From bydeway.com

Last week, Stephan Harper followed through with an election promise and introduced a package of tax breaks for families with children under 18. According to an article published in the National Post, included in this package is the ability for young families to “split-income” and transfer up to $50,000 between spouses in order to collect a tax credit of up to $2,000.

The reason for this new tax break is that single income families currently pay more tax than dual income families. For example, a family where one spouse earns $100,000 and the other earns $0 pays more tax than a family where each spouse earns $50,000.

Clearly, this old system is unfair, and I think the decision to allow families to split income is a just one. I also believe it is important that this credit only be available to families with children. This ensures that both spouses are contributing to society, as the one that is not earning income is providing care for their children.

However, even under this new ruling dual income families will still at an advantage because the maximum tax credit allowed is $2,000, and the maximum income that can be transferred is $50,000. This tax break has the advantage of looking really good young families, while dealing minimal damage to the government’s budget.

From businessreviewusa.com

According to an article in the economist, the United States federal government is taking legal action against Southwest airlines after 44 planes of their planes were found to not comply with FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) regulations. Allegedly, these planes were repaired improperly, and were allowed to return to service prematurely.

Although it is not specified in the article, I believe this event is a result of flawed reward system. In class 17, we talked about performance management and the dangers of rewarding one behavior while hoping for another. Southwest airlines utilizes a cost leadership strategy, and in order to maximize their profit they must operate at a very low cost. For this reason, it is likely the employee responsible for the proper maintenance of their aircrafts was offered incentives to devise a low cost strategy. While Southwest may have been unaware their actions did not meet required regulations, they are at fault for rewarding low cost over consumer safety.

Unfortunately, this event will likely damage Southwest’s reputation among consumers, and may cause them to lost market share. This is not good news for Southwest, as their relatively low margins demand a high volume of sales in order for the company to maintain its current profitability. Hopefully, this will serve as a lesson for Southwest, and lead them to reform their reward systems.

The Arc Initiative, social entrepreneurs and the United Nations all share a common goal: help impoverished communities enhance their quality of life. Hypothetically, if the United Nations had the means and decided to give all underprivileged persons the funds necessary to temporarily break them out of poverty, would the problem be solved? I don’t believe so, and my reasoning is quite simple: it’s not about the money. If you give a starving person $10, they will likely buy $10 worth of food and be hungry again the next day. However, if you loan a starving person money, and teach them how to use it to start and grow a business, they can feed themselves for the rest of their lives. In this case, the gift of knowledge and opportunity is more valuable than a lump sum of money.

This transfer of knowledge and opportunity is what the Arc Initiative and many social entrepreneurs choose to focus on. Unlike charities, this approach creates shared benefit for both parties. Students in the initiative are able to gain real world experience, while social entrepreneurs are able to make a profit.

For these reasons, even if the United Nations was able to provide adequate funds to temporarily feed all in need, programs like the Arc Initiative and social entrepreneurs will still maintain an important role in development of have-not communities.

Images from cascadestudios.com and kysis.edu.my

When I was in grade two I wanted to be a rock star. I had just started playing guitar, and I thought I had the skills to make it big. I told my dad one night about this aspiration, and he gave me some advice I will never forget. He posed, “If playing guitar is your job, what are you going to do for fun?” As a seven year old, I struggled with this concept. I wondered, why can’t work be fun? I understand now what he meant. Unfortunately, no matter what you do, work will always be stressful. Why would I take the thing I love, my escape, and make it stressful?

As I grew older, I was bombarded with an endless stream of advice all saying the same thing: “do what you love.” Maybe it’s because my dreams were crushed at an early age, but this message never made sense to me. By this time, I had already decided I wanted to go to business school. Did I love business? No, of course not. Did I think it would be a good fit for me? Yes, I certainly did.

I recently read a blog post by Penelope Trunk that humorously expressed my thoughts on this topic. She advices her readers to do what they are, not what they love (Trunk, 2007).

Now, why am I talking about this? What does this have to do with COMM 101? As an introductory course, we’ve spent considerable time discussing the different majors and programs offered here at Sauder. I believe the goal is to help students decide which fields interest them, and what they wish to peruse. If so, congratulations! I’d like to take this time to officially announce that I plan to major in accounting. Yes, you read that right. Do I have a passion for accounting? Sorry Jeff, but no. Do I think it will be a good fit for me? Yes, I certainly do.