Cleanliness is next to godliness, so add it to your "vow" of poverty.

Editor's Note: I am a bit leery to post this. All my readers know that I am a libertarian, and know that I am hitting a bit of a slump. I see no shame in temporary assistance. In fact, given the miserable nature of the current economic climate, the advantages outweigh, at this time, the disadvantages (I assure you we'll discuss that sad state eventually).  I do hope to eventually find some reasonable work leveraging my talents into sufficient pay to justify the loss of benefits, thus re-establishing my anti-authoritarian Free-Market cred.
 Until then, we work with what we got, eh?

Today, I "swept" my floor on my hands and knees, using an old T-shirt and vinegar soap. Two things occurred to me, as I bent and hunched over the tiles. Chiefly:

1) I need to lose weight. Seriously, I looked ridiculous and felt unhealthy, like a ponderous hippo.
2) Why can't I buy cleaning supplies with food stamps?  What do people do for a broom?

I did a bit of research on the Internet to take a look. What do food stamp recipients do when they need to clean their house? After all, the absolute worst thing you can do as a poor person is look poor.
And it's a small way to feel some dignity over the less-than-stellar situation they find themselves.

The Internet is full of ideas. The best frugal cleaning information came from rich hipsters who are rediscovering the techniques of their grandparents - those whom lived through the great depression.

If you want to help the poor in your neighborhood, but feel cash is gauche or risks enabling alcoholism or drug use, I suggest the following items. Most can be bought if someone is receiving SNAP or TANF.  They are not available on food stamps.

.Some of these seem counter-intuitive. I don't want to repeat this list.

1) Paper products.

Going to start off with a touchy subject. They don't provide a lot of paper products at the Food Pantry, and you can't buy them with Food Stamps. Not sure why - it's not like their are many ways to use Toilet Paper to commit crimes - unless you count it's actual use. I admit that sometimes I think my movements are criminal.

The Food Pantry offers 1 4-pack of rolls a month. Given the diet the food pantry provides, you'd think they'd be more aware of it's gastrointestinal effects and provide accordingly.  TP is not something most people think to donate and it is possibly the best thing in the world.


2) Cleaning Supplies

Do you have an old plastic bucket lying about? Maybe a broom? How about some old T-shirts and a scissors? This is actually more important than cleaning chemicals - some of which can be purchased with food stamps.  But all the food into cleaner recipes require lidded jars, buckets, bowls and cups, and cleaning requires sponges, rags, and brooms. Seriously, I'd give my left kidney for a broom*


3) Soap

Soap is huge as well. Laundry detergent, shampoo, body soap. dish soap. The food pantry let's you pick one. One. Shampoo or body wash or bar soap, but not all. And you can't buy this with food stamps.  Fels-Naptha is a great cheap soap for laundry. Any cheap soap will do. Soap is a little expensive. Go for large scale brands like Dial or Irish Spring. It may seem nice to buy fancy goat-milk soap that smells like unicorn butts and lavender, but these expensive tend to be burned through quickly.

4) Cleaning Chemicals

I like the smell of chemicals like bleach and Windex. I'm weird. But the Food Pantry doesn't offer much by way of solutions.  
What makes this so low on the list is that vinegar and baking soda do nicely for cleaning and are available on food stamps. My kitchen smells like vinegar, but it's clean, and shall remain ant-free.


5) Cooking Supplies

Many cleaning hacks require some equipment, a blender, or . Do you have a spare blender? Maybe some canning jars or some large bowls? Rather than dump these on Goodwill, give them to someone who can use them. Much can be done with a frying pan and a baking dish, but more can be done with a blender. 


There you go. A list of things not normally given to the impoverished that can make their life much better.

*Thanks to type II diabetes, that's probably all it's worth anyways.

I was mugged today.

I was mugged today.  

Soon I shall be kidnapped. 

It was very clever if him, the mugger. Several cars and a beer truck passed by; a few looked before moving on. People walked,  oblivious or unaware at what was happening. The mugger was very clever. Most muggers skulk in shadows, this one stood out, openly, brazenly.

I can't say I didn't notice him, out in the sun. . Seeing him, I stiffened, whispered an oath.  It's terrible to say, but I knew immediately what he was and his intent. Maybe it was the clothes he wore, or the car he drove.  Perhaps it was a sixth sense. I don't know.

I drove past, hoping he hadn't noticed me. He pulled out behind to follow, I knew I was his mark. I hoped, foolishly, that he perhaps had received some instructions and would leave me at peace. But when he turned on the lights atop his car, my hopes were dashed in the strobe of red and blue

My mugger was incredibly clever, you see. With his blue uniform, his white car topped with attention-grabbing lights, and his gold badge, I could have easily mistaken him for a police officer. But the gun on his hip and the restraints on his belt displayed, without doubt, that he was an agent of force. And he would use the force to steal from my wallet.

He was clever, very clever. He had pulled me over, ostensibly, for public safety. My taillight was broken. And it was, having taken water some time ago. I feigned passive ignorance. It's best not to make any sudden moves around those capable of violence, nor to volunteer information to those you don't trust.   "Did I know," he asked? I claimed I didn't. He chucked.

Be polite to the person with the gun. I remember my self-defense classes.

He asked if I was in the racket. The racket, of course, is where you pay in, betting you will crash a car. They call it "car insurance"  Like a good citizen, I had paid my "premium" - though I would call it "the ante" or blind. Failure to do so and drive is punished with extortion.  But I didn't have proof,  he kindly noted that would be an extra pilfering.

He asked where I lived. See, the mugger can do this. If anyone else asks, I can refuse. But to refuse the mugger leads quickly to assault and kidnapping. So, reluctantly, I admitted my home.

He left to go back to his car. Most muggers attempt to make the transaction expedient. They close in swiftly, demand your wallet, and escape.  Not this one. They are clever. They are confident. You may ask why didn't you run when he turned his back.  Had I left, he would have given chase, called on other gang members. They would have assaulted me, and kidnapped me, and tossed me in a dungeon.  That is how they deal with those who don't acquiesce. 

So you can see why I was afraid to flee. 

After waiting about 10 minutes, He returned. He handed me my license and a paper. I have 15 days to repair the light, and 15 to produce proof I am in their i gambling racket. Failure results in his gang issuing me a "citation" - piece of paper - a contract I did not sign but they enforced. And if I don't pay, well - accidents happen to those who don't pay up. They tend to find themselves securely ensconced in the slammer.

I tried to plead with my mugger – I have no money. Could they at least mug someone who has money? 

No. 

I won't be able to repair the light, I will be fined, and I will be kidnapped.

No, you see we are all equally victims under their laws. Not laws that protect property or lives, but laws that allow for "cause."

What can they offer as an excuse? Do they make the city safer? Perhaps. But not one block from the mugging, fifteen people walked casually across a busy street. No crosswalk, no indication of their intent to cross to warn motorists. They simply strolled out in front of cars  hurrying to their destination. They trusted the vigilance of drivers.  Compared to a tail-light, that is very unsafe. Surely we ought have a mugger at that street, compelling, with threat of force, that they use the crosswalk.

Not five blocks away, I person was going fifty in a thirty, past a government building and in defiance of speed limits. Surely his speed was unsafe speed limits, generally are to reduce the damage in accidents and ensure the driver can react. Sadly, my mugger was too busy finishing his report to be there. And they coyly say they can't mug whom they don't see. Surely we ought have a gang member stationed there, or several, lest these marks go on with their day un-accosted.

A gang-member, in his blue and with his badge of gold, on every corner.  Sounds quaint. But if public safety is the issue, then they ought better ensure it.

And how is kidnapping going to improve the circumstances? So kidnapped, I cannot work, I cannot pay taxes. I shall be useless to the gang leaders and gang shot-callers as a revenue stream. I shall only exist as a warning. "Do not resist when we mug you, but give your money quietly, lest we kidnap you!" In short, kidnapping is a short-term resolution.

Because that's not what mugging is all about. Safety? They do not are for safety. City peace – not one whit. These are the polite lies they use to mask what they really want: money.  They cannot offer a service that deserves it - when was the last time crime was prevented by a cop. They offer deterrent, perhaps (though most criminals simply return to their trade.) But deterrent is a small satisfaction when you are the victim of a crime.  

If someone simply, on threat of force, pilfered cash from your wallet. Why you'd call it a crime. And perhaps you'd even get help. So long as that help wasn't busy mugging someone else, they will get around to your case - eventually. Too bad your wallet will have been emptied by then. .

So I am preparing to be kidnapped. I hope I can put myself at the mercy of the shot-callers, and avoid this. But in the event I cannot, then so be it. Better imprisonment then.

This all seems melodramatic. I assure you, I know. But what kind of world do we live in when armed gangs run the cities, extort the citizenry, and – through equal punishment, punish unequally? After all, where I not poor, I could simply repair my car.

Arguing that a car is a luxury gets us nowhere. Your case rests on the use of force. We must have a license because to drive without one incurs the wrath of the gang. Yes, a car is not a right. But property, and it's use, is.  It harms no one to use my vehicle with a busted taillight. They have not attempted to convince me, using reason, that my taillight endangers anyone sufficiently that I must be mugged. So they apply force. 

They have the guns, they make the rules, I suppose.

So, this front line mugger, this reverse-Robin-Hood  champion in the war against the poor, as struck a double blow.  I was mugged today. Soon I shall be kidnapped. 

A Mistake

As I apply for the umpteenth mcjob. As I send out countless digital resumes, I realized, once again, I made a terrible mistake.

Now,I am not one for great regret, but the other day, waiting for a meeting to determine my future among the "not-a-living-wage" type jobs, I found a book on tackling the"Brick Wall" of a tight, hyper-competative job market. 

This book starts, with all, to find a direction. You have to know what you want. It asks that we perform an exercise called the Seven Stories. The premise is simple: write down 20 to 25 enjoyable accomplishments. Look back into childhood,  in young adulthood, hobbies and in jobs  orcareers you have held.

I did my list on the back of the folded piece of paper I snagged; some expired advertisement for well-passed Employment Fairs. When I have a phone, or camera, or scanner, I can prove it. Imagine a scribbled note here:

Editors Note: Scribbly Note goes here. Use your imagination.

Some items that were on the list were: Piggy Pirates, A relationship that helped me learn about relationships, myself, and people, My brief stint with chain mail, Several stories I wrote in college and my work in  400 University Drive and the Ubiquitous. A portrait of Ian Anderson that caused my father to not have a critical remark. Tutoring adults and children in several subjects and having them do well.

I want you to note something - something immediately apparent. Not a single accomplishment was related to IT, Technical Support, or call center work.  I am reminded of 2001 when I had the option
to intern with an Art Instructor. Since I could not ratiocinate both work and the instruction with respect to time, I gave up on the internship, because you've got to work to eat.

The mistake has always been my inability to sacrifice a job for a career.  I always chose the job: A small piddly, temporary thing over the work of a career: a long course. My head wa snever one for computers. I can work with computers, I understand their value,  but I found them incredibly tedious to work with. Had I been able to find them even a bit interesting, perhaps I would have tried harder. But the work with them was about as interesting, and important to me, as one might feel working at Mcdonalds.  And whilst working these jobs, I did not work on my talents/


 When you have gifts, you must work in the direction to increase efficacy. If you have talent for something, it would be foolish to let it whither.

And I am not saying I am special (not in this post, anyway). I think we all have talents and I think most of us give up on using them. I want to say it's circumstances that lead us to this, but that's only half of it.  Circumstances, internal and external can only become so obnoxious before your will is thwarted.

Mastering a skill boils down to desire overcoming obstacles.  And success, and expertise, is simply displaying mastery in a skill. Your upbringing and genetics make it somewhat more easy to walk some paths than others. We call these talents.
 
When I was offered opportunities to master skills in my life, to test skills, I tended to withdraw. And this was my mistake. I was not prescient enough to realize the existential pain of regret would be far worse than the difficulty at the time.

I don't know if GenY has this problem. Do you? There seems a certainty among others that I never felt. Better parenting, better schools? Better information? The Internet has done wonders to help our self-esteem, and (destroy it).

All I can say, is, in wisdom borne from foolish mistakes plus years of making the same mistakes, is that if you have a passion, do make time to work on them. Work on them intensely, passionately, and consistently.

More on Metrics.

Editor's Note:** According to our metrics, your donation makes increases beatings of the author by 21%. this, in turn, leads a 7% increase in writing quality and quantity. Your donations matter. 


I realized, as I worked on this post, about Comcast, I have a lot to say about metrics. A whole lot. It's not an easy subject, and the corporate world loves metrics. Every middle manager in the country becomes flush at the sight of a report detailing the After Call Percent, the Labor Percent, and the time in queue. They are positively froth at the notion.

Now, I am going to upset a lot of people. Maybe I won't come off as an expert. I have a lot of experience with metrics. And before you say that studies show that metrics are the best performance measures we have, remember that whenever you say "best" you have to ask, for whom.

Metrics, in a lot of ways, are a justification. No company likes it's technical support division. This love-child of rapidly growing tech, coupled with furtive and error-prone tech, is a sinkhole for company money. I'd bet that half of R&D is basically just "make it less error prone."  It's certainly cheaper.

But as technology increased, Tech Support became the second sales associate. We were the soft sell. "Hey, thanks for buying out product. All technology, even that car, has issues. We know that it's inconvenient when it doesn't work, let's get it working right for you."

The flip side - it's a sinkhole for companies to offer free support. They'd charge but most customers suffer a disconnect - they see a technician fiddle some buttons and then the computer works. The technological "wizardry" is largely subtle. When you take your car in for  a repaire, they lift it up on blocks, pull out parts. It looks like work. It's easy to understand as actual skill.  When a technician rapidly scrolls through text, presses a few buttons, reboots your computer, there doesn't seem to be any substance.

So the company wants a profit on a department and the customer doesn't want to pay for what looks like crystal waving hoodoo. But tech support needs to exist.


So Technical support managers use metrics because to the executives, who care only for the bottom line and who listen only to bean-counters, need, desperately need, to know why this red mark exists in the the ledger of their exchequer. They see this entire department that has no income and they can seem to justify it.

I don't understand why. They happily understand exchange of money for goods, at least - they ought. Unless, they don't. When they take their ski trips, do they not pay people for food? For shelter? Why do they think the $30 dollar bottle of hair product is worth it? I mean, their computers need fixing too. I get frustrated that I have to buy cleaning supplies, but after living in some lichen-coated ogre-caves in my past, I wouldn't be caught dead without at least a bottle of bleach. .

Metrics, in this case, justify something that ought need no justification. Tech Support is the second customer service. Once the item has been sold, follow-up falls, mostly, on service. If service is handcuffed to metrics, or poorly staffed, or poorly paid, you lose your ability to create meaningful and important customer experience. Yes, you will have a trickle of naive and bright-eyed techs who will begin the job with open-hearts. But your system will turn them into cowering, mumbling misanthropes in six months. And then, you'll need a retention team.

My point is exactly this: Metrics should never cost the customer experience. The customer experience needs to be managed. If you manage the customer they will have a bad experience.

Truth is, metrics are not all bad. On the contrary, someone I admire, Jon Taffer, uses a type of metric called analytics. He touts the "science of the bar business." He uses these metrics to aid the bar in increasing profit. But bars make money by improving and lengthening the positive customer experience. It's may sometimes come off as if you your chairs are 5 cm higher then profits increase 10%, but only because on TV, they edit and use shorthand. Bars make money on happy, well-served, pleasantly-buzzed-and-entertained customers. If a metric increases short-term profit for a bar at the cost of long term customers - then it isn't used.

Growth under the current system that puts profit first will fall. Profit is important, despite my difficulty understanding work, I can understand profit.

Good service, a good product, and good follow-up, is not a detriment to service. You don't make profit and then, as an afterthought, offer a good experience, or an experience.  You don't begrudgingly slough off to work, petulant and angry like a spoiled child, (or yours truly). You don't try to mitigate it as a "unfortunate and unintended consequence."

You offer a service and a good experience, and, in trade, you are provided other services or goods, or the shorthand, money.

Imagine! Imagine the bar that, as a a consequence, has nice lighting and a dance floor. "What do you mean, we have to have good liquor and clean bars? I just want to sell drinks!" or  a Pizza place? "Quality ingredients? Psh! Just sell them them ground up cardstock!*" How many people would be impressed by an executive with unwashed hair and a ratty suit? 

And, as  customers go elsewhere (assuming they can - Telecoms have the system locked up). You are left with needing "Retention specialists", basically glorified beggars and strong-arm experts who's sole purpose is to keep your unhappy customers on the hook.  You are no better than some back alley clip joint.

If you need metrics to justify your position, you haven't adequately managed your value. And if you need, god help you, an extortionist in "retention." then you aren't providing a service worth retaining.



* I am talking to you Pizza Hut.  Little Caesar's tastes better. And it's cheaper. You should be ashamed. 

** It's just me, but I put on a spiffy bowler and a monocle.

Application to play Sysiphus

Editors Note: Trying a new thing. All instances of swear words have been replaced with other words. The author is woefully unaware of our trick. Let us know if you it.

I don't know how many of you are on the hunt for a job. I'll say I am, but the truth is I am half-heartedly engaged in the process. It's not that I don't want to work, it's just that I don't really want a job.  If I, or anyone, is required to perform such a job, perhaps there should be some recompense in less hours?  I mean, robots can do our work anyway. 

Recently I got the chance to speak to my friend Linda, who is about my fathers age, about work. Labor. Her generation, and therefore my fathers, prided themselves on work. A good job, in a factory, marked your status in the community.

Even Norman Rockwell would find this quaint. A modern jaded hipster would find this the worst, hopeless conceit of a poor imagination. Not because we are afraid of work, but because the stable jobs are all low-wage unlivable jobs or high-stress paperwork jobs. Go on, read about the twenty hours staring at excel.

The truth is, the economy is sideways. The black-and-white Calvinistic, Austrian model of economics hasn't just been turned on it's ear, it's been kidnapped, gagged, and forced to inform people by the use of hoots, grunts, and interpretive dance.

Face it, the rules that applied back then simply don't anymore. Not in any meaningful way. Our parents, leaders, and corporate elite  haven't informed us that the rules have changed. Partially from ignorance.   But also, out of malice.

Job applications have certainly not changed for the better. They are, in all honestly, a hopeless  bureaucracy,designed to inhibit, deter and prevent you from getting a job.

In my father's day, you could walk in, ask for a job, and get one, or told to get lost. And, if so rebuffed,  you'd head down one door.  "Hitting the pavement" was the euphemism for what you actually did.   Now you apply on  for Internet websites, press submit. Answer 400 questions about your personality. And though there are no right answers, clearly I answer them wrong because I never get a call back. i just send my application into the either.

And call on an application? They don't really do that anymore. They will call you.

Sure they will. 

The worst so far, Qdoba. Do you really need to ask 300 questions. I go to Qdoba frequently, and the biggest question I have is: Can you find someone who can actually roll a borking burrito? fire the people who make those long personality tests, use that money to bus your burrito rollers to La Bamba for a day.

McDonald's was only slightly less aggravating. They ask a series of questions and you choose the question that most reflects your views. These are the same questions.  For example

"I am a hard worker" vs "I like to watch butterflies fly into my bosses nose." 

"OK" I clicked the former - though my boss has nose hairs you could land Apache gunships on.

"I am a lazy good-for-nothing slacker"  vs  "I eat baby dolphins because I hate life."

So now what?  Do I contradict myself or do I make Jack-the-ripper look like a children's educator?
Sure, it's a bit of hyperbole, but it still aggravates me. What does any of this have to do with pressing burgers and dropping fries in hot oil? 

I'll tell you what, I ain't no slacker. Baby dolphins be damned. 



Sparkfire kindly posted this  graphic. I know it's bogus  when it talks about farmers. "No Job Hunt. No Career improvement."


Nonsense. Farmer is one of the most important jobs. The plight of the farmer was not one of improvement, it was about the poor economic and political policies. Yes, being a feudal serf might have sucked. But barring disaster, a skilled farmer lived quite a good life in the US.

And besides, in this hyper-corporate project-based, intern-serfdom world. Maybe a stable job with consistent pay is just the thing we need. 

I tell you Zach Weiner is positively prophetic. I suspect he has a lot of Millennial friends less-than-employed. 

We are reaching the existential crisis of the Job Market.  On one hand, we have a a bunch of slack-jawed sociopaths babbling about "returns on investments", "10 percent improvement in process efficacy" and "item action productivity", on the other, we have an overabundance labor jobs (replaced by automation) and service jobs "not meant to be a living wage." On the third, yes, third hand, we have an ever-swelling, leviathan-like government bureaucracy that exists to leech off the low- and moderately-waged and make serfs of those at the bottom. And the fourth hand we have people who, by virtue of illness, disability, or plain orn'riness, refuse to have anything to do with this nonsense.

Yes, the current job market is basically a 4-armed tentacled monster. In my nightmares it has Newt Gingrich and Barack Obama's face, melded like a sick love child.

And it's not like the basic rules have changed. So why the horse and pony show? 

The massive tentacled beast destroying or economic possibilities does have some vestigial arms - farmers (often automated), medical technicians (rapidly becoming educated button mashers), the arts. Things that were, or are, still valued for producing. But the system doesn't like those arms. Bankers making money on bailouts hate to hear that maybe the guy that grows pumpkins is doing more for the country. At least the farmer isn't giving money to people who hate the US. 

At least you can become a plumber or tradesman, with years of schooling and byzantine apprenticeships.

The markets are being made to keep people out.

But that's another blog post (or two, if I talk about neo-cottage revolutions). I'm losing my point today. Forgive me.

If you are, or were, looking for a job in an old way, you are right-borked. Unless you know somebody. And I am not even kidding. 

That McDonald's job? I have applied at McDonald's before. That specific McDonald's, for a soul-sucking mcjob that I can work around my desire to not actually do that job. Something that lets me pretend that I will be an artist some day.

They have ignored my application, but a caseworker of mine works with  and knows the manager there. And he says he will hook me up.

Networking required for a "not a livable wage" job. This is madness. Absolute madness. Regulation and litigation have made companies terrified of just giving a job.

If I weren't already a little on the batshit side, this would be enough to make me so. 

If you can't talk to people and hob knob, you might as well enjoy mopping floors. It's not like starting a business is much an option. Even in the blog post above, he needed way more money than he new. if you are in poverty, how are you going to manage that?

Remember when we were told to get a good job and not to be an artist? Remember that? I sure as hell do.

That was before Patreon and Kickstarter made fools of all of us, except the damn fools that followed their dreams. It's a new world, and prescient as I might have been, I was sure dumb on that account.  

The Comcast Effect.

I seem, very much, to be in a tizzy over the economy - specifically how we work, why we work, and what we work on. I think the whole system, created by industrialization, has turned like some modern-day ouroboros, onto itself. The mechanization and industrialization has ran away with regulations (and de-regulations) all in the wrong places. It's left the free market, good work, and the lower-class gasping in the dust.

As for the middle class, our current legislative body, from fed to state, and often local, stabbed it in 2002, it just took this long for it to bleed out. The middle class barely had tiem to gasp "Et tu?"

The ever-increasing hatred of Comcast is a bandwagon that has perhaps circle. Recordings and interviews  making the rounds, showing us the madness of the Comcast system. And regardless of claims to the otherwise, Comcast knows about and encourages it.
In fact, I feel like translating the Comcast apology:

We are very embarrassed by the way our employee spoke with Mr. Block and Ms. Belmont and are contacting them to personally apologize.

 Translation: We are so busted. This is just like when mom caught me stealing as a child. I had to go, apologize, and promise to pay back the shopkeeper. So now we have to apologize even though the candy we stole was delicious. Lame 

 The way in which our representative communicated with them is unacceptable and not consistent with how we train our customer service representatives.

Translation: We do not precisely train our CSRs like this. In fact, it's not until they get on the call center floor where we discreetly discuss metrics. We reinforce these metrics at their 30- and 60-day reviewt

We are investigating this situation and will take quick action. 

Translation:   So, we know what's up and we will handle it in-house by completely ignoring it and.or firing the employee. 

While the overwhelming majority of our employees work very hard to do the right thing every day, we are using this very unfortunate experience to reinforce how important it is to always treat our customers with the utmost respect.

 Translation: This happens all the time, but we will add an extra ten minutes in training to discuss how much we care about our customers so we can update the published date on our training materisl. We'll make it look like an overhaul by paying people way more money than they ought to rewrite the language of our training materials.

(As a mercenary who doesn't have apersonal beef with Comcast, I'd like to say to them: I am up to the rewrite job, and my fees are reasonable. It's will be $10,000 a month. You can bundle that with my $5000  a month  consulting and my $3000 cartooning. Now separately you'd pay 18 grand for all that, but with introductory bundling, I can get you two for $9000 or all 3 for only $6000 for 6 months!  What a deal!)*

 Sometime in the past we gave up on the simple idea of good products and services. There used to be this process. You made a product or a service, then shared it and exchanged it for money. if the product and/or service was good, and you were reasonable, you would get returns and some profit. Industrialization was, supposedly, simply an extension. of this.

But something went sideways. We stopped looking at return customers and happy customers as signs of good work and started engineering opinions. We sent out surveys. And the surveys said things like 'the call was too long" or "they didn't fix the problem and I had to call again."  And we valued signing up new customers, at any cost. We added flow lists and databases and metrics because we thought the science and data backed it up. And it did, to a point. 

But we stopped offering service, and offering to do the jobs, and starting managing the customer. Not his expectations, but them. We forgot that all the data in the world isn't giving the customer what they want or need. 

The fact is, while it's true that no sane or honest business owner goes into the game to lose money, the profit - the bottom line, comes from relationships, and connections.

Rather than asking "What can we do to help the customer?' We ask: "Can we make the customer happy in 6 minutes." Then we ask "Can we finish the call in 6 minutes to help the next person, and can we make them wait in a queue."

I have discussed this before here.

Comcast is not alone. I worked for a small Telecom, TDS. I was a pretty solid employee,but I had a problem. I wanted customers to be helped. I want to solve their problem and make sure they didn't need to talk to me again.
Did some of the customers need multiple things? Yes. That, at first, didn't bother me. Did some customers ask me for things outside my scope of support? certainly - I explained that I could help, or couldn't. If I could help, I said other agents might not be able to help.

I had excellent customer service. But in the world of metrics and numbers, this was unacceptable. And the simple answer is because our managers were so divorced from the customer and the process that they couldn't even understand good customer service, and why their metrics were detrimental to the people on the floor. Customer Service Representatives breaking out in a sweat when the difficult call takes very long. raises lost to skewed averages and you miss a metric.  

All companies do this. Marco's Pizza did this. Measuring the time to make pizza, the time in the oven, the time on cut and time out the door. All of these do, in fact affect customer service. But, in the end, the only thing that really matters is the quality of the pizza and the good customer experience.  At Marco's Pizza, the management is not distant from the customer. If a customer is happy, metrics are loosened. If a customer is unhappy, no amount of metrics repair it.

Metrics tell very little about the customer experience. It is a game of testing boundaries - how much can we get away with in our search for profit and speed and still have a positive experience.

It seems insane. In order to give a "positive experience" I had to not do all the things that made an experience positive.

Now the same telecom sent all their tech jobs to uneducated Jamaicans, costing the US jobs and giving a worse customer experience.

Madness and bad customer experience in a search for profit. No company went out of business by building positive relationships.

Something has happened. Industrialization and profit-hunting have become metric chasing. Desperate attempts to show your job is relevant by explaining why your imaginary measurements are good measurements. That the science of profit, time management, and efficacy replaced the ability to craft a good customer experience.


*Comcast must sign a 12 month contract. After 6 months the introductory rate become $19,999 a month. Early termination fees apply.

My FCC comment.

 In light of net neutrality (I.E. Comcast F*cking the Internet), I conntected the FCC and commented thus:

"Simply put, the telecoms, all of which are thinly-veiled actual monopolies, cannot be trusted with the Internet. They use strong arm tactics and bullying, both on providers like Netflix, and on customers attempting to extricate them from the service. In no way can we trust them to ensure the fast lane/slow lane service will be priced fairly.

Our Internet lags behind many other countries, only because the monopolies - sorry - telecoms do not want to provide better service. They want to profit, and ignobly. "Get the mostest and offer the leastest." It would be comical if it weren't so true.

When we came to this country, a man or woman could make good in this country by simply carving out a part of the public land. The Internet is the new frontier, and technology the way to freedom. My giving this power to the telecomonopolies, you are denying the will to prosper of the United States.  New blogs, new stores, new industry using the logistics and the easy messaging of the Internet to make money, for themselves and for the government.

How many Internet business will we lose because access is only by slow lane? How many subscribers will quit Netflix and use libraries to get movies? The unintended costs of letting telecomonopolies introduce lanes will be staggering as it deincentivizes Internet use and Internet commerce. Economically it will be a disaster. Does that matter to you? the GDP used to matter, does it anymore? What happened to being a country of producers?

The media is woefully inadequate and untrustworthy. Pictures of George Zimmerman were lightened. His 911 call, manipulated. An informed public cannot trust television and radio sources.  Several news agencies have outright said they are biased, and one even won a lawsuit, claiming they didn't even have to tell truth. But on the Internet, where information is free, the truth can be found. And even if it requires digging through stacks of useless cat pictures and diatribes, I do it gladly to find out facts - something other media outlets often lacks.

By giving in to the telecomonopolies, you are taking steps to ensure that we cannot find any truth but the one most well liked by the corporations. What's next, a firewall to prevent us from knowing things outside Oceania? That would certainly prevent the spread of crimethink.

If an appeal to your nobler capitalist side side does not dissuade you, let me then try your more ignoble, despotic side.

Fast, inexpensive Internet is literally circuses. Imagine, if you will, a society of people who have access to cat pictures all day. With the incredible amount of slacktivism today, don't you think it would be wise to let people speak out on the Internet. They will spend their time lamenting with Facebook E-cards and never be so idle as to pick up protest placard and brick.

Open up the internet, and we will immerse ourselves in hedonistic voyeurism, and leave you alone. Close it down, and our idle hands will have to find something to do. Maybe rallying against a corrupt government is just the thing to get us off our Netflix-deprived couch-sitting asses."

I am not a lawyer, my language may be colloquial - I am a blogger and would-be demagogue. But if enough us remind them that the internet is useful, as a tool of information for us, or, at the very least, an easy leash for our masters - they may realize what a terrible idea Comcasts lanes will be.

Go here:  http://www.fcc.gov/comments and comment on 14-28