Archive for the ‘Society’ Category

Promises Promises

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

You made me promises, promises
Knowing I’d believe
Promises, promises
You knew you’d never keep
       

 from  ”Promises, Promises”  by Naked Eyes

When you promise somebody that you will do something, is it to get them off your back or are you committed?

When the boss asks you to stop texting in the office and you promise not to anymore, is breaking that promise different than promising your son you will be at his football game and then not making it?

Does intent change the penalty when one breaks a promise?  If you make a promise with no commitment or intent to keep it, is the guilt less than when you make a vow and do not keep it?

How many people do you know that seem to not be committed to what their marriage vows promised?  If a person does not honor an oath made to their soon to be wife, family and friends, should you trust them to keep an exchange of promises in a business contract?  Or is an oath given in a ceremony a step higher on the commitment scale?  If so, what does it mean if one does not honor an oath?

When somebody tries to convince me that they have a steel curtain between their business and personal behaviors, I find that this is really a way to say “please do not look at my behavior in this situation as reflective of how I am as a husband or father.”  Why is it necessary to say this?

I think it is because if you can’t be trusted to keep your promises, the truth is that this behavior knows no boundaries.  Likewise, I have found that a person of honor,  does not need to advise us to judge their public persona separately from the way they act privately.

Hard to be trustworthy part of the time.  Do you agree?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Superman To The Rescue!

Wednesday, July 28th, 2010

 

Here is a nice story about how sometimes what we do not know we have stored in our attic might just someday save our hind ends! (hint to wife..take note there is a reason for me to save the things I have stocked away-besides just avoiding trips to the store late at night to finish a school project!).

I hope in this economy this works out for this family.  Notice they have not actually auctioned off the comic but I am assuming they stopped packing?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Back To School

Monday, July 26th, 2010

This cartoon was titled “How Our School System Has Changed.”  Really?  How about “How Parents Have Changed?”  I see it way too often..excuses made for a child by their parents.  Think about this as you start to get ready for school again.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

The End of Men

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010

I hate to say I am not surprised, but I am not.  The Atlantic offers a piece this month titled “The End of Men: How Women Are Taking Control of Everything” and it is a nice blow to the man’s super ego!  The story summary:

Earlier this year, women became the majority of the workforce for the first time in U.S. history. Most managers are now women too. And for every two men who get a college degree this year, three women will do the same. For years, women’s progress has been cast as a struggle for equality. But what if equality isn’t the end point? What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to women? A report on the unprecedented role reversal now under way— and its vast cultural consequences.

I am looking around my neighborhood and see numerous men who have been out of work for a year or more.  Their wives are the bread winners and they are home taking care of the family and house.   For one thing this recession has created an environment where the higher priced middle age men were the ones let go.  In the meantime, I am a witness to the business advantages being offered company’s owned by anybody other than a male (and while this is not a post about race, all the disclosures I am exposed to also ask my race so I think it must be acceptable to add the classification “white” to the group affected).  So, in addition to the societal advantages this article so aptly exposes, there is also an orchestrated direction in our society to move women (and other groups) in front of  (white) men in the food chain. The two factors combined explain why so many men may be permanently out of the work force as we once knew it.

Regarding the societal changes-some outtakes from this article that are relevant.

“Men seem ‘fixed in cultural aspic.’ With each passing day, they lag further behind.” Numerous college women assume they’ll be primary bread winner; guys “are the new ball and chain.”

“As thinking and communicating have come to eclipse physical strength and stamina as the keys to economic success, those societies that take advantage of the talents of all their adults, not just half of them, have pulled away from the rest.”

“The evidence is all around you [e.g.] in the wreckage of the Great Recession, in which three-quarters of the eight million jobs lost were lost by men. The worst-hit industries were overwhelmingly male and deeply identified with macho: construction, manufacturing, high finance.”

“Of the 15 job categories projected to grow the most in the next decade in the U.S., all but two are occupied primarily by women.”

“Women hold 51.4% of managerial and professional jobs—up from 26.1% in 1980. … In 1970, women contributed 2 to 6 percent of the family income. Now the typical working wife brings home 42.2%—and four in 10 mothers are the primary breadwinners in their family.”

“What’s clear is that schools, like the economy, now value the self-control, focus and verbal aptitude that seem to come more easily to young girls.”

If you have raised boys and girls, this last point brings all of this home in a different light than just blaming cost-cutting and diversification efforts.  The information age we now live in favors the skill sets of women.  It is part of their genetics..better communicators, better understanding of a problem, more focused.   If you are raising a boy today, it may be the greatest gift you can give to allow them to absorb the skill sets that involve the characteristics that are those of great communicators,organizers, and disciplinarians.   Boys have been raised, and continue to be raised, to excel on the playing field and in stiff competition.  We, as the American society, reward our boys for success on the football field, and tend to overlook failure in Composition classes.  Girls, this is reversed.  Where is your child’s future?

If this article is correct, for the first time boy’s are now arriving in the future at a disadvantage.  I see evidence of this change everywhere.  Better consider the affect of your priorities on your son’s.  Very few of them are ever going to play a sport after high school, and fewer yet will ever receive a dime for their athleticism.

This article is a wake up call.   Not much you can do if you are a middle aged (white) guy like me, but you sure can recognize what the world will look like for your children.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Why Zero Tolerance Policies Lead To Bad Decisions

Friday, June 4th, 2010

Can you believe this story?  All because a school system created a zero-tolerance policy that allowed no room for any subjective reasoning. 

I remember my first exposure to zero-tolerance thinking.  We can argue about the merits but remember when IU Coach Bob Knight was placed on a zero-tolerance policy in 2000?  First time he had an issue (lets admit, there was no way he was not going to get caught up in some controversy-after all he is Bob Knight!) Indiana University had no choice but to dismiss him.  I suspect that ten years later, most people would consider this moment of lack of subjectivity to be the start of a long period of difficulties and loss of prestige for a basketball program and its reflection on the University.  There was no choice but to fire him when the zero-tolerance policy was created and then violated.

Now we have schools that create policies out of the fear activist parents will challenge and sue the school, its administration, and staff if they are forced to use subjective judgement in the management of thousands of children/teens.   Sure, the zero-tolerance approach provides consistency and a backbone to policy.  Yet, just like the long term effects of the zero tolerance policy that Indiana University used in 2000, many such policies when enforced (as they have to be) create damage far beyond the original intent.

We seem to have come to a point in time where every decision requires a manual and procedure. People in academia and business are no longer encouraged to utilize their own good judgement to make decisions based on all the circumstances.  In my opinion this way of thinking takes the zest of life and squashes it.  The ability to problem solve and be creative now requires a policy or procedure. 

I think history shows society’s greatest achievements came when the rule book was tossed aside and somebody was willing to look at a problem in a unique, curious, reasoned way.  Then they created a solution to match the problem.  If there was a policy, it was ignored. 

Are you willing to ignore policy and do what is right to make sure your career or life is not stamped with the label of following a policy and procedure that puts a 12 year old Boy Scout in jail for 2 days due to zero tolerance enforcement?  Are you the reasonable person who believes the world still needs subjective, creative, problem solving?  If not, what would it take for you to become the kind of leader we need today?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Memorial Day-More Than An Excuse For A Three Day Weekend

Friday, May 28th, 2010

“It is my earnest hope, indeed the hope of all mankind, that from this solemn occasion a better world shall emerge out of the blood and carnage of the past, a world founded upon faith and understanding, a world dedicated to the dignity of man and the fulfillment of his most cherished wish for freedom, tolerance and justice. Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world, and that God will preserve it always.”

General Douglas McArthur

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

PC Mistakes That Tarnish An Entire Group

Thursday, May 27th, 2010

Maybe the National Association of Realtors (NAR) would like to spend a little time today trying to perform some damage control.  I think they better.

Here is this idiot property manager, working for an idiot property management company who tells a Army Vet of Iraq and Afghanistan that he and his wife are not allowed to display an American flag at their rented home (see picture in this post) due to a company policy that bans the display of flags, banners and political or religious materials. 

The idiotic political correctness of this scenario is reflected in the public statement made by the management company to the local newspaper: 

“This policy was developed to insure that we are fair to everyone as we have many residents from diverse backgrounds,” the statement read. “By having a blanket policy of neutrality we have found that we are less likely to offend anyone and the aesthetic qualities of our apartment communities are maintained.”

Excuse me..are we now so worried about our global appearance that we do not allow our brave men and women (or anybody for that matter) to show their loyalty and respect for our country because we are afraid of offending somebody?  Somebody living on our soil?    This story is beyond political correctness.  Unfortunately, it says so much about the fear we all are forced to live with in a country more concerned with providing illegal aliens rights, that are different than the ones of our natives, that we make bonehead decisions to avoid conflict.

The other side of the story is that a 2005 federal law called the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act for some reason exluded renters..thereby opening this loophole for an eviction threat.  Nevertheless, the response of the management company in a press release has me scratching my head as to whether they really believe what they said?  Laws can be fixed…but this way of thinking seems to have grasped our country in its public speech and statements.  Why not just say that  a display of a flag is against the rules of the building and the law allows the owner to make such rules.  That would be bad enough.  Instead they use the excuse of political correctness and not offending anybody.

If this management company is a member of NAR, NAR should get involved and tell them to stop giving our group a bad name and beyond that..use a little logic in your business practices.  I picked up this story on Fox News.  There is a 2000+ and growing Facebook group, and nothing good will come from this ridiculous display of political correctness.

Are you with me on this?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Donkeys and Enterprise

Thursday, May 20th, 2010

If you think creating a whole bunch of new regulations is the answer to ensure our economy does not walk this path again..and the first place to regulate are the money people on Wall Street…  let me share this story:Young Chuck moved to Texas and bought a donkey from a farmer for $100.

 The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day.

The next day the farmer drove up and said, “Sorry Chuck, but I have some  bad news. The donkey died.’”

Chuck replied, “Well then, just give me my money back.”

The farmer said,” ‘Can’t do that. I went and spent it already.”

Chuck said, “OK, then, just bring me the dead donkey.”

The farmer asked, “What ya gonna do with a dead donkey?”

Chuck said, “I’m going to raffle him off.”

 The farmer said, “You can’t raffle off a dead donkey!”

 Chuck said, “Sure I can. Watch me. I just won’t tell anybody he’s dead.”

 A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked, “What happened with that dead donkey?”

 Chuck said, “I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars piece and made a profit of $898.00.”

 The farmer said, “Didn’t anyone complain?”

Chuck said, “Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back.”

Chuck now works for Morgan Stanley.

The moral of this story as it relates to the world today?  You can regulate enterprising people all you want, and they will find a way to make a few bucks off a dead donkey!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Spreading The Blame

Monday, May 10th, 2010

Everybody is doing it.  Who is to blame for the economic mess?  If you are a politician it is every policy you were against-have you noticed that?  Now our government thinks we should just create a whole bunch of laws to make sure big bad banks never screw us over again.

When it comes to housing, I still am waiting to hear somebody place the blame where it most certainly belongs….on we the people.  How many of you out there bought a house from about 2002-2008 with a less than 5% down payment, maybe interest only, maybe no income verification?  I know that it is a lot because I witnessed it first hand, week after week, during this period.  We all were living for today and sleeping at night thinking housing was destined to always rise in value.  That appreciation was our security blanket. 

The way I continue to see this is the whole housing industry, from mortgage companies to builders,  from Realtors to investors, and finally to the consuming public, need to get out of the blame game and accept responsibility.  But that is as far as it goes.  Here is why.  The public wanted housing.  The public wanted more space. The public wanted fancy appliances.  The public wanted status.  Most big screen TV’s are bought on consumer credit and the public wants them also.  If credit card debt crashes (maybe it has?) are we going to once again blame appliance stores and finance companies for offering six months same as cash?  Will our leaders spend endless hours and resources protecting the consumer?

There is a certain logic at work here that says we are all too stupid to accept responsibility for our decision making.  In addition, since we are all too stupid, we all must be protected from the ramifications of our actions.  This way of operating a country seems to be leading us into a financial crisis ten times the severity if we had all just fessed up to our problems.  Like an Alcoholics Anonomyous meeting, we all could have said, “my name is Bob Smith and I allowed my desire for modern housing, and the fact that there was a way to obtain it, cloud my judgement.  I made a bad business decision and today I am in recovery.”

What got me thinking about this is a very interesting study released last week.  Certainly not considered politically correct, economists at the University of Arkansas have published “The Foreclosure Crisis: Did Wall street Practice Predatory Lending or Did Households Overreach?”  Guess what the study concludes?  Households overreached!

Overall, the study found that most foreclosed households were not “duped” into bad loans. Rather, they were caught up in a housing price bubble in which both consumers and lenders were too aggressive.

Not surprizing to people who make a living in the housing industry if they would just admit it.  We all accomodated the demand.  From Wall Street to Main Street.  We made a living finding solutions to the public’s demand. 

The study is interesting for how it breaks down the population of people whose homes were in foreclosure during the third quarter of 2008.  The people with the highest risk of foreclosure (low income, low education) are not the ones who are experiencing the highest rates of foreclosure.  Of course, the politicians want to make us believe these are the victims they are trying to protect in all the new takeovers and regulations.  The group with the highest level of foreclosures were affluent and well educated.  This also coincides with the location of the largest percentages of default..coastal hot spots and Las Vegas. There is a whole other post in me to write about the literally daily phone calls I use to receive from the California “investor” who basically had taken a second mortgage on their home, with phantom equity we now can safely say, and wanted to buy some cheap Midwestern properties.  These almost all ended up in default with no money spent on them.  This “investor” today is eleigible for multiple types of relief because few programs that have been created seem to want to let anybody fail so they are not limited to purchase money loans.

We are the enemy.  We all like to consume.  It is a societal problem.  Do we all think we need to be protected from ourselves?  Somebody does.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn

Unemployed? Unhappy With Your Wages? Get Rich Working for Obama!

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

I guess it goes without saying that many of the job creation opportunities that were formerly a part of the private sector are today mostly on hold.   Wonder why?  How about taking a look at how difficult it is for private employers to compete with the public sector?  Data compiled by the US Commerce Department now shows the extent of the pay gap between federal and private workers.  And the difference is more than a little disturbing for anybody in the private sector trying to grow a business.

An editorial last week in the Washington Examiner titled “Want to get rich? Work for feds” reveals that the Commerce Department study shows the average federal salary in 2008 was $119,982 compared with the average private sector employee salary of $59,909.  Yes…TWICE as much!  So, if you are not a little upset by this news…add this spicy bit of fact.   The average federal worker also receives $40,785 in additional compensation in the form of benefits like health care and pensions.  The private sector average?  A measly $9,881!

What does this say about the challenges in creating jobs in the private sector?  How about American competitiveness?  What about deficit spending?  Seems like we have discovered an easy way to trim some fat.  Unless of course your objectives are to grow the public sector and make it the employer of choice?  Look, I recognize this is not a partisan dig toward one party or the other.  Though the current people running the show are surely not helping this disparity and we know government is where the jobs are.   I think it alarms me as a private employer and a citizen.   Additionally, have you ever considered just what these people in the federal government do for their nice wages? 

Maybe you have.  Maybe you are mad.  Maybe you will start to pay attention to what the politicians say.  Who is willing to return this country to an economic giant status?  Growing from the inside?  Who?  Or is it just too hard once you join the team?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • LinkedIn