Posts Tagged ‘Table of Contents 2018 (Q1 images)’
2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019].
2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019] (Short-link ends “-9p3.” This post is under 4,000 words).
This post lists, links to, and thereby publicizes, one year’s worth of posts. It’s an informal TOC.
It does this in two different layouts. Both Layouts follow short Introductions I and II only because this ended up being the top “sticky” post on the blog.
Layout by Date Only {{Short Form, no titles: Links by date only (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)}} precedes Layout by captioned images displaying full post titles & published dates {{The image captions show only dates published; click on the date wanted to read the associated post}}.
AGAIN:
Images from my blog administrative dashboard (also organized by quarter) display the post titles (and every image has captions also with direct, clickable, active links – labeled by post date, not title — to each post title displayed in the corresponding image). These are found below the “Read More” link below.
Therefore, the full post titles are displayed only on the images, not as searchable texts on this post;* that’s the “informal” aspect (due to author’s — i.e., my — time and technology limits)! (*You can of course search any specific title on “Google” or on the blog “Search” at top right, if looking for a specific post; but browsing a year’s worth of titles is recommended.
To read any associated post (to a specific title), click on the link provided for that post’s date. I’ve provided these links twice for every post, as it says in the preceding paragraph: First layout, by date only, all together (by quarters, Q1,Q2,Q3,Q4, i.e. Jan-Feb-March | Apr-May-June | July-Aug-Sept | Oct-Nov-Dec) but with no nearby visual showing full post titles. My post titles are generally too damn long, so omitting them lets me compress that version of the TOC into a short space.
Second layout, two-up* image galleries (organized by quarters) display the full titles — but you must click on the associated date in the caption to go direct to any single post. The images are from my blogger admin dashboard, which capture the full titles and dates published. (*side-by-side, two columns)
Some “Vocabulary” (from this post title) since this now is the top post displayed on the “Current Posts” page of the blog: just three phrases, next three bullets:
- “STICKY?”
This post is one of 7 Top “Sticky” posts on the blog and for reasons unknown to me displays in Position #1.
To instead go first to the post reading “Welcome To My Blog,” now in Position #2, click the preceding link. I do not directly control (or understand how WordPress decides) “sticky” post priorities or see how they cannot be manually numbered). You’re reading the one most recently added. Its purpose is only to provide links to all posts published in 2018, not to introduce the blog. If you are new to this blog, “Welcome To My Blog” (and/or the Home Page of the blog, for which just type “FamilyCourtMatters.org“) may be a better place to start.
- WHICH “WELCOME TO MY BLOG” POST? (“I don’t see any post by that title.”)
The post which begins “Welcome To My Blog,” (because I thought it would remain at the very top of the blog but which is now in position #2) is not labeled “Welcome to my Blog,” just starts out with that phrase. It has a much longer title, reflecting one of my major concerns starting off calendar year 2018:
In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts STILL [FN1] (Abusively, Territorially, and Intentionally) Limit Possible Answers by Censoring Terms Admitting Other Historic Evidence — About The Courts (not “Batterers!”) AND Government Itself — while Coaching (even Certifying) Others to Imitate. (Published May 2, 2018) (case-sensitive short-link ends “-8Ly”; about 7,900 words).
[FN1] It reads “STILL” because, to tell the truth, this has been a major concern for as many years as I have been blogging and one of the reasons I felt it so urgent to write and publicize this public-interest blog, stay connected where possible with my generation and subsequent generations of people going through it.
If I’d had access to a blog like this, and people willing to address its issues collectively, I likely would have acted differently during my time in family courts which followed quickly upon my having filed for protection from domestic violence with young children still in the home. I cannot say for sure, because it takes time to recover from years of having been battered and threatened at home, and we all grow with increased experience and understanding over time. But I believe I would’ve known where to hit hard legally, and have obtained the data to back it up, earlier.
Mothers are being sheared like sheep (of ongoing contact with their own children, and of– where some existed — savings, income, and functional work lives) in these systems, many fathers are also being set up (if not incited) to start custody battles beyond those kinds of fathers who might naturally do so to “get even” or just reduce child support obligations.
There are SYSTEM components to why it continues to take place, not only personal or psychological ones.
Speaking of the domestic flock analogies and other things that happen to such animals:
Some people, including at times responding officers, have been literally slaughtered by the other parent in the process of attempting to escape potentially lethal and obviously dangerous relationships, while the family court overseers continue to peddle more mental health-based, “intervention” programming focused on behavioral modification. I call this “roadkill” in part because some incidents literally have occurred and victims been left on the road, and because the press often treats it as accidental, or an opportunity to call for more of the programs which didn’t prevent it in the first place.
- “POSTS?“
I said “posts” because there are also pages and I added some this past year. Usually, I’ll add a post to call attention to any new page, as I did on March 29, 2018.
I often begin posts explaining what inspired them, showing “angle of approach.” If the posts take long enough to be completed, as I continue researching and interacting with others between, a few different angles of approach often develop. That happened here, too.
While having a Table of Contents hardly needs an justification, I still have this time (for this post) two parallel introductions/angles of approach, with two different reasons for my working to get this TOC out informally (=quickly). Neither introduction is more important than the other, so I’m delivering them both, after which this TOC gets to the actual links to posts faster than TOCs from other years. Compiled in about a day and a half only.
I may (or, may not: see Introductions I & II for why) come back alter and add “tags” or otherwise embellish this post, but for now, it lists and publicizes and provides links to one year’s worth of posts, with as usual, significant personal time and energy put into on each one.
Again, here’s the layout below: INTRO I, INTRO II (both brief; Intro II points to the substance of the blog and why I’ve taken the “uncommon” approach, but report on why the typical approaches seem designed to fail, to fall short, and to deprive the public of a fully informed consent to restructuring their own government(s)**), (**phrase added Feb 3, 2019 during brief review) then:
- First, one chrono listing with each post’s dates & links (12 months worth but still shown by quarters),
- Then, below the “click-to-read-more” link, four mage galleries with the full titles and same links to every single post shown in the captions, one gallery per quarter. These are screenshots from the blogger’s admin dashboard with some color annotations (color-coded and labeled in part to help me keep which image went where while posting). They grab some (not all) of the tags, if any, for each post. Each image gallery has its own section title. It’s a messier format than you’d find in a book, or annual financial report, but still gets the job done.**
- Occasionally (so far, twice) a short, fine-print “Blogger Status During This Quarter.“***
INTRODUCTION I – Why a TOC Like This?
I’m putting out this informal (image-based + quick-links) Table of Contents now rather than a larger, more thoroughly polished one weeks later because I want to communicate sooner on other platforms, like Twitter, and to a few people who’ve shown an interest in my approach to Family Court Matters, and because the topics I posted on recently keep coming up in that context.
Some of these topics relate to legislation or (for example) resolutions either just passed, or are under consideration (US, UK, possibly also Canada) due to affect custody, divorce, parenting, child support, and personal safety after domestic violence or child abuse.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, from ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018)
Full Post Title: Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, From ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018) [Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-8X8” and this post ends after about 9,600 11,000 words, sections of which may be moved elsewhere to shorten it!] [The “Read-More” link will also, in time, be moved closer to the top, making for a shorter lead-in section.]
**Explained more below in this post, and in a typical post. No apologies for failing to sugar-coat the news. Or for long sentences in the next few indented paragraphs, summarizing my understanding and explaining that comment. With additional “show-and-tell” relating to the rest of this post (and blog).
In my experience, (far) too many people, as for generations most of us have been conditioned, whether or not holding any number of white-collar professional jobs, whether or not possessing sufficient understanding of running a business to handle themselves, whether employee or self-employed, not only lack the functional vocabulary — financial literacy — to even acquire an understanding of the intersection of public and private finances, or on government and taxation itself — but also are so emotionally and financially invested in what works — at least tolerably — for themselves — they do not really want to (will not to the point of continually “cannot”) understand something different, that is, a different assessment. Indicators and symptoms that something odd, that an ongoing, major economic “black hole of non-accountability” exists are thus sidelined, dismissed, and/or ignored, as are people who may broach the topic and point to it. These fainter, less “in your face” indicators in some ways could be called “the canaries in the coal mines.” i.e., ignore at your own risk.
I have of course stood in the “too many people” category above until shocked out of it (in the context of family court), but unlike some, that shock didn’t eradicate all my curiosity, or my healthy respect for the value of ongoing observation and assessment of current surroundings as survival traits (which I also know are best utilized BEFORE in “fight-or-flight” mode).
The literacy and information (including functional vocabulary and its use) on certain economic matters and the operations of government as it is versus as it is portrayed to the public is where “first come + mutually organized = first served” and the rest of the population will be allocated to useful, functional positions within society* as organized by those more aware of just what public resources actually exist [1], and how to access them for private profit [2]. *That these positions may not look exactly like what they did centuries ago doesn’t mean they’re still not symbolically “Hewers of water and drawers of wood.”
[1] Key to understanding this is whether the public has been told the truth regarding the bottom line of (particularly) the federal government, and based on that, the legitimacy of all systems of taxation portrayed as beneficial and necessary for example, to balance that budget. Bottom lines whether of both government and private sectors are expressed not just in terms of annual or bi-annual budgets — but of financial statements. AUDITED ones. Looking at a single entity or just a few entities within a field (OR at public only or private only) is inadequate because public and private constantly interact with each other. Both sectors frequently change names, consolidate, spin off or (for government departments) set up new offices within existing departments, etc.
[2] There’s far less competition in fields mutually controlled by those who pioneered them.
(Example: See blog search phrase: Harvard/Bain/Bridgspan (as a business model) and click on the “Why Bother to Unravel” post [2.1] (its concluding paras) on that search result (2nd search result after this post).’ I concocted that phrase during a drill-down involving all three. I had discovered “Bridgespan” as a subcontractor on another foundation’s tax returns. My fabricated phrase refers generally to commandeering the profits in NONprofit consulting, and as a NONprofit, which takes collaboration with others also so inclined. Notice “Bain” is associated with well-known public figure from Massachusetts (who also ran for President not too long ago).[3, with two associated images] Notice that an elite, private university (in that aspect, HBS — Harvard Business School) is integral part of the phrase, as it is of that model. Better yet, spell “Bridgespan” correctly in the search and read (scroll down towards the bottom for that section) what I published last year (March 30, 2017): Omidyar Entities: The Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan Consulting Model (Transform and Help Run — or own — Distressed Assets, LIKE U.S. PUBLIC SCHOOLS), Rebranded, on Steroids, and Gone Global).
[2.1] Full title and image from top of “Why Bother to Unravel” post (publ. June 16, 2018):
“Why Bother to Unravel…“Link provided nearby or see blog “Archives” for 6/16/2018. Bottom section of this post also summarizes key concerns in a few paragraphs, regarding social service delivery in the private sector, and the tax-exempt sector in general (from an accountability standpoint — not from a “service-delivery” standpoint).
[3] Bain Execs Spent Nearly $5M on Romney’s White House Run, Records Show (Anne Faris-Rosen in Center for Public Integrity, 2/7/2012 (let’s call this “about six years ago.) Mitt Romney and John Kerry both referenced, in the article, but the image (excerpt shown here) mentions Bain Capital LLC and Bain & Co., the latter being a consulting company. Note the timeframes and that Bain & Co. formed in 1984, a decade which is ON my radar below as to LBOs and major Tax Reform, and within the following decade (1986-1996) and with (Tax Reform Act of 1986) organizing personnel and nonprofits in common, welfare reform, which brings up right up to “the elephant in the room” when discussing why family courts are so conflict-ridden and economically, socially and psychologically devastating for so many. Romney, it says below, had continuing passive income after the fourteen years he spent at Bain & Co. Note Bain & Co. LLC also did those leveraged buyouts which (for some of the bought-out companies’ employees) resulted in job loss through the heavy (i.e., “leveraged” with debt) burden the resulting setup provided.
Image #2 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge
Image #1 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge
Along the way (and on most posts on this blog), you’ll see that I continue to name and profile (economically) many organizations directly associated with and set up to affect custody proceedings, child support decision-making, and of course, defining what is and (especially) is not “domestic violence” or “child abuse” and is better described instead as, “high-conflict.” Most of these address how to problem-solve any assessed condition — typically through more trainings (some qualified under CEU or for lawyers CLE credits), certifications, and guidelines for those in the (existing and as we speak, more being created) professions involved. MOST of which will be supported, up front, or once in operation long-term, by public funds.
This time (not most times) the image is the link to article. Click to access. It’s a short read — Please Do! (from Atlanta Business Chronicle originally).
McKinsey & Company copies Bain (2014)
This section/illustration may be moved (or may not) later! I added to it where McKinsey, already a global consulting company (for decades) connects also to the US-based National Governors’ Association., and the significance of the NGA among other similar associations in setting policies which obviously will affect US citizens due to size, scope and major corporations involved. //LGH.
While I’m on “Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan (The Bridgespan Group)” — it’s no secret that Bridgespan was a spinoff of Bain and involves consulting for nonprofits with positive spin on the social impact (benefits of course are featured) of doing so.
On basic Google search again, among plenty of results on the first page, one is Nonprofit Quarterly reporting that the big consulting firm (multi-national) McKinsey & Co. (which I featured as a “Corporate Fellow” to “National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,” a pay-to-play status), reported in March 2015 that it has copied the model and spun off its own nonprofit.
Click nearby image to read more (see esp. para.3), however this next quote from it specifically acknowledges the “Bain’s Bridgespan” model being circulated — obviously among powerful corporations whose profits, otherwise, would be taxed — considerably if they weren’t moving revenues from nonprofit to nonprofit for better “social impact” and to help economic mobility of retail-level entry workers (!).
If you explore this example further, that’s exactly what they’re talking about.
Someone has to work for all the corporations who have so many profits they have to pour excess into tax-exempt foundations.
If you read further (on this post) for example, on the background of people like Grover Norquist (active in pushing for Tax Reform Act of 1986, and after that, “Contract with America,” which so dramatically (but in the “background operating systems”) impacted judicial decision-making in America’s (meaning here, the USA’s) family courts, it becomes clear that businesses organize in response to tax laws so as to reduce their corporate taxes.
There seems to be a connection between Tax Reform Act of 1986 and “Welfare Reform” (major restructuring) of 1996.
McKinsey & Co. Starts its own version of Bain’s Bridgespan Rick Cohen, March 27, 2015 in Nonprofit Quarterly.
…Some portion of McKinsey’s thinking on nonprofits is contained in the McKinsey on Society website, where there are essays and research summaries addressing topics such as how poor school systems can become good school systems and, not surprisingly, extolling the potential of social impact bonds. In other words, as a global management consulting firm, McKinsey has had a nonprofit practice carried out by some of its 19,000 staff in over 100 offices in 61 countries.
This looks a little like Bain & Company’s creation of the Bridgespan Group in 1999. Bridgespan started out strongly with a $1 million grant from Bain plus several loaned staff. Like McKinsey, Bain & Company is a wealthy parent for its nonprofit consulting spinoff, with sales of around $2.1 billion.
The Chronicle of Philanthropy suggests that the McKinsey Social Initiative will start life with a $70 million capital infusion from McKinsey & Company plus access to 25 of its consultants to work on MSI projects and advice from 10 McKinsey partners …
Well, I just looked up the Form 990s and found it’s already (since 2014 origins) changed its name AND its website, and the one linked to on the 2015 report (which is neither) isn’t what the 2016 tax return shows (latest year shown on a separate database — NONE are shown on the website) (EIN# is 471073442).
Read the rest of this entry »
