.
All of this keeps you stuck behind the eight ball for too much of your life, working and slaving to support a lifestyle that starts out as a pleasure and becomes a burden.
How do you get back on track? Call a family meeting or just sit down with your financial advisor. Make a list of your monthly obligations. How many of them do you really need? How many of them are freeing you and how many are enslaving you?
Generally speaking, with the exception of a home and a vacation house, if it's eating money and not paying out, you have to question if you really need it. Do you need that time share? Do you need those three cars? Do you need a $20,000 TV? (If you do, please tell me what's on that makes it worth paying that kind of money for.) Illiquid assets that you rarely use enslave you unless you have so much money that their cost is incidental.
The Liquid Life
On the other hand, liquid assets equal freedom, as my old dad used to say. Liquid assets that pay good dividends and have capital gain potential, such as index funds weighted toward companies that are financially strong, are especially lovely.
The XLU, the REIT, and the ICF are all lovely as well. Any form of broad index fund that tracks the larger markets at home or worldwide is a darned good thing -- and for most of us, far better than a third car.
The fact is that life is deeply uncertain. We often need money when we least expect it, and at that point a third car is useless. A third car doesn't compound unless you it's a rare antique. (I sure hope my handyman has such a car.)
Money in a broadly based mutual funds or a low-cost variable annuity does compound. Life goes by pretty quick, and as my old student Ferris Bueller said, "If you don't slow down, you might miss it." And slowing down takes money.
The Luxury of Financial Security
The Daumits have it right, and far too many of us have it wrong.
So keep it simple, my friends -- the burl-wood dashboard and plush leather seats of a Bentley may feel great, but opening up your mutual fund statement and seeing how much you have to cushion you and your family against life's uncertainties feels even better. Besides, peace of mind gets you down the road farther and in greater comfort.
Start now. Get those unnecessary monthly costs out of your life and replace them with monthly savings in broadly based funds. I promise you'll be grateful. And if you still want a Bentley, you can always go to the hobby shop and buy a model of one.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
drugs cause addiction by remodeling brain
Drugs may cause addiction by 'remodelling' brain by Marlowe Hood
Wed Apr 25, 2:16 PM ET
A heroin addict aching for a fix years after kicking the habit is not simply weak-willed but may be tormented by enduring changes in the brain caused by the drug itself, according a groundbreaking study released Wednesday.
In experiments carried out on rats, a team of American researchers at Brown University in Rhode Island showed that even a single dose of morphine physically altered the neural pathways that regulate the sensation of craving.
The change persisted long after the effects of the drug had worn off.
The study, published in the British journal Nature, adds weight to a new theory that sees addiction as a disease which "remodels" brain mechanisms related to learning and memory, the lead author, cellular physiologist Julie Kauer, said in an interview.
The findings also point the way to the tantalizing possibility of a pharmaceutical antidote to addiction, she added.
Kauer's experiments focused on the activity of synapses, the connective junction between brain cells.
So-called excitatory synapses increase the flow of chemicals -- such as dopamine, associated with a feeling of euphoria -- while inhibitory synapses impede such flows.
"You have to have both, because they create checks and balances on the system," she explained.
Previous studies have shown that excitatory synapses are strongly linked to building one's capacity for memory, and that -- just like muscles in the body -- they grow stronger over time with increased activity.
This is a virtuous circle when it comes to learning because the release of small amounts of dopamine creates the incentive to learn more. It also helps hone basic survival instincts.
But the same mechanism becomes a dangerous magnet for abuse when certain drugs such as heroin and cocaine provoke a similar response.
"If you have ever been really, really thirsty, that same craving may be the same thing that is going on in the brain of someone who is addicted to a drug," Kauer said.
In this context, she added, "addiction is a form of pathological learning" in which the brain has created a rewards system for something that is harmful to the body.
"I would not call it damage -- the circuit is working the way it should. But it has been remodelled in a maladaptive way," said Kauer.
The Nature study breaks new ground in two areas. It presents the strongest evidence to date that inhibitory synapses are also capable of "long-term potentiation", or LTP, the ability to strengthen and change over time.
And it showed that morphine, an opiate, continued to block LTP long after the drug was absent from the animal's system.
"The fact that they are long lasting could be one of the reasons that the craving for drugs is so hard to conquer, and suggests that addictive drugs are producing persistent physical changes," she said.
The study also points to the intriguing possibility of a pharmaceutical treatment to neutralize intense cravings, which could help those fighting addiction to resist the temptation of relapse.
It could likewise help prevent unwanted side effects of morphine in hospitals, where the opiate is frequently used as a painkiller.
The molecule disabled by the morphine is called guanylate cyclase. By pinpointing it, Kauer and her team identified a promising target for new drugs that could potentially prevent or treat addiction.
Such a treatment, however, might create other problems, she acknowledged. A remedy that removes a drug's addictive quality but not its capacity to provoke euphoria could add a temptation of another kind.
Wed Apr 25, 2:16 PM ET
A heroin addict aching for a fix years after kicking the habit is not simply weak-willed but may be tormented by enduring changes in the brain caused by the drug itself, according a groundbreaking study released Wednesday.
In experiments carried out on rats, a team of American researchers at Brown University in Rhode Island showed that even a single dose of morphine physically altered the neural pathways that regulate the sensation of craving.
The change persisted long after the effects of the drug had worn off.
The study, published in the British journal Nature, adds weight to a new theory that sees addiction as a disease which "remodels" brain mechanisms related to learning and memory, the lead author, cellular physiologist Julie Kauer, said in an interview.
The findings also point the way to the tantalizing possibility of a pharmaceutical antidote to addiction, she added.
Kauer's experiments focused on the activity of synapses, the connective junction between brain cells.
So-called excitatory synapses increase the flow of chemicals -- such as dopamine, associated with a feeling of euphoria -- while inhibitory synapses impede such flows.
"You have to have both, because they create checks and balances on the system," she explained.
Previous studies have shown that excitatory synapses are strongly linked to building one's capacity for memory, and that -- just like muscles in the body -- they grow stronger over time with increased activity.
This is a virtuous circle when it comes to learning because the release of small amounts of dopamine creates the incentive to learn more. It also helps hone basic survival instincts.
But the same mechanism becomes a dangerous magnet for abuse when certain drugs such as heroin and cocaine provoke a similar response.
"If you have ever been really, really thirsty, that same craving may be the same thing that is going on in the brain of someone who is addicted to a drug," Kauer said.
In this context, she added, "addiction is a form of pathological learning" in which the brain has created a rewards system for something that is harmful to the body.
"I would not call it damage -- the circuit is working the way it should. But it has been remodelled in a maladaptive way," said Kauer.
The Nature study breaks new ground in two areas. It presents the strongest evidence to date that inhibitory synapses are also capable of "long-term potentiation", or LTP, the ability to strengthen and change over time.
And it showed that morphine, an opiate, continued to block LTP long after the drug was absent from the animal's system.
"The fact that they are long lasting could be one of the reasons that the craving for drugs is so hard to conquer, and suggests that addictive drugs are producing persistent physical changes," she said.
The study also points to the intriguing possibility of a pharmaceutical treatment to neutralize intense cravings, which could help those fighting addiction to resist the temptation of relapse.
It could likewise help prevent unwanted side effects of morphine in hospitals, where the opiate is frequently used as a painkiller.
The molecule disabled by the morphine is called guanylate cyclase. By pinpointing it, Kauer and her team identified a promising target for new drugs that could potentially prevent or treat addiction.
Such a treatment, however, might create other problems, she acknowledged. A remedy that removes a drug's addictive quality but not its capacity to provoke euphoria could add a temptation of another kind.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Zero savings, 'dream jobs' and nest eggs. Never, never, never put saving for someelusive retirement ahead of "investing" in your "dream job"
Zero savings, 'dream jobs' and nest eggs
Millionaires are dreamers, but not about cushy retirements!
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 4:55 AM ET Oct 3, 2006
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "If you are creative enough to select the ideal vocation, you can win, win big-time," says Thomas Stanley in "The Millionaire Mind." "The really brilliant multimillionaires are those who selected a vocation they love."
Guess what, the rest of us got it all wrong. Our obsession with regular savings may be totally off-base, distracting and misleading. Why? Because the relentless drumbeat about savings may be just a broker's self-interested sales pitch to generate more fees. So maybe you should stop being so obsessive about savings. Maybe there's something more important in life than working at a job you don't like in order to save up a nest egg for a cushy retirement 20 to 30 years from now.
Warning: Our brains have a bad habit of focusing on bogus targets, then tenaciously staying the course, no matter what. We give up today's dreams for fantasies that may never come true. We waste what's really important, hoping to be relieved from life's burdens when we retire. But what if that distant fantasy isn't "there" when we get "there?" What if you sacrifice your dreams, only to discover (when it's too late), that the dream you gave up wasn't worth the little nest egg you saved?
A year ago I was in one of Starbucks' 11,000 shops and it struck me that Americans were wasting their future retirement security by indulging in the instant gratification of their daily habit that's made coffee America's second biggest import, driving an $11 billion business. The math is simple: five bucks a day per latte and muffin compounds to $200,000 in 30 years, which is larger than the nest eggs of most Americans at retirement.
That's right: The average American has less than $50,000 in savings at retirement (exclusive of home equity). Two out of three aren't saving enough. No wonder our nation's savings rate is in negative territory. Worse yet, as meager as Social Security is, half of our population over 65 would live in poverty without it.
Last year I reviewed 10 reasons why 65% of Americans were not saving "enough." Ten reasons, all negative: Too busy, distrustful, too complicated, hate math, uninterested, naïve, etc.
This year, let's look a some positive reasons why people don't saving "enough," why people are choosing to live for today rather than save for a fuzzy, unpredictable tomorrow.
Forget Starbucks, go for a 'Dream Job!'
This shift in perspective -- looking at the positive rather than negative explanations for America's subzero savings rate -- hit me suddenly while reading the October Men's Journal. Check it out, there really is a radically new way to look at the problem.
Maybe Americans aren't wasting their future. Maybe we're actually "giving it away," getting out of ourselves, helping others, serving a larger purpose, fulfilling our unique mission in life. Maybe all the saving and getting rich hype really isn't as important as Wall Street wants us to believe.
Men's Journal's feature on "Dream Jobs" was loaded with inspiring stories. For example, Dr. David Jenkins, a physician, goes on a luxury charter cruise surfing off Indonesian. Suddenly he's "surrounded by 100 desperate people ... One woman was literally brought to me in a wheelbarrow. Later she died. She had pneumonia, very treatable, but it was just too late. Malaria, anemia, tuberculosis. The chief of the village asked me to run a clinic. It was then I knew I was going to do something."
Do "something?" You bet. He "founded SurfAid which assists regions connected to the surf community." Then he said something about savings that inspired me: "Working to end suffering became more important than saving my money to buy BMWs or whatever."
"Dream Jobs" tells us: "Work defines who we are." Work consumes most of our daily lives, what we learn and contribute to life, and "to an arguably unhealthy degree, whether we're happy. That's why it's so important to find a job you love." So Men's Journal asked eight inspiring guys "what they do right that the wannabes do wrong" in the pursuit of that elusive dream job. They came up with eight "guiding principles" that create dream jobs:
1. Find your passion and follow it
Nobody will kid you that it's easy, or the money comes fast, or ever comes. But when I was doing career counseling back in the 1980s, this was rule No. 1 from every expert in the field, and millionaires next door say it still is.
2. You can't be too obsessive
Mark Cuban is hyper-obsessive. But it made him a billionaire during the dot-com mania. Enough to buy the Dallas Mavericks. Obsessions start early: "When I was 16, buying and selling stamps, I learned that most people don't do their homework." Obsession gives you a competitive edge in knowledge.
3. A little narcissism goes a long way
Men's Journal's readers' poll found 83% are deskbound, like X-Games champ, Will Gadd. Then "I quit my office job a decade ago to do adventure sports full-time." His first competition was ice-climbing. Netted him $13,000 in 1998. Red Bull is now his sponsor. "If you get good enough at anything in the world, somebody will pay you to do it."
4. Accept risk with confidence
As commander of the space shuttle Discovery, astronaut Steve Lindsey knows risk. He trains hard: "It can't ever be completely safe, but within limits there's an acceptable level of risk." You compete with confidence, ready for the inevitable curveballs.
5. Don't be too cautious
Phil Simms knows how to push the envelope and win. Proof? His Super Bowl ring from days as New York Giants quarterback: "You've got to be free enough in your mind to the point where your body is right on the edge of going out of control, but not quite."
6. Always set new goals
Born in Ethiopia, raised by a Swedish engineer, Marcus Samuelsson fell in love with cooking, and got scholarships in Switzerland and France. He keeps raising the bar: Executive chef, part owner, now of several restaurants. Michelangelo once said: "The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it."
7. Choose your allies wisely
Chris Carmichael started training with Lance Armstrong as a teen. Gifted people often "float along on there extraordinariness," never really push themselves, never reach full potential. Mentors, coaches, teachers, you need allies that drive you to achieve.
8. Know when you have a duty
Remember Dr. Dave Jenkins, surfing on a luxury cruise? The dying woman in a wheel barrow. The tribal chief who needed a clinic. A wake-up call to "do something." He knew he had to a duty, and created SurfAid: "My personal belief is that, for all of us, the best way to deal with our own problems in life is to help someone else."
Burn these eight "guiding principles" into your brain: They are "as useful for staying at the top of your game as for launching a second career or catching your first break." Bottom line: Never, never, never put saving for some distant, elusive retirement fantasy ahead of "investing" in your "dream job" today!
Millionaires are dreamers, but not about cushy retirements!
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 4:55 AM ET Oct 3, 2006
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "If you are creative enough to select the ideal vocation, you can win, win big-time," says Thomas Stanley in "The Millionaire Mind." "The really brilliant multimillionaires are those who selected a vocation they love."
Guess what, the rest of us got it all wrong. Our obsession with regular savings may be totally off-base, distracting and misleading. Why? Because the relentless drumbeat about savings may be just a broker's self-interested sales pitch to generate more fees. So maybe you should stop being so obsessive about savings. Maybe there's something more important in life than working at a job you don't like in order to save up a nest egg for a cushy retirement 20 to 30 years from now.
Warning: Our brains have a bad habit of focusing on bogus targets, then tenaciously staying the course, no matter what. We give up today's dreams for fantasies that may never come true. We waste what's really important, hoping to be relieved from life's burdens when we retire. But what if that distant fantasy isn't "there" when we get "there?" What if you sacrifice your dreams, only to discover (when it's too late), that the dream you gave up wasn't worth the little nest egg you saved?
A year ago I was in one of Starbucks' 11,000 shops and it struck me that Americans were wasting their future retirement security by indulging in the instant gratification of their daily habit that's made coffee America's second biggest import, driving an $11 billion business. The math is simple: five bucks a day per latte and muffin compounds to $200,000 in 30 years, which is larger than the nest eggs of most Americans at retirement.
That's right: The average American has less than $50,000 in savings at retirement (exclusive of home equity). Two out of three aren't saving enough. No wonder our nation's savings rate is in negative territory. Worse yet, as meager as Social Security is, half of our population over 65 would live in poverty without it.
Last year I reviewed 10 reasons why 65% of Americans were not saving "enough." Ten reasons, all negative: Too busy, distrustful, too complicated, hate math, uninterested, naïve, etc.
This year, let's look a some positive reasons why people don't saving "enough," why people are choosing to live for today rather than save for a fuzzy, unpredictable tomorrow.
Forget Starbucks, go for a 'Dream Job!'
This shift in perspective -- looking at the positive rather than negative explanations for America's subzero savings rate -- hit me suddenly while reading the October Men's Journal. Check it out, there really is a radically new way to look at the problem.
Maybe Americans aren't wasting their future. Maybe we're actually "giving it away," getting out of ourselves, helping others, serving a larger purpose, fulfilling our unique mission in life. Maybe all the saving and getting rich hype really isn't as important as Wall Street wants us to believe.
Men's Journal's feature on "Dream Jobs" was loaded with inspiring stories. For example, Dr. David Jenkins, a physician, goes on a luxury charter cruise surfing off Indonesian. Suddenly he's "surrounded by 100 desperate people ... One woman was literally brought to me in a wheelbarrow. Later she died. She had pneumonia, very treatable, but it was just too late. Malaria, anemia, tuberculosis. The chief of the village asked me to run a clinic. It was then I knew I was going to do something."
Do "something?" You bet. He "founded SurfAid which assists regions connected to the surf community." Then he said something about savings that inspired me: "Working to end suffering became more important than saving my money to buy BMWs or whatever."
"Dream Jobs" tells us: "Work defines who we are." Work consumes most of our daily lives, what we learn and contribute to life, and "to an arguably unhealthy degree, whether we're happy. That's why it's so important to find a job you love." So Men's Journal asked eight inspiring guys "what they do right that the wannabes do wrong" in the pursuit of that elusive dream job. They came up with eight "guiding principles" that create dream jobs:
1. Find your passion and follow it
Nobody will kid you that it's easy, or the money comes fast, or ever comes. But when I was doing career counseling back in the 1980s, this was rule No. 1 from every expert in the field, and millionaires next door say it still is.
2. You can't be too obsessive
Mark Cuban is hyper-obsessive. But it made him a billionaire during the dot-com mania. Enough to buy the Dallas Mavericks. Obsessions start early: "When I was 16, buying and selling stamps, I learned that most people don't do their homework." Obsession gives you a competitive edge in knowledge.
3. A little narcissism goes a long way
Men's Journal's readers' poll found 83% are deskbound, like X-Games champ, Will Gadd. Then "I quit my office job a decade ago to do adventure sports full-time." His first competition was ice-climbing. Netted him $13,000 in 1998. Red Bull is now his sponsor. "If you get good enough at anything in the world, somebody will pay you to do it."
4. Accept risk with confidence
As commander of the space shuttle Discovery, astronaut Steve Lindsey knows risk. He trains hard: "It can't ever be completely safe, but within limits there's an acceptable level of risk." You compete with confidence, ready for the inevitable curveballs.
5. Don't be too cautious
Phil Simms knows how to push the envelope and win. Proof? His Super Bowl ring from days as New York Giants quarterback: "You've got to be free enough in your mind to the point where your body is right on the edge of going out of control, but not quite."
6. Always set new goals
Born in Ethiopia, raised by a Swedish engineer, Marcus Samuelsson fell in love with cooking, and got scholarships in Switzerland and France. He keeps raising the bar: Executive chef, part owner, now of several restaurants. Michelangelo once said: "The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it."
7. Choose your allies wisely
Chris Carmichael started training with Lance Armstrong as a teen. Gifted people often "float along on there extraordinariness," never really push themselves, never reach full potential. Mentors, coaches, teachers, you need allies that drive you to achieve.
8. Know when you have a duty
Remember Dr. Dave Jenkins, surfing on a luxury cruise? The dying woman in a wheel barrow. The tribal chief who needed a clinic. A wake-up call to "do something." He knew he had to a duty, and created SurfAid: "My personal belief is that, for all of us, the best way to deal with our own problems in life is to help someone else."
Burn these eight "guiding principles" into your brain: They are "as useful for staying at the top of your game as for launching a second career or catching your first break." Bottom line: Never, never, never put saving for some distant, elusive retirement fantasy ahead of "investing" in your "dream job" today!
- new retirement mindset - got Dreams? "Nothing has meaning except the meaning we give it"
'New Retirement' asks: 'Got dreams?'
Discover the meaning of life, or nothing matters, not even money
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 7:24 PM ET Dec 11, 2006
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- What's the only thing you really need to get "right" in retirement? Get right, or nothing matters? This message isn't just for retirees. It's for boomers, young investors starting a career and family, folks in midlife crisis. Some day we all stop and ask: What's really, really important?
What's the big question mark in retirement? Health? Maybe family? Security? Money? I'll bet Wall Street's got you convinced that all your fears boil down to one thing, money. Got money? Got no problems! Right? Wrong!
So what really, really matters in retirement? OK, so it's not money or security. Nor health, a loving spouse, teaching the kids right. Don't get me wrong, they're all important. But none of them will ever matter much if you don't get this one thing right.
To understand it, let's put it in context: Look at the old versus "new retirement," compare 1969 to today. Not Vietnam versus Iraq; I'm talking "Easy Rider!"
Dennis Hopper is a great pitchman: He's come a long way from his get-rich-quick days chasing the great American Dream in "Easy Rider." Remember the night before Hopper's character gets killed. After a big score, he's telling his buddy Peter Fonda: "We did it. We're rich, man. We're retiring in Florida. You go for the big money, man, and then you're free."
Except he didn't get "it." The price of his dream was too high, it cost him his soul. And he didn't even know why. His friend did: "We blew it, good night man." Next day, he was blown off his chopper by an angry shotgun-totting redneck in a beat-up truck. He went to his grave oblivious. He didn't "get it."
Money isn't "it." Get-rich-quick isn't it. Neither is getting rich slowly: All that stuff Wall Street and Corporate America want you to believe about working 30 or 40 years, saving regularly, piling up a hundred thousand, maybe a million or whatever, in IRAs, 401(k)s and lots of retirement accounts. Not it.
I'm dreaming of a 'new retirement!'
Flash forward from 1969: Today Hopper's got it. And it's not hard to miss his exuberant reincarnation in the new Ameriprise Financial ads: No more empty dreams of getting rich quick and playing shuffleboard in Florida:
"You still have things to do, right?" Hopper says to new retirees. These ads replace the old "rocking-chair dream" with relaxing beaches, rolling hills of wildflowers, yoga, traveling, stuff you've always wanted to do. "You have dreams. And there is no age limit on dreams. The thing about dreams is, they don't retire."
You gotta love it! But, there's a catch: Sure, everybody gets a second chance, but lots don't take it. Too many are still like Hopper'69, oblivious, never quite getting "it."
Why? You'll get a glimpse of the answer in Thomas Stanley's classic, "The Millionaire Mind:" "Why is it that only a minority of our population love their work?" That's right, the vast majority of people don't like what they're doing before retirement, and they're not prepared for the second chance, second career, second act.
Then, when it finally happens, you may even retire one of the few who've saved enough to announce like Hopper: "I did it. I got the big money. I'm rich, man, I'm free!" Then it'll hit you, you'll come face to face with the one and only thing that really matters in retirement ... and it's not money.
Case in point: I was in the career-planning business years ago. I've been around miserable megamillionaires. And around people who are broke yet happy, doing what they love in retirement, and before. I'll bet you know some of both.
A "new retirement" begins with a new attitude. It's not about money. And it's also not about being "happy." Being happy is a by-product of something else.
You must find the "meaning" of life, the meaning of your life. Years ago I was in a midlife crisis, got my first glimpse of the answer in Tony Robbins' "Unlimited Power:" "Nothing has any meaning except the meaning we give it." Psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl elaborates in "Man's Search for Meaning:"
"We needed a fundamental change in our attitude toward life. We had to learn ourselves and, furthermore, we had to teach the despairing men, that it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life -- daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answers to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual."
It's never money, what's the 'meaning' of your life?
You can have health, friends, family, total security and all the money you'll ever need, but unless your life has "meaning," nothing matters. And no one can give "meaning" to your life except you. Not a million-dollar portfolio, not being debt-free, nor tight abs, low cholesterol, nor a famous guru, evangelist or yoga instructor. All that's irrelevant if you don't know deep in your soul the meaning of your life.
Only you can ever know whether you're living a meaningful life or one of quiet desperation. So let's assume you're already more like the new rather than the old Hopper. But you're searching. And let's forget all the new-age nonsense about "life's not a rehearsal" and "you only go around once."
Everyone gets a second chance. We never stop getting chances because "dreams never retire." When I was helping plan careers, I'd have people spend time covering a wall with a montage of magazine clippings, whatever turned them on (fishing, fashion, golf, travel, music, art, hobbies, you name it), then we'd explore the pattern.
In "The Power Years," retirement guru Ken Dychtwald suggests making three lists. Go buy a big journal. Write in it every day: First, a list of every job you've ever had and what you loved about it. Next, go through your annual budgets, list where you spend your discretionary income. Third, review the key turning points of your life. Get real: Where did your secret dreams take a back seat to your commitments to others, like the kids' college.
Go on a retreat, to seminars, maybe a spiritual pilgrimage, maybe get the advice of a career counselor. Read about other's second-act dreams. Take your time. You're on a journey, explore. Review the lists. Look inside. Trust me, the answers are already in there.
Rediscover your dreams, tap into the meaning of your life. You'll get all the chances you want this time around because dreams never retire! It's your life, make it a meaningful life. And when you get it, go for it with passion.
Discover the meaning of life, or nothing matters, not even money
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 7:24 PM ET Dec 11, 2006
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- What's the only thing you really need to get "right" in retirement? Get right, or nothing matters? This message isn't just for retirees. It's for boomers, young investors starting a career and family, folks in midlife crisis. Some day we all stop and ask: What's really, really important?
What's the big question mark in retirement? Health? Maybe family? Security? Money? I'll bet Wall Street's got you convinced that all your fears boil down to one thing, money. Got money? Got no problems! Right? Wrong!
So what really, really matters in retirement? OK, so it's not money or security. Nor health, a loving spouse, teaching the kids right. Don't get me wrong, they're all important. But none of them will ever matter much if you don't get this one thing right.
To understand it, let's put it in context: Look at the old versus "new retirement," compare 1969 to today. Not Vietnam versus Iraq; I'm talking "Easy Rider!"
Dennis Hopper is a great pitchman: He's come a long way from his get-rich-quick days chasing the great American Dream in "Easy Rider." Remember the night before Hopper's character gets killed. After a big score, he's telling his buddy Peter Fonda: "We did it. We're rich, man. We're retiring in Florida. You go for the big money, man, and then you're free."
Except he didn't get "it." The price of his dream was too high, it cost him his soul. And he didn't even know why. His friend did: "We blew it, good night man." Next day, he was blown off his chopper by an angry shotgun-totting redneck in a beat-up truck. He went to his grave oblivious. He didn't "get it."
Money isn't "it." Get-rich-quick isn't it. Neither is getting rich slowly: All that stuff Wall Street and Corporate America want you to believe about working 30 or 40 years, saving regularly, piling up a hundred thousand, maybe a million or whatever, in IRAs, 401(k)s and lots of retirement accounts. Not it.
I'm dreaming of a 'new retirement!'
Flash forward from 1969: Today Hopper's got it. And it's not hard to miss his exuberant reincarnation in the new Ameriprise Financial ads: No more empty dreams of getting rich quick and playing shuffleboard in Florida:
"You still have things to do, right?" Hopper says to new retirees. These ads replace the old "rocking-chair dream" with relaxing beaches, rolling hills of wildflowers, yoga, traveling, stuff you've always wanted to do. "You have dreams. And there is no age limit on dreams. The thing about dreams is, they don't retire."
You gotta love it! But, there's a catch: Sure, everybody gets a second chance, but lots don't take it. Too many are still like Hopper'69, oblivious, never quite getting "it."
Why? You'll get a glimpse of the answer in Thomas Stanley's classic, "The Millionaire Mind:" "Why is it that only a minority of our population love their work?" That's right, the vast majority of people don't like what they're doing before retirement, and they're not prepared for the second chance, second career, second act.
Then, when it finally happens, you may even retire one of the few who've saved enough to announce like Hopper: "I did it. I got the big money. I'm rich, man, I'm free!" Then it'll hit you, you'll come face to face with the one and only thing that really matters in retirement ... and it's not money.
Case in point: I was in the career-planning business years ago. I've been around miserable megamillionaires. And around people who are broke yet happy, doing what they love in retirement, and before. I'll bet you know some of both.
A "new retirement" begins with a new attitude. It's not about money. And it's also not about being "happy." Being happy is a by-product of something else.
You must find the "meaning" of life, the meaning of your life. Years ago I was in a midlife crisis, got my first glimpse of the answer in Tony Robbins' "Unlimited Power:" "Nothing has any meaning except the meaning we give it." Psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl elaborates in "Man's Search for Meaning:"
"We needed a fundamental change in our attitude toward life. We had to learn ourselves and, furthermore, we had to teach the despairing men, that it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life -- daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answers to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual."
It's never money, what's the 'meaning' of your life?
You can have health, friends, family, total security and all the money you'll ever need, but unless your life has "meaning," nothing matters. And no one can give "meaning" to your life except you. Not a million-dollar portfolio, not being debt-free, nor tight abs, low cholesterol, nor a famous guru, evangelist or yoga instructor. All that's irrelevant if you don't know deep in your soul the meaning of your life.
Only you can ever know whether you're living a meaningful life or one of quiet desperation. So let's assume you're already more like the new rather than the old Hopper. But you're searching. And let's forget all the new-age nonsense about "life's not a rehearsal" and "you only go around once."
Everyone gets a second chance. We never stop getting chances because "dreams never retire." When I was helping plan careers, I'd have people spend time covering a wall with a montage of magazine clippings, whatever turned them on (fishing, fashion, golf, travel, music, art, hobbies, you name it), then we'd explore the pattern.
In "The Power Years," retirement guru Ken Dychtwald suggests making three lists. Go buy a big journal. Write in it every day: First, a list of every job you've ever had and what you loved about it. Next, go through your annual budgets, list where you spend your discretionary income. Third, review the key turning points of your life. Get real: Where did your secret dreams take a back seat to your commitments to others, like the kids' college.
Go on a retreat, to seminars, maybe a spiritual pilgrimage, maybe get the advice of a career counselor. Read about other's second-act dreams. Take your time. You're on a journey, explore. Review the lists. Look inside. Trust me, the answers are already in there.
Rediscover your dreams, tap into the meaning of your life. You'll get all the chances you want this time around because dreams never retire! It's your life, make it a meaningful life. And when you get it, go for it with passion.
'Irrational Millionaire" - thinking for ourselves, not what wall st. tells us
New 'Irrational Millionaires' Club!
Yes, you can do everything 'wrong,' and still die rich and happy
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 7:06 PM ET Feb 5, 2007
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Remember Howard Beale, that lovable wacky TV news anchor in the classic film "Network" screaming: "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore!" Good old Howard even got his audience going to their windows and shouting out loud: "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore!"
That's how I feel: I'm sick and tired of those arrogant, stuffed-shirts behavioral finance academics and high-priced Wall Street insiders looking down their noses at America's 95 million Main Street investors like we're clueless inferiors who can be easily manipulated using esoteric quant algorithms, so Wall Street's old boys club can make big bucks.
Here's how those eggheads and fatheads see us: Wall Street "needs investors who are ... irrational, woefully uninformed, endowed with strange preferences, or for some other reason willing to hold overpriced assets. Get it? Their goal is to get you to buy "overpriced" securities by keeping you "woefully uninformed" and distracted by "strange preferences." Why? Because that makes it easy for them to treat the market like a private hunting reserve where they can bag unwary targets at will.
You bet "I'm mad as hell." It's time to stand up to those self-appointed "arbiters of rationality" ... tell them "we're not going to take it anymore" ... that we're going to stop playing their game by their rules ... that we know there's a better way ... that we really can do everything "wrong" (that is, ignore the rules of their "rational investing" game), and still live happy and die rich ... playing by our own rules.
Folks we need our own club: Let's start the new "Irrational Millionaires Club!"
We know real millionaires get rich thinking for themselves. Thomas Stanley's "The Millionaire Mind" is a perfect model. He says: "What most millionaires tell me [is] they learned to think differently from the crowd." So his book was "designed around a central theme: It pays to be different." That means thinking outside the box, going unconventional, against the herd, a contrarian who breaks the rules of the game set by Wall Street and the quants. Be a maverick, trust your gut instincts.
Unfortunately that's not easy, it challenges the "rational" mindset that's so deeply locked into our cultural brain it sounds almost anti-American. Look around, "rationality" is everywhere:
Corporate America: its operations, systems, plans, strategies, goals
America's business schools: their core beliefs, theories, curriculum
Books on business and investing: oversimplified with annoying platitudes
Wall Street's misleading theories and self-serving pseudo-rational advice
Now we get the dismissive arrogance of the behavioral-finance quants
This rigid, ultra-rational mindset is blinding us, transforming 95 million investors into robots who believe that if you want to become a millionaire you must minimize irrational behavior and maximize rationality.
Well folks, they're wrong and they're misleading you! If you really want to be a successful and happy millionaire, I say shift your focus and aim at becoming an "Irrational Millionaire!" I believe it's time to go contrary, debunk the conventional wisdom and embrace irrationality.
We need to see the world differently, like Stanley's millionaires. Forget that "rational man" mantra, it's a myth. Forget the new science of behavioral finance, their quant math and algorithms. Why? Because none of that stuff will ever change your basic irrational nature ... that's what you are and always will be.
9 traits of the successful "Irrational Millionaire"
In researching "The Millionaire Mind" Stanley surveyed a thousand people in the top 1% of our economy. He identified nine common traits. Let's grade those nine traits against the Wall Street quants' narrow concept of irrationality (behavior that's "nonpecuniary" and therefore something quants can't fit into a mathematical equation.) Here's the score I came up with, graded from 1 to 10, where the most rational is 1 and most irrational 10. Please note and send us your score too:
Courage under fire. Adversity hits many millionaires early, toughens them, builds character. Most were rated average by tests and authorities, even degraded as kids. That's their incentive to work harder and outperform. Can't quantify, so I give an irrational 10.
Got character. Stanley's research says millionaires have multiple intangible character traits: Honesty and discipline were tops, then faith, career passion, supportive spouse, social skills, hard-working, leadership, focused, entrepreneurial, competitive, energetic, physical health, etc. Another 10, can't really quantify.
Driven to succeed. Most are college grads, half got advanced degrees. But not high SAT scores. Grades were so-so, which kept them out of the best schools and prestigious jobs. So they choose their own path! Let's hedge with a 5.
Passionate in a dream job. Most people blindly pursue careers on advice of parents, counselors, peers, job trends, salary potential, job security or status in a prestigious company. "Millionaires are those who selected a vocation that they love." Definitely 10.
Get rich in little niche. Forget status, grab a niche business. Maybe a junkyard or Burger King franchise. "Too many people select vocations filled with competitors," says Stanley "Select a vocation and target where you can more easily emerge a winner." 10.
Traditional vocations. A third of Stanley's millionaires were entrepreneurs. Another third were retirees, business managers, educators, architects, engineers. About 20% were doctors and attorneys. One-sixth, corporate executives. Careers are personal, irrational and nonquantifiable, another 10.
Cheapskates (sort of). In the earlier "Millionaire Next Door" they made about $130,000 annually, "living below their means" on about $70,000. That plus lower taxes (2% versus 12% for average taxpayers) helps them build wealth faster. You can't quantify this in advance, so let's compromise with another 5 here.
Strong personal values. Principled but out-of-sync with our buy-now, consumption-driven, get-rich-quick culture. They'd rather watch the kids play sports, socialize with friends, garden, go to movies or do charity work. Intangible: 10-plus!
Loving spouse. Choose well and stay married. Divorces are costly and debilitating. The average millionaire is 54, male, married to the same person 28 years, got 3 kids. Spouses are "honest, responsible, loving, capable and supportive." But the quants ignore this soft stuff because they can't put a dollar value on such intangibles. An irrational 10.
Bottom line: Stanley says millionaires get rich going with their gut, "thinking different from the crowd," doing what they love, getting rich. But measured by the standards of Wall Street quants, "The Millionaire Mind" traits get a highly irrational 80 out of 90 points.
Maybe you have another way to evaluate "irrational millionaires." Or maybe you simply disagree; don't believe you can do everything "wrong" (by conventional rules of "rationality") and still live happy and die rich.
Tell us: What's your experience? Are you a millionaire (or on the path to becoming one)? What works for you: The irrational millionaire approach? Or do you think the rational approach gives you better odds?
Yes, you can do everything 'wrong,' and still die rich and happy
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 7:06 PM ET Feb 5, 2007
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Remember Howard Beale, that lovable wacky TV news anchor in the classic film "Network" screaming: "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore!" Good old Howard even got his audience going to their windows and shouting out loud: "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore!"
That's how I feel: I'm sick and tired of those arrogant, stuffed-shirts behavioral finance academics and high-priced Wall Street insiders looking down their noses at America's 95 million Main Street investors like we're clueless inferiors who can be easily manipulated using esoteric quant algorithms, so Wall Street's old boys club can make big bucks.
Here's how those eggheads and fatheads see us: Wall Street "needs investors who are ... irrational, woefully uninformed, endowed with strange preferences, or for some other reason willing to hold overpriced assets. Get it? Their goal is to get you to buy "overpriced" securities by keeping you "woefully uninformed" and distracted by "strange preferences." Why? Because that makes it easy for them to treat the market like a private hunting reserve where they can bag unwary targets at will.
You bet "I'm mad as hell." It's time to stand up to those self-appointed "arbiters of rationality" ... tell them "we're not going to take it anymore" ... that we're going to stop playing their game by their rules ... that we know there's a better way ... that we really can do everything "wrong" (that is, ignore the rules of their "rational investing" game), and still live happy and die rich ... playing by our own rules.
Folks we need our own club: Let's start the new "Irrational Millionaires Club!"
We know real millionaires get rich thinking for themselves. Thomas Stanley's "The Millionaire Mind" is a perfect model. He says: "What most millionaires tell me [is] they learned to think differently from the crowd." So his book was "designed around a central theme: It pays to be different." That means thinking outside the box, going unconventional, against the herd, a contrarian who breaks the rules of the game set by Wall Street and the quants. Be a maverick, trust your gut instincts.
Unfortunately that's not easy, it challenges the "rational" mindset that's so deeply locked into our cultural brain it sounds almost anti-American. Look around, "rationality" is everywhere:
Corporate America: its operations, systems, plans, strategies, goals
America's business schools: their core beliefs, theories, curriculum
Books on business and investing: oversimplified with annoying platitudes
Wall Street's misleading theories and self-serving pseudo-rational advice
Now we get the dismissive arrogance of the behavioral-finance quants
This rigid, ultra-rational mindset is blinding us, transforming 95 million investors into robots who believe that if you want to become a millionaire you must minimize irrational behavior and maximize rationality.
Well folks, they're wrong and they're misleading you! If you really want to be a successful and happy millionaire, I say shift your focus and aim at becoming an "Irrational Millionaire!" I believe it's time to go contrary, debunk the conventional wisdom and embrace irrationality.
We need to see the world differently, like Stanley's millionaires. Forget that "rational man" mantra, it's a myth. Forget the new science of behavioral finance, their quant math and algorithms. Why? Because none of that stuff will ever change your basic irrational nature ... that's what you are and always will be.
9 traits of the successful "Irrational Millionaire"
In researching "The Millionaire Mind" Stanley surveyed a thousand people in the top 1% of our economy. He identified nine common traits. Let's grade those nine traits against the Wall Street quants' narrow concept of irrationality (behavior that's "nonpecuniary" and therefore something quants can't fit into a mathematical equation.) Here's the score I came up with, graded from 1 to 10, where the most rational is 1 and most irrational 10. Please note and send us your score too:
Courage under fire. Adversity hits many millionaires early, toughens them, builds character. Most were rated average by tests and authorities, even degraded as kids. That's their incentive to work harder and outperform. Can't quantify, so I give an irrational 10.
Got character. Stanley's research says millionaires have multiple intangible character traits: Honesty and discipline were tops, then faith, career passion, supportive spouse, social skills, hard-working, leadership, focused, entrepreneurial, competitive, energetic, physical health, etc. Another 10, can't really quantify.
Driven to succeed. Most are college grads, half got advanced degrees. But not high SAT scores. Grades were so-so, which kept them out of the best schools and prestigious jobs. So they choose their own path! Let's hedge with a 5.
Passionate in a dream job. Most people blindly pursue careers on advice of parents, counselors, peers, job trends, salary potential, job security or status in a prestigious company. "Millionaires are those who selected a vocation that they love." Definitely 10.
Get rich in little niche. Forget status, grab a niche business. Maybe a junkyard or Burger King franchise. "Too many people select vocations filled with competitors," says Stanley "Select a vocation and target where you can more easily emerge a winner." 10.
Traditional vocations. A third of Stanley's millionaires were entrepreneurs. Another third were retirees, business managers, educators, architects, engineers. About 20% were doctors and attorneys. One-sixth, corporate executives. Careers are personal, irrational and nonquantifiable, another 10.
Cheapskates (sort of). In the earlier "Millionaire Next Door" they made about $130,000 annually, "living below their means" on about $70,000. That plus lower taxes (2% versus 12% for average taxpayers) helps them build wealth faster. You can't quantify this in advance, so let's compromise with another 5 here.
Strong personal values. Principled but out-of-sync with our buy-now, consumption-driven, get-rich-quick culture. They'd rather watch the kids play sports, socialize with friends, garden, go to movies or do charity work. Intangible: 10-plus!
Loving spouse. Choose well and stay married. Divorces are costly and debilitating. The average millionaire is 54, male, married to the same person 28 years, got 3 kids. Spouses are "honest, responsible, loving, capable and supportive." But the quants ignore this soft stuff because they can't put a dollar value on such intangibles. An irrational 10.
Bottom line: Stanley says millionaires get rich going with their gut, "thinking different from the crowd," doing what they love, getting rich. But measured by the standards of Wall Street quants, "The Millionaire Mind" traits get a highly irrational 80 out of 90 points.
Maybe you have another way to evaluate "irrational millionaires." Or maybe you simply disagree; don't believe you can do everything "wrong" (by conventional rules of "rationality") and still live happy and die rich.
Tell us: What's your experience? Are you a millionaire (or on the path to becoming one)? What works for you: The irrational millionaire approach? Or do you think the rational approach gives you better odds?
Psing as pals, Phama Rebs influence Docs - no Duh!
Offical studies confirm influence of pharma reps on doctors, etc
Posing as pals, drug reps sway doctors' choices
Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:00 PM ET
By Julie Steenhuysen
CHICAGO, April 23 (Reuters) - As much as doctors would like to deny it, subtle attention from friendly drug sales representatives can have a big impact on what drugs they prescribe, according to two U.S. studies published on Monday.
"Physicians underestimate their own vulnerability. They think they are smarter ... but they are not trained in recognizing this kind of manipulation," said Adriane Fugh-Berman, a Georgetown University Medical Center researcher and co-author of one of the studies.
Fugh-Berman teamed with Shahram Ahari, a former drug representative for Eli Lilly and Co., who now works at the University of California, San Francisco's school of pharmacy.
Their study, which appears in the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Medicine, details the elaborate methods used by drug company sales representatives to make friends and influence drug sales.
"Reps scour a doctor's office for objects -- a tennis racquet, Russian novels, '70s rock music, fashion magazines, travel mementos or cultural or religious symbols -- that can be used to establish a personal connection with the doctor," Fugh-Berman and Ahari wrote.
"A friendly physician makes the rep's job easy because the rep can use the 'friendship' to request favors, in the form of prescriptions.
"Physicians who view the relationship as a straightforward goods-for-prescriptions exchange are dealt with in a businesslike manner. Skeptical doctors who favor evidence over charm are approached respectfully, supplied with reprints from the medical literature and wooed as teachers," they wrote.
Sales representatives also ingratiate themselves by lining up paid speaking engagements for doctors and arranging educational grants to those who frequently prescribe their drugs.
The study comes as drugmakers are smarting over the public revelation this month from an AstraZeneca drug sales representative, who said in a unauthorized newsletter to staff: "There is a big bucket of money sitting in every office. Every time you go in, you reach your hand in the bucket and grab a handful."
An AstraZeneca spokeswoman said the manager was fired and the company was looking into the incident, which she said violates a core value of serving patients.
QUICK VISIT, LASTING EFFECTS
Another study found that even a brief visit by a drug sales rep could have a powerful impact.
The study analyzed surveys done by a market research firm that chronicled a doctor's intention to prescribe the epilepsy drug gabapentin during the period of 1995 to 1999, when it was sold by Warner-Lambert under the brand name Neurontin.
Pfizer Inc., which acquired that unit in 2000, paid a $240 million fine four years later for illegal promotion of the drug for unapproved uses such as migraines or pain.
The surveys involved 116 visits to 97 doctors.
They found that after 46 percent of the visits, the doctors said they intended either to prescribe gabapentin more often or to recommend it to colleagues more often.
"The remarkable thing is how effective a very brief visit by a drug representative -- most often less than five minutes -- can be in influencing physicians' choices to use a drug for an unapproved indication," Dr. Michael Steinman of the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center said in a statement.
Besides free drug samples, salespeople often bring gifts, lunch for the doctor or office staff, new pens and coffee mugs. "The doctor feels subtly, even subconsciously, indebted to the representative," Steinman said.
Posing as pals, drug reps sway doctors' choices
Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:00 PM ET
By Julie Steenhuysen
CHICAGO, April 23 (Reuters) - As much as doctors would like to deny it, subtle attention from friendly drug sales representatives can have a big impact on what drugs they prescribe, according to two U.S. studies published on Monday.
"Physicians underestimate their own vulnerability. They think they are smarter ... but they are not trained in recognizing this kind of manipulation," said Adriane Fugh-Berman, a Georgetown University Medical Center researcher and co-author of one of the studies.
Fugh-Berman teamed with Shahram Ahari, a former drug representative for Eli Lilly and Co.
Their study, which appears in the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Medicine, details the elaborate methods used by drug company sales representatives to make friends and influence drug sales.
"Reps scour a doctor's office for objects -- a tennis racquet, Russian novels, '70s rock music, fashion magazines, travel mementos or cultural or religious symbols -- that can be used to establish a personal connection with the doctor," Fugh-Berman and Ahari wrote.
"A friendly physician makes the rep's job easy because the rep can use the 'friendship' to request favors, in the form of prescriptions.
"Physicians who view the relationship as a straightforward goods-for-prescriptions exchange are dealt with in a businesslike manner. Skeptical doctors who favor evidence over charm are approached respectfully, supplied with reprints from the medical literature and wooed as teachers," they wrote.
Sales representatives also ingratiate themselves by lining up paid speaking engagements for doctors and arranging educational grants to those who frequently prescribe their drugs.
The study comes as drugmakers are smarting over the public revelation this month from an AstraZeneca
An AstraZeneca spokeswoman said the manager was fired and the company was looking into the incident, which she said violates a core value of serving patients.
QUICK VISIT, LASTING EFFECTS
Another study found that even a brief visit by a drug sales rep could have a powerful impact.
The study analyzed surveys done by a market research firm that chronicled a doctor's intention to prescribe the epilepsy drug gabapentin during the period of 1995 to 1999, when it was sold by Warner-Lambert under the brand name Neurontin.
Pfizer Inc.
The surveys involved 116 visits to 97 doctors.
They found that after 46 percent of the visits, the doctors said they intended either to prescribe gabapentin more often or to recommend it to colleagues more often.
"The remarkable thing is how effective a very brief visit by a drug representative -- most often less than five minutes -- can be in influencing physicians' choices to use a drug for an unapproved indication," Dr. Michael Steinman of the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center said in a statement.
Besides free drug samples, salespeople often bring gifts, lunch for the doctor or office staff, new pens and coffee mugs. "The doctor feels subtly, even subconsciously, indebted to the representative," Steinman said.
Desire to Acquire - Greed is Neutral, not good , bad
The Desire to Acquire
By Robert Ringer
Just the other day, I came across a Time magazine front-cover story on ambition that I'd clipped a while back. Though it possessed many flawed premises and opinions masquerading as facts, it prompted me to reflect on the subject. The essence of the article was an exploration of the factors that are responsible for some people being ambitious and others not.
The article stated, "Of all the impulses in humanity's behavioral portfolio, ambition - that need to grab an ever bigger piece of the resource pie before someone else gets it - ought to be one of the most democratically distributed. Nature is a zero-sum game, after all. Every buffalo you kill for your family is one less for somebody else's; every acre of land you occupy elbows out somebody else."
I feel morally obliged to temporarily sidetrack myself here, because Marxist rhetoric like this is precisely what deters the underprivileged from doing the very things they need to do to lift themselves up. Ignorant, left-wing college profs have been teaching this kind of gibberish to malleable-minded students since the days of the Greek Empire, while at the same time shameless and/or ignorant politicians have been brainwashing the parents of those same kids.
In truth, any honest, half-intelligent individual in this day and age of highly visible entrepreneurial wealth creation certainly realizes that neither nature nor business nor life itself is a zero-sum game. In every country where the zero-sum game has been played out, the results have been catastrophic.
The list is a long one, including the former Soviet Union, Albania, Romania, Hungary, East Germany, China, North Korea, Cuba, and Mozambique. And all the countries on the list have three things in common: torture and suffering for the masses, special treatment for the anointed privileged class, and a failed economy.
Unfortunately, Western societies seem intent on following the loud voices of the zero-sum-game crowd down an egalitarian path that leads only to real communism (as opposed to theoretical communism, which is but a fairy tale).
What they cannot seem to grasp is that those who create wealth almost always do so by creating value for others. Or, to continue the metaphor, they increase the size of the pie. That's why just about every family in the U.S. has the means to buy television sets, DVD players, video-game consoles, computers, cellphones, and an endless array of other electronics that are strictly discretionary in nature - i.e., they are not necessities by any stretch of the imagination.
The dictionary defines greed as "an excessive desire to acquire more than what one needs or deserves." Asinine. I guess I'm not smart enough to understand who has the wisdom, let alone the moral authority, to decide what anyone else needs or deserves.
Since the words "excessive" and "more than what one needs or deserves" are subjective, what greed really means is a desire to acquire. And, though it may ruffle the feathers of many to hear it, the reality is that all human beings have that desire.
One person might desire to acquire power over others by leading or joining a humanitarian crusade. Another person might desire to acquire material wealth by providing products or services that people are willing to purchase from him. And still another might desire to acquire the respect of others through artistic achievements. In any event, all of these individuals are "greedy" in the sense that they "desire to acquire."
Though the audience was set up to hiss and boo when Gordon Gekko (in the 1987 movie Wall Street) spewed out those now-famous words "Greed is good," the fact is that he was absolutely right. Or at least he was conditionally right. Greed is good if it leads to honest wealth creation.
As Brian Tracy has pointed out, greed is actually neutral. Greed is neither good nor bad. What is good or bad is the method a person employs to fulfill his desires.
Just as guns don't kill people, neither do greed or ambition, of and by themselves, harm anyone. However, some people do choose to use greed and ambition to do harm, just as some people use guns to kill.
So long as you do not use force or fraud to acquire what you desire, there's no need to apologize for being "greedy" - and certainly not for any success you are able to achieve. As an added bonus, keep in mind that, through the invisible hand of the market, every dollar you make benefits society as a whole.
By Robert Ringer
Just the other day, I came across a Time magazine front-cover story on ambition that I'd clipped a while back. Though it possessed many flawed premises and opinions masquerading as facts, it prompted me to reflect on the subject. The essence of the article was an exploration of the factors that are responsible for some people being ambitious and others not.
The article stated, "Of all the impulses in humanity's behavioral portfolio, ambition - that need to grab an ever bigger piece of the resource pie before someone else gets it - ought to be one of the most democratically distributed. Nature is a zero-sum game, after all. Every buffalo you kill for your family is one less for somebody else's; every acre of land you occupy elbows out somebody else."
I feel morally obliged to temporarily sidetrack myself here, because Marxist rhetoric like this is precisely what deters the underprivileged from doing the very things they need to do to lift themselves up. Ignorant, left-wing college profs have been teaching this kind of gibberish to malleable-minded students since the days of the Greek Empire, while at the same time shameless and/or ignorant politicians have been brainwashing the parents of those same kids.
In truth, any honest, half-intelligent individual in this day and age of highly visible entrepreneurial wealth creation certainly realizes that neither nature nor business nor life itself is a zero-sum game. In every country where the zero-sum game has been played out, the results have been catastrophic.
The list is a long one, including the former Soviet Union, Albania, Romania, Hungary, East Germany, China, North Korea, Cuba, and Mozambique. And all the countries on the list have three things in common: torture and suffering for the masses, special treatment for the anointed privileged class, and a failed economy.
Unfortunately, Western societies seem intent on following the loud voices of the zero-sum-game crowd down an egalitarian path that leads only to real communism (as opposed to theoretical communism, which is but a fairy tale).
What they cannot seem to grasp is that those who create wealth almost always do so by creating value for others. Or, to continue the metaphor, they increase the size of the pie. That's why just about every family in the U.S. has the means to buy television sets, DVD players, video-game consoles, computers, cellphones, and an endless array of other electronics that are strictly discretionary in nature - i.e., they are not necessities by any stretch of the imagination.
The dictionary defines greed as "an excessive desire to acquire more than what one needs or deserves." Asinine. I guess I'm not smart enough to understand who has the wisdom, let alone the moral authority, to decide what anyone else needs or deserves.
Since the words "excessive" and "more than what one needs or deserves" are subjective, what greed really means is a desire to acquire. And, though it may ruffle the feathers of many to hear it, the reality is that all human beings have that desire.
One person might desire to acquire power over others by leading or joining a humanitarian crusade. Another person might desire to acquire material wealth by providing products or services that people are willing to purchase from him. And still another might desire to acquire the respect of others through artistic achievements. In any event, all of these individuals are "greedy" in the sense that they "desire to acquire."
Though the audience was set up to hiss and boo when Gordon Gekko (in the 1987 movie Wall Street) spewed out those now-famous words "Greed is good," the fact is that he was absolutely right. Or at least he was conditionally right. Greed is good if it leads to honest wealth creation.
As Brian Tracy has pointed out, greed is actually neutral. Greed is neither good nor bad. What is good or bad is the method a person employs to fulfill his desires.
Just as guns don't kill people, neither do greed or ambition, of and by themselves, harm anyone. However, some people do choose to use greed and ambition to do harm, just as some people use guns to kill.
So long as you do not use force or fraud to acquire what you desire, there's no need to apologize for being "greedy" - and certainly not for any success you are able to achieve. As an added bonus, keep in mind that, through the invisible hand of the market, every dollar you make benefits society as a whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)