I was in a car with a woman I’d recently met. We were on our way to a restaurant for lunch; she was driving. Our conversation turned to the topic of higher consciousness. I suggested that mastering this concept was something that — if we truly desired to achieve — we would need to continually practice. And that, even then, “mastering” it might never actually happen.

“Not me” she replied. “I’ve read a lot about it and I really believe I’m already there.”

At that very moment — and timed about as perfectly as a Hollywood movie — an elderly gentleman accidentally cut us off; his car nearly slamming into ours.

This person next to me; the one who had already mastered higher consciousness, then proceeded to scream an “expletive deleted” at the man while, out of embarrassment, I buried my face in my hands. For the next two seconds I found myself frozen with fear that the middle finger on her right hand was going to rise to salute him.

I see some very profound lessons here, ranging from the sacred to the mundane. Anyone want to suggest any of them? Feel free to share.

There is a 19th century folktale about a young fellow who went about town slandering the town’s wise man. One day, he went to the wise man’s home and asked for forgiveness. The wise man, realizing that this man had not internalized the gravity of his transgressions, told him that he would forgive him on one condition: that he go home, take a feather pillow from his house, cut it up, and scatter the feathers to the wind. After he had done so, he should then return to the wise man’s house.

Though puzzled by this strange request, the young man was happy to be let off with so easy a penance. He quickly cut up the pillow, scattered the feathers, and returned to the house.

“Am I now forgiven?” he asked.

“Just one more thing,” the wise man said. “Go now and gather up all the feathers.”

“But that’s impossible. The wind has already scattered them.”

“Precisely,” he answered. “And though you may truly wish to correct the evil you have done, it is as impossible to repair the damage done by your words as it is to recover the feathers. Your words are out there in the marketplace, spreading hate, even as we speak.”

How interesting it is that we, as human beings, so quick to believe the bad that others say about someone; so accepting of the “news” contained in print and television tabloids, and so ready to assume the worst regarding another’s actions, actually allow ourselves to believe that the evil “we” spread about someone won’t really matter. Incredible that we can’t seem to immediately and resolutely accept the fact that the gossip we speak can — and often does — significant damage to that person.

My friend, Paul Myers, says, “Gossip is like a fired bullet. Once you hear the sound, you can’t take it back.” That is what the man in the above story found out in a very disappointing, shameful moment of self-discovery. And it isn’t just what we say about someone to others, but what we say to that person directly as well.

We’ve all been told that “Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never harm me.” We also know that is totally untrue. While a body will typically recover from a physical injury, the harm caused by direct insults can sometimes last a lifetime, and tear the self-esteem right out of a person.

On the other hand, kind, encouraging words can build a person’s self-esteem, help him or her to grow and give them the impetus they need to do great, significant things with their lives. The choice regarding how we speak about or to someone is ours. It’s called “free will.”

(If you’re just joining this series, please read the previous installments.)

Welfare — Has it Helped the Poor? (Part 1)

Or, as Dr. Phil Would Say, “How’s That Working For You?”

Back in the early 1960’s, President Lyndon B. Johnson decided to wage a war on poverty. It was called just that; “The War on Poverty.” He claimed that, within two years, poverty, as we know it, would be wiped out. This would happen by government forcibly taking money from those above a certain income level and redistributing that money to people who were below a certain income level.

The intent was to give the poor a helping hand, leading them out of poverty, and onto a life of liberty, responsibility, and abundance.

Since most of us, as human beings, care about the plight of the poor and genuinely wish to help them, it probably seemed like a good idea at the time.

Yep, it seemed like a good idea at the time. Imagine; just two years … and poverty, as we knew it, would be all but wiped out in our country. Gone. History, No more. Vanquished.

Turn the clock ahead 50 years and what has the result been?

Let’s put it this way; the “War on Poverty” has been just about as successful as the “War on Drugs” … meaning it hasn’t been successful at all and — for all practical purposes — has only made things worse.

Yes, just $9 trillion dollars (that would be $9,000,000,000,000) later, we have just as many people in poverty per capita as we had back then, third and fourth generations of welfare recipients have grown up never seeing their parents bring home a paycheck, their self-esteem is all but shot, and many see no way out. No way out at all. In fact, they are all but trapped within the Welfare System.

Government bureaucrats, as I’m sure well-intentioned as most of them truly are, have a vested personal interest in keeping welfare alive and well. After all, that’s how they make their living. And, government’s rules and regulations on how private charity groups can operate (please understand, these groups are perceived by government to be their competition) have put many of these groups right out of business despite their excellent track records, and have discouraged many other similar groups from even trying. Not to mention, with so much of people’s hard-earned money going to Welfare via taxation, many people who would otherwise give abundantly to the poor will not do so, figuring that they’ve already “done their part.”

Quite simply, government needs to get out of the welfare business.

Does this mean we shouldn’t help the poor? Of course not! If you know anything about me, then you know the answer to that is, “We should definitely help the poor!” We should absolutely make and continue to make a concerted effort to help the poor, both in immediate and long-term assistance. However, the key is that “We” should; we the People, “we” as in individual citizens, groups, charities, etc. NOT government.

After all, we want to actually help the poor; not just “pay lip service” to helping the poor. And government — as is the case with most things they do — has done a terribly bad job at it.

Over the next several installments, we’ll look at how — by getting government out of a job for which they’ve proved to be unqualified (notice we haven’t even brought up that it is not within their legitimate Constitutional functions), and putting this extremely worthy task back into the hands of those who are much more qualified — we can truly make a difference in the “War on Poverty.”

The following actually happened a couple of years ago. While something specifically like this may or may not ever happen to you, the general situation most like has, and will again. Take note of the various “principles” and “techniques” used to turn this situation around.

–

9:45 pm at “customs” at the Toronto International Airport, and things were progressing nicely. I was about to be checked through by the last person, my ride was waiting to take me to the hotel, and I’d be set for a good night’s sleep and ready to present the following morning. But, there would be an unusual snag.

As usual, everyone at “immigration” had been exceedingly polite (I’ve found that Canadians, on the whole, tend to be extremely gracious people). Walking toward the officer at the final clearance checkpoint who’d need to check me through, I smiled at her, and received a smile in return.

She asked why I was coming into Canada and I told her I was here to speak at a national convention of Financial Services Consultants. That’s when her entire attitude and demeanor suddenly changed. “You are a seminar leader then?” she asked. When I answered in the affirmative, she seemed to become rather agitated.

“Exactly what are you speaking on?”

When I told her, she asked me to clarify. When I did so, she said she didn’t understand and asked me to “further” clarify. When I complied, she began asking questions about the company, their history, the numbers in attendance, and other matters I knew were not relevant to the situation (I’ve spoken in Canada enough times to have a working understanding of what they need to know in order to comply with immigration laws).

Now I’m thinking, hmm, something is wrong (could I be a brain surgeon or what?) . Why the sudden change in her demeanor?

One principle of Winning Without Intimidation tells us: “There are usually two reasons for a person’s negative actions — the real reason, and the reason they’ll provide” (and often, they themselves are not consciously aware of the difference). Something was bothering her that was “not” yet apparent to me, but I’d need to figure it out soon or I’d be spending hours at the immigration office.

She asked if I would specifically define myself as a “seminar leader, consultant, lecturer, or speaker.” Actually, I’d define myself as “a really nice guy” but was fairly sure that wasn’t the correct answer. I was pretty certain at this point that anything I said could and would he held against me. When I told her I could most accurately be defined as a speaker, she made the “tch tch tch” sound that told me that shouldn’t have been my — as Regis would say — “final ansuh.” (I just knew I should have used one of my lifelines!)

“Technique” of Winning Without Intimidation: “At this point, regardless of whether you feel angry, confused, bewildered, abused, etc., do your best to keep your wits about you.” Maintain a sincere, warm smile and display extreme patience and politeness in your responses. A person acts this way because they “want” you to become flustered and lose control. Now is not the time to raise your voice or insult them. Keep cool!

Me: “Waaaaa, I want my Mommmmmy!” (only kidding — I managed to stay cool).

Her next question dealt with whether I was receiving an “honorarium” or a “fee” for my engagement — honorarium denoting little money and fee implying lots of money. Now, despite the fact that it was likely she’d have been much happier had I said “honorarium”, I told her the truth and said I was receiving a fee.

“Principle” of Winning Without Intimidation: “Aside from the fact that lying is generally wrong (unless you or your loved ones are in danger) it also will often backfire.” For instance, had I said “honorarium” and she detained me in order to check, and found out the size of the fee I was receiving, I could truly have been in hot water and possibly sent back home without further discussion. My client would not have been happy. No, the truth is usually best.

IW (Immigration Woman): Mr. Burg, let me tell you the problem.

(Note from Bob: It sounded something like this: “Blah, blah blah. Blah blah blah, blah. Blah. Blah blah blah blah. Blah blah, blah.)

Bob: Well, I completely understand what you’re saying. You have rules that must be followed. I’m a guest in your country and I respect that fact entirely and will do my best to comply. I don’t blame you a bit (hmm, about that “truth” thing a couple of paragraphs back, well, that “last” sentence there . . .).

Applying Winning Without Intimidation “strategies,” I let her speak — without interrupting her — and then agreed with her premise. It wasn’t her true reason, but that didn’t matter. Remember, there is no winning a debate in this situation, so don’t even try. Now, even though she still had not quite leveled with me regarding the actual problem, it had to come out soon, which it did …

IW: Do you know {name of a successful U.S. speaker/author}?

Bob: I know of him.

IW: He came through here several months ago, and he was the most obnoxious, arrogant person who has ever…………..

Ahhhh, there we have it. That was her problem and, of course, now mine. She had been insulted and hurt by an outwardly similar person and was — I believe, unconsciously; not with any mal-intent — taking it out on me, making me pay for it. After all, I was right there in front of her. This is what the whole incident had been about. It had nothing to do with anything other than that.

Two Principles of Winning Without Intimidation apply here:

#1 “People make major decisions based on limited information.” I’m an author/speaker. I’m from the U.S. Hence, I must be exactly like him.

#2 “The ego rules.” Her feelings had been hurt (and I don’t blame her). A person will actually act in a way not in accordance with their natural persona (I think she is actually a very nice person) if their ego is bruised.

Now it would be easy. She was able to get all of those bad feelings out her system and to let me know that she had the power to control my situation. That was fine with me. I feel badly that she had to go through that. Of course, I couldn’t agree with her and insult the other speaker, as that would be “gossiping” on my part. Instead, I poked fun at myself to set up a bridge into the following statement:

“I just appreciate your patience and helping me proceed through this.”

Technique of Winning Without Intimidation: What I just said is known as “Thanking the person in advance for what you want them to do.” Said correctly, this will elicit the person doing exactly what they’ve been thanked for.

Her response: “Well, I guess I shouldn’t be talking like that but he was really difficult. You’re obviously not like that. Anyway, Mr. Burg, I appreciate your patience and how honest you’ve been with me (isn’t that amazing?!). Have a great stay in Toronto.”

Reflecting on the incident, it is so clear that, in our world, people are ruled — they are driven — by their feelings, emotions and egos. I know I am, even though I try not to be. With that in mind, it’s completely understandable — though, still not acceptable — that this normally nice person could go out of her way to make another person’s life difficult … only because she perceived him as being like the one who previously offended her.

Mary Kay Ash said, “Everyone wears an invisible sign around their neck that says, ‘make me feel important.’” So, to solve this difficult challenge, my goal had to be to reinstate her feeling of importance.

Hey, glad I could be of help.

As people continue to ask what to do “now” in today’s economy, the answer continues to be, “the same things that work in any economy” … provide value, and be sure to communicate that value. Of course, you might have to find more people to do that with in order to get the same results, but that’s okay; as your competitors retreat in panic, you’re moving forward.

Important: Stay conscious of the basics. Understand that people don’t care about your product or service; they care about what your product or service will do for them. And that’s what you must communicate.

So, do you show your prospect that you have the solutions to his or her problem and can make their life better with your products/services? Keep in mind, that’s what they care about so — in order to make the sale — that must be your focal point.

As the great sales copywriter, John Carlton says, “Remember, people are *not* buying the product. They are buying the benefit of having the product. If you’ve done your job well, they feel they have completed everything they need to do to get that benefit merely by picking up the phone and ordering (or endorsing the paperwork).”

Of course, depending upon your line of work, you still must develop the relationship first. That’s what it takes to get in front of them in the first place. Assuming, then, that you have done that successfully, the prospect still buys only because of the above-stated reasons.

Remember, they don’t buy the “is”….they buy the “does.”

And, that holds true in any economy.