Being financially responsible undermines the US government!

Yes, you heard me right. US tax revenues suffer greatly when you are financially responsible. Undermining our government's ability to spend their way into favor.

Think about it. When you earn enough money, the government gets a nice slice of it from income taxes to spend. If you put that money into savings or use it to pay off debt, it ends there. But if you quickly turn that money around and spend it again it can generate sales tax and corporate profit tax and the government gets more slices. Then it can be paid out in wages again, provide yet another slice and so forth repeatedly. Even better yet, go into debt! Provide even more money into the spending cycle. Each change of hands generates tax revenues that the government can spend, spend, spend. So the more times money changes hands the bigger the government's pile. Mind-boggling, but if the same dollar changes hands enough, it will provide more than a dollar in tax revenues to the government each year.

The US government depends on it! As shown by recent events. When increases in savings and reductions in debt cause a decrease in spending, incomes drop, profits drop and tax revenues drop very quickly. In part from our being financially responsible and reducing debt while saving like we should.

The problem is the dependency on a "boom" level of money cycling. Can we spend our way back into prosperity again? Or realize that there is a different kind of prosperity that comes with responsible living...?

Consume, Consume, Consume...

When I moved out of my parents house, I moved into a rental house with 3 other guys. I was a senior in college. Two of the guys had 4-year degrees, one of them was pursuing his CPA while the other had just entered law school. The fourth guy was in a junior college. Three of us, including myself, had jobs while the law student was funded by his parents. You can imagine the environment. Four frugal college guys sharing a house. The sort of situation sitcoms are based on.

We had a mantra that went "consume, consume, consume". It was used to recognize any of the many compelling motivations in our society to get more stuff. To live more lavishly. To indulge ourselves. You get the picture.

The scene must have been comical, seeing 2, 3 or all 4 of us chanting "consoooom, consoooom, consooooooom...." Repeatedly.

I remember when the CPA student and his girlfriend took all of the groceries from one of our shopping trips (we shared meal expenses at home) and spread the contents on the table. They figured out how much the food would have cost if we bought it bulk and showed that about a third of what we were spending was for the packaging and convenience factor. None of it was TV dinners or what someone might consider convenience foods ... so, much of it was just paying for wrappers and fancy labels. But without them, we wouldn't have bought it.

We often talked about our capitalist corporate system. To survive, a company has to grow. There seems to be no such thing as a stable company, it is either get bigger or die. That means selling more which means getting people to buy more. Profit is king! As students, we understood it well. Sales and marketing from every side. Packaging and appeal is important, even if it is wasteful.

Then there is the allure to spend more than you have. Credit... Ooooh! How far over the edge is "living beyond your means"? Where is that edge, exactly? Credit is good, until it becomes bad. Deferred self gratification is only good when it is someone else's gratification and not yours. Go ahead, get yours today!

Is it better to indulge ourselves (insert consume mantra here) and live like a king or queen while we can? Or to be responsible? It sure seems those irresponsible kings and queens often get the better deal. Or often that indulgent behavior is rewarded.

The Hotblog Stimulus Plan

The popular and political "best plan" for solving our current economic doldrums is for everyone to use lots of credit and spend lots of money. Led by the government. The same thing that got us into the mess... So I'd like to proudly say while biting my tongue that I'm doing my part. First my hot water heater needed replacing, then a refrigerator. Not exactly cheap or purchases we could put off. Then, something that we have been putting off for a while ... my wife bought a new car. The timing seemed advantageous before California sales taxes goes up by 1% and vehicle registration fees go up a hefty amount next month and while sales are slow and it's a buyers market.

I'd say we did more than our fair share to stimulate the economy. Oh, but maybe not in the way our government wants. We used money we had instead of diving into deep debt. In that regards I'm glad we didn't take after the U.S. government's example.

President Jackson Told You So

Andrew Jackson, 1767-1845, our 7th US President faced down congress to revoke the charter of the central bank of the U.S. in 1836. His quote:

The bold effort the present (central) bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it.

When he opposed congress and revoked the bank's charter he is quoted as saying:

Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves.

This sure sounds to me like it applies to the current mess - oops to late. Instead of one central bank we have several large institutions. Our government, using the noble cause of reinvigorating our economy and resolving real hardships, is bailing out the den of vipers and thieves that they are beholden too. These companies should be held to their failings and dismembered so that the more responsible companies can flourish. Otherwise we just have a continuation of the system where, when times are good money flows freely into certain big pockets but when times are bad those pockets are protected and the institutions and public get to make good any losses.

My Daughter's Sex Ed

My teen daughter's school has a program ... I would call it Sex Ed. But they have a more politically correct name for it. Something like Family Life Sciences. So once again I get to face my station in life as a dad making sure his young teen daughter learns what she needs to know about sex. Mom's job, right? I wish... I know I have a role to fill too.

As part of the program, my daughter brings home sets of questions that Mom and I get to answer together and our daughter gets to answer separately. Then she brings both sets of answers (hers and ours) back to school without Mom and I really knowing what will come of it. But it is a good exercise. Not just for her, but for her Mom and I to be thinking about these things.

The questions often get me pondering ... a good thing, no doubt and inspired this blog. One of the more tame questions: What do you think of teens dressing sexy? That had me stalled as to how to answer.

You see, dressing sexy is such a subjective label. Does it mean wearing revealing clothing? Or clothing that accentuates some part of the body? If either of those are the case, then I might consider their school gym clothes as dressing too sexy. How do you make the separation between dressing to be beautiful, dressing to be sexy or just dressing to be comfortable on a hot day? Or are they somehow the same, but different? It's like asking what shade of gray is overly gray. So ... somewhere in that subjective gray mess I have my ideas of what dressing sexy means and it generally involves highlighting and accentuating the sexually attractive features in a big way. A "whoa" inspiring feat.

Also, quite frankly, I'd rather not think of teens as sex magnets. But that is the influence our society seems to promote. Be a girl, be sexy... And my daughter isn't going to wait for me to decide when she is ready to be a woman...

Fortunately right now my daughter takes after Mom and doesn't do sexy. Their style tends towards comfortable, lazy, nothing too showy. In fact, we've been trying to upscale my daughter's appearance. Trying to get her out of the ratty cotton jacket that she likes to wear everywhere. Trying to get her to pay more attention to her ratty hair and personal hygiene. But I know there will come the day when she'll try for "whoa" and I know I may have to be ready to be mean Dad. Backed by mean Mom. I know there may come the day when she'll decide to be one of the sexy girls. "No, you can't go out in that ... not until after you're married."

One of my role models who raised daughters says "Most women will know more about sex by the time they're 18 then most men will their whole lives." While somewhat anecdotal, it reflects on me knowing my role as a dad with daughters.

What is too sexy ... a vision caught somewhere between the reality of active hormones, the ideals of attractiveness and the ever changing decorum of modesty... Um, that shade of gray.

Discrimination

I have to admit, I can be a bit contentious about discrimination. Especially when someone infers that we are obligated to compensate for past discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion or sexual preference. You see, I've experienced blatant discrimination. Reverse discrimination is still discrimination. Politically correct discrimination, but still trying to compensate for a bad bias with a bad bias. The examples that stand out the most in my memories are from my college days. During the heydays of affirmative action. I'm a Caucasian male and although my heritage is diverse and multicultural, I was lumped into the so-called "white majority". So like it or not I learned all about discrimination in college. How it was recognized that historically some groups had suffered because of discrimination and so the general solution was, reality be damned, to discriminate against me and those like me.

There was Cathy ... we both worked at the same company part time in the evenings as security guards while going to the same college during the day. We both lived with our parents while commuting each day to the college. We both had respectable homeowner middle-class parents. She was US born of Mexican heritage. At the job, we made the same wage, although she sought and got the less demanding and safer work, in part because she was a woman. This is understandable since when working in security being more intimidating can provide an advantage. On the job and at college she had big advantages. She was a "minority female". She was a pre-med music major. Early on I asked the obvious question about how music and medicine were related. She told me that by being a minority female, all she needed was good grades in her 4 year degree and she was guaranteed a free ride through medical school. She was a very good violinist, which seemed the best way to get high grades. She talked about how there were financial aid groups and hospitals begging for students like her. With the affirmative action and quota tracking at the time, I didn't doubt her one bit. But it was clear that this wasn't a case of disadvantage or greater need. She enjoyed an advantage simply because of her race. What became clear too, was her sense of entitlement. Since Mexicans had historically been predominately employed as laborers, it made sense to her that she deserved an easier path to the top even if she wasn't qualified. As a side note, she later changed her mind and chose a different career path.

Then there was Olga. Olga was a member of a group of us at work who would go on breaks and lunches together. Olga lived with her mom in a nearby subsidized townhouse. Olga and her mom were considered Hispanic which qualified her as a minority. But Olga detested "those lying, thieving Mexicans" and was always willing to back the statement with examples. Olga's heritage was Castillo Spanish. The interesting part were all the things she and her mom had to do to continue to qualify for the subsidized housing, which being Hispanic helped qualify her for but didn't guarantee. Her Mom took seasonal jobs and always made just enough each year to be under the income limit needed to qualify for the subsidy. Any other income had to be cash and unreported. Olga paid a share of the rent to her Mom, but couldn't declare it (couldn't claim the renters credit on her taxes) or her Mom would have to count it as income. I'm not even sure Olga was listed as living there. I got to hear stories about how, when the social workers scheduled to visit, Olga and mom would cover the furniture with sheets and move the expensive electronics out of the living room into a room the social worker wouldn't see. Such the hassle... Plus, I got to hear about the even more outrageous acts of the neighbors, predominately those lying cheating Mexicans (her words, not mine)... I learned how programs meant to overcome discrimination can easily turn into institutions of welfare abuse and entitlement while motivating exaggerated claims to qualify for benefits ... which promoted a culture of hidden income and deceptions.

There was Kavita. I met her in a class and soon we were studying and spending time together on campus. We got along great. She lived with her parents and commuted to the college as well. Her parents were wealthy immigrants from India. Culturally, Kavita was very American. I asked her out on a date and she rather sheepishly turned me down. Her parents would never approve. Her parents were strict about dating and she could only date Indian guys. It wasn't the first time my race was a barrier in dating. Ironically enough, we stayed in touch over the years as casual friends and shortly after college she met and married a guy at her work who could easily be mistaken as my brother... While I have had no problem with dating women from differing heritages, this was not the first or last time I ran into being so openly discriminated against because of my race.

I remember the jockeying between groups in college for meeting rooms in the student union and for the study rooms around campus. The student union had a policy of scheduling meeting rooms and assigning study rooms by group size. The bigger groups got the bigger rooms, which made sense. But there was also a policy of equal access (special consideration) for minority and special interest groups. So we had groups arguing that they were the biggest minority, while arguing that they should be given priority over other groups such as the groups based on professions or societies, because, of course, those groups were non-minority. This led to arguments by groups that they were "multi-minority" and other debates of fairness, unfairness and what counted as minority... Many of the best study rooms around campus were taken over by minority groups. My favorite study area went from being a great place to meet others in my discipline for quiet study to becoming the noisy social center for some Asian minority group. Ironically enough, there was a Women's Professionals group that was trying to hang onto one of the smaller study room which they had used for years that started asking men to join. So I joined this Women's group as one of a handful of guys helping to keep their membership up (I was counted towards a "minority" that I wasn't) and actually helped them out with fundraisers and such. This led to the interesting quirk that when companies came through on recruiting drives and were wooing the various women's groups (got to fill those quota's) I was on the list.

And the lessons go on.

Not to say that there isn't a need to confront discrimination. There is the need. But so often the reaction doesn't address the action, making it ineffective at best ... and as you can probably tell from my depiction, creates resentment.

It is in human nature to seek advantage. Since claims of discrimination can provide an advantage and are hard to argue against without seeming like you are defending prejudice, they get used ... too often. Often the people most sensitive to discrimination turn out to be the most prejudiced ... we need to look at actions not words.

So I learned as a single white male in college that; reality be damned, it was inferred that the solution to discrimination was to discriminate against me.

Becoming a VP Candidate

What does is take to be a Vice Presidential Candidate? Clearly you have to be selected by the Presidential Candidate and his party. So, what are they looking for? To select the most capable person as their candidate's second in command? Hell no. They might want you to think so, but let's face it, it's all about getting enough votes to get elected. The selection of VP is always secondary and tactical ... to strengthen their voter base and/or weaken their opponent's. To sway those swing voters who matter.

Obama may have made the weaker choice there. He picked a known name with a long track record to scrutinize. Maybe too well established in the status quo for his "change" message. Plus, when it comes to "change" some people are fixated on the ultimate big change: getting a woman into the White House. Joe Biden is very qualified, if that matters... Yes, Obama may have fared better selecting Angelina Jolie as his vice presidential candidate.

On the other side, I wondered (as many people did) what was taking McCain so long to announce his running mate. It is clear. It was tactical, as we should expect it to be. Obama announced his VP candidate and McCain was able to tactically react. It is obvious that Palin wasn't chosen for her extensive experience. Or her knowledge. Hell, all of the kids on Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader have a better grasp of history and world events than Palin. Too bad none of them are old enough to nominate.

McCain's tactical advantages:

McCain picked a woman. An obvious grab at Hillary Clinton sympathizers. Apparently it is working so far. Without getting into the grit of it, some people will vote for a candidate just because she's a woman who is challenging the status quo. McCain's people are investing in the emotional "Moms can do it all too" vision and seem to be gaining with that. An impressive vision to build around a woman with so much negative baggage. This tactic may backfire.

McCain picked someone from obscurity. Palin is not well known which made her a harder target. We are distracted by this period of discovery. It was clear that Obama and party didn't know how to react to her selection. McCain caught them off guard by choosing someone not on the lists of people they were prepared to face.

McCain picked an ultra conservative. Anti abortion and pro gun. Someone who wants to establish her strong religious beliefs as law for the masses. Strengthening McCain's conservative base. A tactic that was used quite successfully to get Bush elected into his second term was playing on fears of liberalizing abortion, gay marriage, restricting belief based education, etc.

McCain picked a good looking woman. I'm not trying to pass judgment here. It is well understood that since the introduction of television people are more likely to vote for better looking candidates. Man or woman. It is a quirk of our human nature to want to like a better looking and more pleasant looking person more. Palin's success in politics after coming in 2nd for the Ms Alaska beauty contest... You make the call.

All said ... time will tell. But when I run for President I hope that Kathy Ireland is willing to run as my VP. She could take on Palin any day! I'm saving cabinet spots for Angelina and Arnie!

Business 101: Doing the Diving Catch

I am so jealous of Scott Adams. For those who don't recognize the name, he's the cartoonist that does Dilbert. I am jealous because it is so easy to tap into the ironic subject material in any large company. There are so many people working hard to make his job so easy.

I was with a small company that was bought by a large company. While the transition was still new, I had the luck to be selected by the Human Resources group as part of a focus group of employees from throughout the company. You know, one of those internal interview sessions that HR groups do to justify their existence to the executives. With the usual amount of filtering of the information into what the executives want to hear... Anyways, there was one guy in the group who was more brash then the rest. He'd been through it before. He wanted to point out that in the normal operation of the company, employees who were part of successful projects were overlooked while to be successful you needed to "do the diving catch".

So what did he mean by "do the diving catch"?

The company used MBOs to measure progress. MBOs = Management By Objective. Every manager and employee was committed to a list of objectives to be completed by specific dates. Objectives often had dependencies on others. Your part of a project might have to wait for someone else's completion or availability. Being a company with "above average" employees, the project schedules were always aggressive. So as schedules slipped from whatever reason, yours became even more challenging. Now the crux of "becoming overlooked"; if you worked hard and met your objectives on time, that was what was expected and you were rewarded with more aggressive objectives. Now for the "diving catch"; if a project got into trouble, especially a "key" project, there was great opportunity in "recovering". By doing the "diving catch" and working hard to rescue a project, the rewards were much, much better.

So, if you were meeting your objectives you would rarely enjoy much fanfare or exceptional raises. The scramblers who were getting all the visibility were those who were catching up, motivated with bonuses, special awards, special recognition and ended up getting better reviews. Projects that were well planned, coordinated and executed got congratulated. But a project that ran into trouble (and it was amazing how adept some managers were at managing their problems so they weren't to blame) was a gold mine. Ironically, managers were able to get resources and rewards for their people that couldn't have been justified before-hand... They are often what I called vampire projects. Held to their objectives they would die, so they survive by sucking the resources and talent from other schedules and teams...

There were employees who thrived this way. I went on to experience much of this first hand ... Scott, are you listening?

So, What Gas Crisis ... Really?

I have to say I am amused by the so-called gas crisis. But then, I was the one that was forecasting in early 2006 that the price of gas would be past $4 before that year's end. Aren't you glad I was a bit premature? My prophecy came from all the shiny new upsized vehicles I was seeing with big engines and the spendthrift lifestyles of that time. Living rooms on wheels ... used as single person commuter vehicles.

So, who thinks this is a crisis? Really... Yes, the price of gas has gone up a hefty percentage. Well, if that's a crisis then what about the grocery crisis, clothing crisis ... and let's not forget the concert ticket crisis! Everywhere you look it's a crisis. Yes, it's inconvenient that gas is costing more. But a crisis? Who didn't see this coming?

It was clear years ago that the oil companies of the world had done a good job locating most of the world's oil. They knew where it was and had a good idea how much was there. The problems was getting at it cost effectively. New discoveries were declining years ago and known oil reserves aren't growing notably like during the decades before. But with our unrelenting appetite, demand kept growing. Something had to give. More drilling and pumping oil out of the ground faster works to temporarily manage the price problem.But nowadays it isn't about finding new oil. It's about pumping it out faster to keep up with demand. Forget trying to curb the demand. More oil faster is a good thing ... until it's all gone.

I say I'm amused and not surprised because I've learned to expect the reactionary swings. There was a real gas crisis back in the 1970's. It came in 1973 following a period when we took the price of gas for granted. Luxury cars, vans and big engine station wagons were selling briskly. Then, all of a sudden there was a gas shortage started by an Arab oil embargo. People reacted. They started hording and filling their tanks every couple of days. Gas stations got known for having long lines into roadways with people waiting to top off. If they had any gas left. The problem was only increased by the general reaction. So they made a law that you could only fill up on days determined by your license plate. Odd plates on odd numbered days, even plates on even days and so forth. People canceled discretionary trips. It became common to hear of gas siphoning and license plates being stolen. The price of gas went up to *gulp* over a dollar a gallon in some cases. All of a sudden there was talk of oil dependence and fuel economy. Car pooling became common. And those large vehicles plummeted in value as people started opting for smaller.

A bit of deja vu, maybe... And I have to say there is a part of me that hopes gasoline tops $5 a gallon. Or $10 ... to see if the neighborhood Humvees go the way of the station wagon... But then I believe $5 a gallon is only a matter of time. It has been shown that it takes a big price change in gas to affect behavior. That just might do it. But so far I still see rampant inefficiency as the biggest problem we can do something about.

Top 10 Reasons I Can't Be Over 40

10) I skipped some birthdays ... would you like a tour of my TARDIS (time machine)?
9) It's just another Bush Administration conspiracy.
8) I can still ace Kingdom Hearts!
7) I still have kids to put through college. I just can't be that old.
6) The Law of Relevance for Guys: any birthday over 21 isn't relevant.
5) Is this my cue to show you my one-armed pushups?
4) I still have college clothes that fit and even have some that are fashionable.
3) I got carded when buying booze just last month (hint: it helps to pay by check).
2) The Youth Fairy wand that I got at a prior birthday really works!
1) Don't be silly, that would make me older than my Mom!

Our Civic Duty

About a month and a half ago I got a jury summons in the mail. Oh joy, jury duty. There must be a way to make jury duty more convenient. It would be hard to make it more inconvenient.

My previous experience from years ago was ... let's say enlightening. My number came up, so I told my boss I'd miss work. The next day I checked into the jury pool and we were ushered to a courtroom in another building. They started jury selection. There were 2 young men being tried together which seemed rather strange to me. They selected a jury and alternates and I wasn't called. Yay! I figured I was off the hook. Then there was some discussion between the lawyers, the 2 men and the judge while we all sat and waited. And waited and wondered. The defendants settled for a plea bargain. A court official explained to us that this was often the case. Only after they were facing the real jury would a defendant realize they weren't going to negotiate any better deal. We found out the case was for theft and vandalism of police property. Our sense of relief about it being over and done was short lived. With the day almost over we were told that we all had to report back the next morning. So I notified my boss again and went the next day. Again we are ushered into a courtroom. Again they start selection, except this time they were much more selective. The lead question for a while was "Have you ever been the victim of a crime". The person would say "yes" and after a few questions about it be excused. Except for the guy who had an argument with the judge that he should be excused for hardship ... because he was an executive in his company. Anyways, after going through about a dozen people with only 1 or 2 jurors they stopped asking that question and to make a long story short I became juror number 6. The trial was for auto theft and during the 2nd week us jurors took about a day to deliberate that the guy was guilty. Then we learned something that stunned us. We learned that it was a 3rd strike case and the jury could be kept to review the prior cases to make sure they were appropriate. But in this case we were lucky. With 8 prior felony convictions the defendant was waiving his right to the jury and allowing the judge to do the review. The ongoing review could have easily kept us there for a month, we were told. In the end my boss was less than understanding and unforgiving of work project commitments.

So, this time when my group number came up and I had to go in I groaned. Seeing my plans and schedule for the near future cast into mayhem was upsetting. I would have checked in early except for the half hour long line to get past security. They had a much nicer juror waiting area this time. I chuckled at the large selection of jigsaw puzzles that were available, some with large piece counts. I sat and started reading the magazines and books I had brought. First one group was called, then another. Finally I heard these fabulous words. "Group 4, your case has settled and you are being dismissed". Wow. A woman across the room did the "yessss" arm pump while another man got up and said "well that was easy" as he headed towards the exit. Can I say that I was elated and relieved. And I didn't have to come back.

So I did my civic duty and intimidated another defendant into settling. Such is justice, it seems.