Geoff Michel Wrong on All Points

Dante and Virgil in Hell

The name Geoff Michel won’t mean much to my many national and international followers,  Hell, little Geoff won’t mean much to my local followers either.  But read along anyway because he is a typical GOP simpleton and we can learn from him.

Geoff Michel is a Minnesota State Senator and he just appeared on WCCO-TV with Esme Murphy to defend a $1 billion in cuts in legislation now going through the state legislature now.  It includes efficiencies like less toilet paper and soap for prisoners.  Republicans are geniuses.

Michel defended these cuts based on the same folksy cliches that are hardwired in the brains of conservatives. 

Michel reminded us that families are cutting back in tough times.  Yes.  But most put in extra effort and look for additional revenues.  They don’t stubbornly keep cutting until they are broke and homeless. 

Conservatives also attack people for not saving and not having a plan ready for hard times.  Why doesn’t their false government-as-household analogy apply on this account?  When times are good we give tax rebates and cuts.  By that logic, when times are bad shouldn’t we raise taxes?  No…people see why that isn’t the way to go, but in the ideologically driven and backward logic of conservativism, it shouldn’t it follow that if we cut taxes in good times, we raise them in bad?  No, of course not because Republicans refuse to support responsible tax policy. 

The reality is we have had funding problems – versus spending problems – that have been in place for decades.  Government has been deliberately underfunded for years.  Let’s not forget the Starve the Beast strategy embraced by conservatives.   By underfunding government programs, the argument for cutting government was more easily made.  As a result when bad times came there was very little to give.  

On the conservative side, ideology and opinions matter more than facts.  Economic history does not line up with conservative arguments very well.  Large government does not correlate with economic decline.  In fact, the opposite appears to be true.   Just look at what 30 years of conservative principles have done to our economy.  Compare the last 30 with the previous 30. 

More frustrating than the predictable historic and economic ignorance from the right is the less-than-truthful ”tax cut.”  What Minnesota plans to do is what it started to do under the failed leadership of self-important Tim Pawlenty.  Taxes didn’t get cut, they got transferred.   

In the Minnesota Senate’s proposal,  $487 million in state aid to local government will get cut.  Unless people in these local governments want to do without services like roads, police, fire, and other essential services, they will have to pay for them locally.  Bake sales won’t cut.  Taxes will need to go up.

Geoff Michel lives in a district that has a strong tax base.  His neighborhood won’t be threatened by poor schools and less public safety.  And Geoff Michel does not care. 

This is awfully short-sighted on Geoff’s part.  If the quality of life in the state deteriorates, the economic opportunities that Geoff claims to value as the solution to our fiscal crises won’t exist.  (Every time I hear someone offer tax cuts as the solution to economic growth, especially in this demand-starved economy, their credibility is lost.  Geoff Michel has no credibility.  But then…he is a modern day conservative.)

We are not living in the 1950s.  The world and the economy have changed.  We compete on a global market and we are losing, especially in the labor market.  We need to develop modern competitive advantages.  The private sector is not investing in these advantages here, they are doing so in other parts of the world.  Minnesota is not competing with South Dakota for work, we are competing with China and India…competition that is funded by American investors and corporations.   Tax cuts, especially tax cuts to businesses and people who don’t need them to survive the recession, go to investments that increasingly go overseas.  That is not a good solution.

State governments are different than the federal government.  We cannot deficit spend, for example, and don’t have the monetary tools available to the federal reserve.  There are many differences.  But the mindset that less is more is killing us.  A unified effort to rebuild this country by supporting strong federal stimulus would get money flowing in the economy again.  That’s where we need to look in the short run.

In the long run we need to think about what we are doing to our country.  The American Dream attracted talent and investment from all around the world.  People came for our great schools and universities.  Business tapped into the tremendous talent and security of our workers.  People stayed in this country because we invested in a high standard of living that opened many doors into the future.  We didn’t have the tar paper shack mentality of today’s conservatives.  We understood the value of investment.

Guys like Geoff Michel…well, I’m sorry.  Just another misguided conservative who hasn’t proposed a thoughtful or innovative idea that reflects the realities of today’s economy and our place in it.  We need better people to public office.  We need to support better ideas and real plans. It is that simple. 

Related Articles

• SNL’s Michele Bachmann Gets A State Of The Union Response Do-Over (mediaite.com)
• GOP Wingnut Food Fight…. (tagg-lines.com)

We Are Missing Something

Getting Closer! Ironically so.

American political discourse today melds the ideals of freedom with the interests of private business.  One seems to depend perfectly upon the other.  Anything beyond that is suspect, inefficient, and — good grief – totalitarianism.  Systematically, and in increasingly larger steps, contributions from public efforts get squeezed out of public discourse.  Even our soi disant progressive president gets in on the act. 

It isn’t surprising, perhaps, that younger — and dare I say more naive? — political leaders see the world this way because of their age.  We began ransacking government services in the 1980s after all. 

But people like Glen Beck, Rand Paul and Tim Pawlenty — especially Tim Pawlenty, and for many reasons — shouldn’t have naivete as an “excuse” for being uniformed and ignorant.  That generation of selfishly petulant conservatives should see things differently. 

I don’t think I am being overly romantic or revealing a hyperreal nostalgia if I say there was a time when civic pride meant…well, civic pride.  Today the lines between community pride and business interests are being deliberately blurred.  

Civic interests and business success, especially in local economies, do share  a common sense of pride in a community.  There is no doubt about that.  But when government defers and more closely resembles a chamber of commerce than a government of public interests, I think we have a problem with how we view and manage our government. 

What has happened to civic pride as pride in things the community does together and for each other?  Americans have always respected small business and have celebrated its success.  (The chamber of commerce almost always is part of the community’s celebrations, is it not?) 

Consider our public facilities and services, for example.  Schools, libraries, parks.  Civic projects once were pursued with a sense of style and commitment that we lack today.  Public space is private space controlled by commerce.  Conservativism is turning our public world into a corporate one.  Main Street has been replace by the Mall of America.  In my great state of Minnesota, you cannot find places to throw your trash at some state parks anymore.  Carry it out…it is too expensive to contract for garbage service. 

And what do we get for all of this anti-government shifting of our dollars from our public goods to an increasingly shrinking private few?  Well…look around.  Wealth hasn’t trickled down, it has trickled up.

We have closed public facilities and still get a bad economy.  A lose-lose scenario, I would say.  We have declines in education at a time when we need well-educated people more than ever before, especially if we want to compete in a smarter world.  That’s not very good either.   We live in a crumbling, civically disengaged society and that is not a good thing.

Perhaps most significantly, however, we have a dissatisfied public that is being manipulated by distorted rhetoric and even flat out lies.  How else do you make anti-middle class policies appealing to the middle class?

America was great when Americans respected their government.  Government might not have been perfect, might not have been uniformly fair and respected, and it might have been big and clumsy…but it was our government, a shared investment in our present and our future and it was directly responsible for generations of progress in social programs, civil rights, education, environment, workers’ rights, commerce and banking, and economic innovation and growth occurred with our government was bigger, stronger, and lead by people who respected government’s role in our collective best interests.

That respect for government and the civic pride that supports it from the ground up is what is missing.  Demonizing public service and public goods is no way to build a strong future for all.  This is where the GOP has proven itself wrong since the 1980s and still insists on the same failed ideology as they press on with an anti-government agenda. 

We are missing optimistic leadership that respects the positive role government provides for our future.  It is hard to see how our increasingly conservative slant will provide beneficial change in this regard.

Related Articles

• Actor calls on schools to help restore civility through civics studies (cnn.com)
• Mr. Obama, tear down this wall! (thehill.com)
• Jon Stewart To Tim Pawlenty: ‘Why Is The Right So Fearful Of Tyranny?’ (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)

A Sale a Day

Image via Wikipedia

Just working on a sale a day.  Anything more is gravy.

Overall a good day today.  I actually liked most of the people I met, even the bi-polar guy with the sociopaths grinning from the periphery as he turned from hot to cold didn’t seem all that bad.  I was getting a little tired anyway and the amount of any sale I might have made from his business hardly would have been worth the added strain.  I wished him good luck and drove off.

Next call though…oh, god.  I warn people about this all the time.  It amazes me how many people really — truly genuinely — seem to think they know my business better than I do right to the point of demanding things I don’t sell. 

“I’m sorry, little miss, but I can’t do that.” 

“Oh, yes, you can.  I have been doing this for years.”

Doing what for years, pray tell?  Actually it is I who  have been doing “this” for years and yet people seem to know more than I know.  Woe is me, I guess…Poor simple little me.  Bah! 

If I have time to waste, I’ll take their time with me.  I eventually gave up the fight with this stubborn client – temporarily — and said Ok.  I said I would get on my computer and see what I could do.  (That gave me a few minutes to check email.) 

“Nope, sorry.  It just isn’t there.  I know it is hard to believe, but I can’t sell you that.”

We pushed and pulled a little and I decided I better move on.  You have to keep things at a professional level and I was starting to feel more motivated by the sport of sparring than being motivated by a good sale.

No worries though.  All in all it was a good day.

I Have Said This Before…

Computer Directory.

In a recent post I caution against judging traditional print-on-paper phone directories to be dead.  This post is a timely complement to that post.  Briefly, be cautious of people who want to be paid convincing you that phone directories are dead.  If I can say this again and help someone be a smarter, better decision maker, I will say it again.

Make sure you’re doing business with a reputable internet marketing company.  Make sure you’re doing business with a reputable advertising professional.  Can’t say it enough.

In particular, beware of  people who offer savings as the reason to dump advertising or shift investments as their key benefit. 

Advertising opportunities — and risks — are very confusing today and a class of “experts” ready to prey upon the uninformed or the gullible lurks out there.  They look for businesses owners who might not know exactly what their advertising does for their business.  They also look for people lured by the appeal of being trend-forward  Perhaps they will capitalize on business owners ready to outsource some of their management responsibilities.  Most often they use savings as the key incentive for doing business. 

If savings cut profits, they’re not really savings.

These cutters and slashers promise businesses access to the riches being made on internet…kind of.  They often offer access to the internet, but they really sell savings.  Instead of paying X, pay one-half of X and get internet advertising, for example.

First of all, if you’re currently buying “old media” chances are good that your old media service also offers “new media” options for your business.  Take advantage of your existing relationship.  Your current advertising professional already knows something about your business.  They have the same incentives for your success whether you invest in existing services or expand into new ones.

Second, check your “expert.”  With all due respect to SEO and SEM professionals, look at proliferation of internet marketing professionals out there, especially in a down economy.  There are many people eager to stretch their experience a bit into an expertise in now-vogue areas of social media, mobile search, and good old fashioned search engine marketing and website optimization.  Just look at profiles on Facebook, Twitter, or the like.  It can feel like everyone is an internet guru today.

In my opinion, you should pass on anyone who comes to you offering you savings and only asks for a percentage of the savings as compensation.  (“You pay nothing unless I can save you money.”)   They will look at your current advertising contracts and offer to negotiate a better program.  It sounds good, but…Ask yourself, do you think they will look to maximize savings to serve your best interests or to increase their commission?

Of course you need to be cautious of anyone selling on commission and ask yourself the same question about whose interests are best being served.  Most of these cutter services, however, operate on a single contract and move on.  Perhaps they will ask for a two-year contract.  In other words, they have no long term interest in your business.  Unlike an advertising professional selling services based on results versus savings, they have a short-term incentive — your savings — and not the long-term incentive of selling services that will generate revenue and profits.

Likewise be careful with new media programs that offer to find you savings in your current advertising contracts and transfer those savings to cover new advertising programs.  Many people are ready to find “savings” for you in one media only if they can transfer it to another program. 

Make sure you are working with someone who wants your business, not just your cash.  Test them.  Tell them you’re happy with your current advertising media; tell them you think it is earning a profit for you.  If the primary reason given for doing business with them is to shift “wasted” money to “better” advertising, make them work more for the sale.  If you’re making a profit on one form of advertising, they should not try to cut your advertising.  They can offer to diversify by adding to your opportunities, but why should you cut something that is already profitable?

I learn everyday that many new media reps don’t understand their old media competition.  Even well-qualified new media advertising professionals don’t always understand the old media they claim to be replacing.  Unfortunately this shortcoming isn’t easy to spot and isn’t likely to be less common in years to come.  This is a red flag that business owners might not ever see . 

When choosing an advertising professional, maybe it helps to think about another major purchase that has changed over the years.  Think of the automobile industry.  Cars have changed dramatically over the years, but people often buy cars from the same dealer even as auto technology changes.  Experienced advertising professionals are not that much different.  Experience and relationships matter.

And I still contend that some of the best values today are in old media.  A phone directory might not be what it was twenty years ago, but it still works and can be more cost-effective now than it was then.  Don’t sacrifice this standby prematurely and if you’re not taking advantage of it, talk to a reputable ad professional and see if it should be in your advertising mix.

Related Articles

• Deloitte: Social Media Advertising Still “Modest” Compared to Television (socialtimes.com)
• UK Advertisers: Penny-Wise, Pound-Foolish? (hubspot.com)

Imminent Death of Paper Phone Books? Not Quite.

Image by smallritual via Flickr

Time to offer some advice. 

A friend forwarded an article citing a study proclaiming the imminent death of paper phone directories.  Don’t believe it.  In fact, if you’re a small business and you’re looking for a cost-effective advertising investment, phone directories might be a better value today than they were just a few years ago.

First…a disclaimer.  I sell advertising that includes phone directories.  I also sell an array of online advertising services in addition to even more “old media” like direct mail.  The people I work for really don’t care if my advertising sales come from print directories or new media.  I don’t care either.  In fact, I would rather sell more internet advertising.  It is popular, easier to sell, and renews nicely.   A lot of misperceptions support this trend.  I won’t complain, however…

…I have to tell you…

There are several sound business factors that favor people who still choose to advertise in phone directories.  Yes, directory usage continues to decline, but it does so very slowly. 

That is the first positive factor favoring print directory advertisers.  The perception that directories don’t get used have influenced some businesses to mistakenly pull from phone books.  This means there’s less competition competing for the leads that do come from phone books.  Ad content in phone directories has declined disproportionately to the usage of directories.  This bodes well for yellow page directory advertisers.

Second, the economy has been down (remember?) and too many business owners mistakenly see advertising as an expense.  (If it really is an expense, why do it all, in good times or bad?)  This has influenced poor decisions about advertising, again limiting the advertisers competing for leads from phone directories which benefits those who choose to stay in the game.

Even industries that are down still generate business.  In fact, in a down market you can argue that it is even more important to advertise.   There might fewer people seeking lawn care maintenance services, for example, but people still seek those services.  If you think of potential business as a pie, even if the pie is smaller, some businesses are getting more of it because they have less competition competing for it.

Which brings up another good reason to stick with directories.  Now is a time to build market share.  It is not a time for the timid.  Phone directories are a very cost-effective way to build market share.  As long as they generate leads, take advantage of it.

And costs generally are better from phone directories.  (But not all directories offer value equally.  More on that in a moment.)  Many people don’t understand how the internet works.  Social media is a big buzz word, but many businesses are not in a position to see a lot of organic growth from social media, especially for new lead generation.  Services like SEO and SEM can be very expensive.  $100 leads are not uncommon.  If you work with a credible advertising professional, phone directories can deliver leads for a fraction of that cost.

Some businesses inherently do very well in phone books.  Any business that caters to emergencies, for example, tend to do well.  You come home and find a very sick pet…do you log on the phone book and start searching or do you flip open a phone book?  The myth of speed and accuracy from the internet has yet to be completely answered. 

Or discretion…need an attorney?  Do you search on the office computer or even the home computer where searches might be tracked?  Examples abound.

Not all phone directories are created equally, however.  Like all industries, the advertising interest evolves and responds to market changes.  Shop a little.  Leads are leads, they’re like a commodity and some businesses deliver the same product at better prices and greater efficiencies.  The phone book you grew up with might not be the best deal.  Again, a good professional can help you sort this out.

Finally, a word about waste.  A single phone book delivered once a year is significantly less wasteful than the daily mail.  (Remember…I sell direct mail, too, so trying to be balanced.)  If you have the patience to do so, hold a month’s worth of junk mail and weigh it against your phone directory.  (Yes, you have one…go look.) 

Don’t pish posh directories.  Not yet.  Even the study funded by the “ban the phone book people” (coincidence?) admits that older folks make up most of phone directory usage and they ain’t quite dead yet…and they have money!

Enough advice.  Now scroll down and read something better.  Tell your friends!

Time out! Is this right?

Antonio Gramsci

I must have been sleeping and missed it, but I read today that the GOP actually has called their effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.”  Are you kidding me? 

Another almost childish absurdity with a twist of Orwellian Newspeak from the GOP.  Come on, thinking people, you have to understand this, don’t you? 

I know there are some conservative friends who check this blog from time to time and I have to ask you…what the hell is wrong with conservatives today?  Doesn’t this embarrass you? 

In my previous post I suggest (quite correctly) that you can study Jack Torrance from the 1980 film The Shining to understand conservative politics today, and now that I have identified that connection, it is hard not to see it everywhere.  The babble that Jack Torrance typed day after day while going mad at The Overlook isn’t much different than the empty and misleading rhetoric delivered by the right today. 

All we hear from the right is boiler plate cynicism, sound bites geared at stoking emotions.  And Main Street conservatives support it!  Why?  Well, suddenly every GOPer thinks he’s Jack Welch just because he backs the Republican agenda.  But one should question how much people aligned with the GOP really understand about business and economics.

We hear the same BS about “uncertainty” ,  “jobs”, and “job-killing” from the GOP.  Of course creating uncertainty and killing jobs is something the GOP does know something about.  Rebuilding jobs, especially for the American middle class, is another matter.

It is disgraceful — and irresponsible — that Republicans are not smart enough to look into history and economics and see where the trends lie.  You cannot be intellectually honest and believe the pointless rhetoric spewed by the misguided right.  Prove me wrong.  Cite facts.  Build an argument. 

Progressives on the left need to pay attention.  Sadly the cheap rhetorical tactics of the right work.  People don’t want to think, they want to be led.  The GOP is proving it with greater and greater efficiency.  Conservatives have attained the cultural hegemony that Antonio Gramsci warned us about almost 100 years ago.  We need strategies of our own.  Intelligence should defeat ignorance.

(Antonio Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks is worth a look.)

But back to this bill the GOP will pass through the House.  Really?  Come on!  The…what is it called?…”Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act”!  Hilarious!  It sounds like a grade school clique bullying the kids they don’t like. 

Insecurity runs deep, GOP, and it shows. 

Related Articles

• On Debt Ceiling and Health Care, GOP Is Just Fine with Uncertainty (crooksandliars.com)
• GOP shows no clear plan for replacing health law (chron.com)
• GOP wants repeal, but fervor slips in poll (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• If they want to talk about ‘job-killing,’ we can talk about ‘job-killing’ (washingtonmonthly.com)

Random Musings on “The Shining” and Politics

Avoid Paths Bordered in Red

It occurred to me last night while watching Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining (1980) that what we have here is something of a morality play and a harbinger of political trends wrapped into one.  It was a lesson with a warning.  Stephen King was on to something, he could sense it, he had a “shining”, and put into words.  Kubrick sensed it, too, and translated it into a film.  Here’s what  it is…

In a nutshell The Shining tells the story of Jack Torrance coping with failure and a lack of direction.  He’s frustrated and that manifests itself in violence, alcoholism, and insecurity.

Jack aspires then to be a writer, which is the perfect goal for a man in Jack’s situation, and he is given an opportunity to be the winter caretaker of a remote hotel where he will have plenty of time to pursue his literary career.  Jack’s wife Wendy and his son Danny appear a bit apprehensive, but go along and make the most of it.

In my assessment we can draw parallels between the characters in this story and the looming political climate emerging around 1980 and discover Stephen King’s premonition.  While I believe this is very much like a morality play, I’ll resist the temptation to define Good and Evil.  You be the judge.

Turn Right, Damn It!

Jack Torrance represents conservatism in the United States at the time.  Frustrated, impotent, and burdened by an uncertain identity and direction.  Conservatives, as they are wont to do, see the world going to hell in a hand basket, but hadn’t really been able to change its course.  Like Jack, conservatism is looking for its future and frustrated that there is no place for it.

Wendy Torrance represents the status quo.  She’s not an imposing figure.  She’s vulnerable, perhaps handicapped by naivety and fear, but she is strong enough to survive.  She keeps the household running, protects Danny, and even does Jack’s work.  She represents liberalism in America.

Danny Torrance is Jack and Wendy’s child.  He gets dragged around – sometimes literally – between his incompatible parents.  His father hurts him and his mother nurtures him.  Dad is irrational discipline, mom is patient caregiver.  He’s largely unheard even though he has the clearest vision.  Danny has little power to change things, but he is the future and he has the most at stake in this play.  Danny represents the people of the United States.

Dick Hallorann is one other character who needs to be mentioned.  Dick is the head chef at the Overlook Hotel.  Dick represents history and wisdom.  He has seen this play acted out in the past.  He could be the answer to the family’s safety, but no one pays attention to the facts of history.  Dick Hallorann is an important character in this story; a potential anwer and a sane foil to Jack Torrance.

This isn’t going to turn out well…

Finally, there is the Overlook Hotel itself.  Stephen King was brilliant here!  The story starts here, really.  Jack and his family go to The Overlook to start their new life.  Remember Ronald Reagan’s City Upon the Hill speech?  In the film, the hotel literally shines, all lit up from inside and out.  Also note the obvious:  The story is called The Shining.  Coincidence?  I don’t think so.  I think Stephen King has a crystal ball.  The Overlook represents the United States and the story anticipates Reagan’s conservative revolution.

Like Reagan and the conservative movement he enabled, Good and Evil stand out as clearly as black and white.  They are both ever-present and real.  Problems are to be dealt with directly, or – as in the parlance of the story – they are to be “corrected.”

Government – in this case Wendy – isn’t the solution, it is the problem.  And the people?  Well, follow Danny in this story.  He suffers the outcomes of delusions and poor decisions.  He is, in short, a perfect embodiment of the American people struggling to get ahead.

When the family arrives at The Overlook Hotel Jack is in control.  The conservative revolution has occurred.

Look at some additional parallels between Jack and conservatism.

ü  When Jack is working and Wendy tries to talk with him, Jack shuts her down, abuses and intimidates her; he has no time for her.

ü  Jack hears voices from the past (Nancy Reagan anyone?) and acts on those voices.  Likewise, conservatives selectively look to the past for solutions.  Solutions to correct problems.  Is it a little sign from our filmmaker and writer that Jack and his spiritual mentor talk in racists terms in one part of the film or that Dick Hallorann, the voice of history, is played by black actor Scatman Crothers?  The past is a mix of Good and Evil, like everything else, which is black and white to Jack.

ü  Jack spends days working on his novel, but really is slipping deeper into insanity.  He isn’t writing anything at all, only repeating the same “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” thousands and thousands of times day after day.  Sort of reminds you of conservative rhetoric, doesn’t it?  The same tired clichés and talking points, words without substance, repeated over and over and over.  Serious legislation?  Hell no!

ü  I could talk about violence, but that’s a touchy point.  Conservatives have tossed us into a few pointless wars, turn up the violent rhetoric, and pursue other reckless policies, but I think here King and Kubrick are more subtle.  Trashing The Overlook is a metaphor for trashing government.  In other words, we will “correct” the problem even if it means destroying what we have.

That brings us to other little parallels.  The phones don’t work at The Overlook.  Our country’s infrastructure is failing.  Nice little touch there.

There is an economic lesson here too.  The road to The Overlook is not plowed because back in the long-ago days when the hotel was built there wasn’t much interest in winter sports and the cost of clearing the road was too expensive.  Like a true American conservative, the management of  The Overlook doesn’t seem to recognize that times have changed.  Winter sports is a huge industry now and modern technology might make clearing the road to the overlook economically feasible.  Think winter sports equating to new technology and a cleared road as modern infrastructure.

The American people rather than elect people who will support responsible winter management of The Overlook hires Jack Torrance instead.  And what do they get?  Chased around a maze by a mad man who wants to kill them!

Next time you vote, this kid would appreciate someone other than Jack Torrance.

And what’s the point?  All that violence and damage and backwardness seems to accomplish nothing.  Dick Hallorann shows up – remember he represents history from which the lessons we need exist – and Jack Torrance kills him.  Wisdom is a threat.  All that matters to Jack is power, answering the voices and spirits from the past, and he’ll destroy rather than build to accomplish it.  Does that sound like a liberal agenda or a conservative one?

In the end you have to ask again:  What is the point?  Jack Torrance ends up united with his spiritual world, living in the past as a smiling ghost at a 1921 Independence Day Ball.  So why the axe and the drama?

Stanley Kubrick is said to have liked ghost stories because he thought they gave people an optimistic fantasy about life after death.  I like Kubrick’s spin on things, but you have to wonder why the ghosts at The Overlook seem to think you need to employ horror in order to cross over to better days.  Likewise, I think you have to ask why conservatives employ destruction — rhetorical and otherwise — to achieve a goal.  Smashing what is new to restore what is old again.

I’ll close today’s brief musing on a theme by simply asking you to watch The Shining again and keep my character assessments in mind.  Then tell me:  Am I right or am I wrong?  Isn’t this a story that portends the rise of conservatism in the United States and metaphorically represents the politics we live in today?

I do believe that Stephen King had a shining and Kubrick saw it.

Was all that drama really necessary, Jack?

Related Articles

• The spooky Stanley Hotel celebrates the 30th anniversary of ‘The Shining’ (gadling.com)

A Better Offer From China, Unless…

Image via Wikipedia

In today’s New York Times Business Section there is a story about a solar panel manufacturer moving from Massachusetts to China, taking away 800 jobs and squandering millions in financial help provided by Massachusetts.  Briefly, a couple of things to note about this.

First, note that the jobs didn’t move from Massachusetts to Texas or South Dakota or Wyoming.  They moved overseas.  In some ways, the structure of government in the United States is outdated and handicaps competition.  We have politicians who pit state against state, arguing for tax and regulatory advantages, when the competition is not state against state.  We operate in a global economy more so now than ever before and that trend will only strengthen, not weaken.  

Politicians, especially politicians on the right, argue that states need to be “open for business” and eliminate “uncertainty” in the marketplace.  That all sounds great, but they base that argument on naive interpretations of competitive advantage in today’s economy.  This is 2011, not 1950.  And if you’re looking for certainty are you more likely to find it in Wuhan, China, or Devens, Massachusetts? 

These red herrings employed to manipulate voters have to go.  As conservatives roll back the clock, the rest of the world is racing ahead.  It will be hard for us to be an economic leader when we are following countries like China and India for jobs and growth.

The second issue that stands out in this story is the economic assistance that China provides the solar panel manufacturer.  Unfair or prudent?  In the United States we have politicians — again mostly from the right — who still complain about TARP and the stimulus programs as a step toward socialism and “tyranny.”  (Tyranny in quotes…I’m convinced no one knows what they hell they are talking about.) 

By coincidence, on the same page in today’s paper is the story “A.I.G. Pays Its Full Debt To The Fed.”  General Motors is back on its feet, too, in fact the entire U.S. auto industry is pulling itself together.  The financial industry…well, no need to bring that up, it will just tick off the average thinking American who sees our wealth trickling up to that sector again.  The road to tyranny.

We can’t get support to save what’s left of our domestic economy without whining and (literally) crying about it, unless, of course, you drill for oil or dig for coal…old economy industries…or perhaps ration health care in the insurance industry.  So how do we expect to compete in emerging economies that do collaborate with government to support investment and growth? 

Of course American business has always asked for and still receives American tax breaks, but today these breaks do little to ensure stability in local economies.  American business is more likely today to move investment opportunities overseas than ever before, effectively taking the tax breaks and incentives that they get with them.  No one wants to talk about that — again, especially on the right (what is right about the right?) — but it is a fundamental problem standing in the way of economic recovery and growth here.

Look at General Motors.  Many thousands of jobs saved directly, certainly many, many more indirectly, and quite possibly an industry that has been an American economic mainstay saved with it.  More importantly, however, is the fact that an important economic domino did not fall.  The economic repercussions of a failed GM or auto industry would have been devastating.  As it turned out the auto industry recovered better than economists expected and the United States might even earn a profit in the end. 

But even if the US Treasury does not earn a direct profit, the economy will.  Our investment pays off in a stronger GDP and better growth.  Think of compounding interest and growth.  Doing what we can as people of our government to invest in our common economic interests is a respectable way to use the tool of government.

American needs to be more nimble, especially in the world of business and economics.  Conservatives are by definition less forward-thinking than others, but even supposedly more-progressive Democrats need to wake up.  The economic world is not at the end of economic history, economies will evolve and grow.  Our unfortunate disadvantage in the labor market means we need to find opportunities that will command the compensation levels once taken for granted in our past.

How do we do that?  First we need a fresh outlook.  Relying on economic and social reactionaries has not helped.  Since Republicans began blaming government for problems real and imagined and began a renaissance in favoring old economies, the United States has lost tremendous ground.  We are not better off now than we were 30 years ago, not at federal, state, or local levels.  The American middle class is losing…fast.  Incomes measured in real dollars have remained flat at best, most have fallen.  Prospects for the future look bleak at the moment.  We keep making the same mistakes, electing the same failed policies.  We need a fresh outlook and better leadership.

We also need to reinvest in America again.  This would seem like a no-brainer, especially to the GOP who claim to know something about wise investment.  Unfortunately by vilifying government, people don’t respect government as a responsible and necessary place to invest part of our resources.  Yes…taxes. 

We shouldn’t have a “barely get by” mentality, we should have a “whatever it takes” approach to success.  Schools from grade school through universities should be strongly funded…and respected.  Creativity and ingenuity were keys to American exceptionalism; it spurred entrepreneurship and responsible hard work.  Do we still have that in this country?  You tell me.  Look at the attitudes in America today, look at our social environment as much  as our economic one.  What do you see?

We have opportunities to rebuild our infrastructure and we need competitive infrastructure.  Keep in mind that the world competing against us is mostly new!  Infrastructure in the United States is aging and failing.  Can we leave this to the private sector?  No.  Public goods need public support.  The rest of the world is winning on this level while we fall further behind.

The way we choose to compete today is not working and it is supported by a simple-minded, outdated form of rhetoric that does not promote our interests in either the short term or the long term.   It takes hard work to succeed, but we need to know where to begin that hard work.

Too often we elect the people who seem to speak simply to our common sense, but if that common sense is steeped in outdated assessments of our strengths and advantages, we stand to fail.  American business already understands this.  They move to places offering better economic advantages.  These are advantages that in some ways we no longer have a competitive edge, such as wages and even skills. 

So we need to begin making ourselves better offers than those coming from China and elsewhere, we need to look ahead patiently and plan for success.  This includes retooling our physical infrastructure and encouraging our human capital with opportunity and security.  If we let red tooth and claw free market capitalism rule, the majority of America loses and our wealth and advantages will shift to places that are already better positioned than we are for the future.

It is time to embrace a more progressive and forward-thinking approach to our future.

Related Articles

• Solar Panel Maker Moves Work to China (nytimes.com)
• Plant will shut after $58m in state aid (boston.com)
• Economix: The Irrational Awe of China (economix.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Americans See China as the World’s Strongest Economic Power (dailyfinance.com)

Shhh…Don’t Tell Anyone

Skiing

Read this post and tell me if the advice I am about to give isn’t proven here.  If you’re not in the mood to write, don’t write.  This post feels a lot like my time working today.  Frankly, I wasn’t much in the mood to sell, so I went skiing instead. 

They say that discipline is an important part of success, but so is sanity.

This morning our sales team met and reviewed our sales numbers from the last year.  Not bad, not fantastic, but certainly respectable and getting better.  Those are all good signs and usually very motivating.

Unfortunately when the meetings ended my thoughts of work were ambivalent at best.  I was tired, even a little cranky and impatient.  I simply felt flat.

I shuffled some paper, chatted with a colleague or two, and reluctantly prepared to work leads.  I felt lousy, but that would soon change.

Outside snow was falling in big soft flakes.  Stepping into the snow made me feel entirely different, optimistic and happy.  The last thing I wanted to do was fight traffic and walk through slush and meet ungrateful clients.  I decided to do something else.

There was one client I needed to see, however, but I knew the chances that he would actually keep his appointment were very slim and he did not disappoint.  When I got to his office it was dark.  I quickly went back to my car and left the rest of my planned day behind me.

My skis were at Afton Alps where I left them two months ago for a tune up.  That is where I was going to go.  A couple of car accidents in December along with other inconveniences kept me from getting to my skis and on the slopes.  Today was too beautiful of a day to let that delay last any longer. 

And the drive to Afton Alps still is very nice on a snowy day, despite the best efforts of suburban builders and their aesthetically-challenged clientele.  Yes, eyesores have replaced too many rolling acres of field and wood, but if you get moving the old beauty still lingers on the edges of it all. 

Afton State Park.

The snow made everything especially pleasant.  This was a picture perfect snow, the perfect stuff of Hollywood films.  Big dry fluffy flakes that slowly twist and spin as they fall.  If you look carefully, you can see them join up and break apart as they fall from the sky.  Truly beautiful snow.

I wasn’t dressed for skiing.  I had a pair of my tights on under my pants, but no ski pants.  I keep a heavy turtleneck and other cold weather clothes in my car along with a ski shell to cut the wind.  I put that over my shirt and tie and that would be as ready as I would get.

Picking up my skis felt good.  I felt excited, like a kid getting a Christmas gift.  The skis are now tuned up and ready to go.  Back at my car putting my boots on was a challenge.  I have been doing this for years and I still haven’t mastered ski boots.  I struggle and tug and get cramped up trying to get those things on my feet.  They were especially stiff and cold today.  Made it all more challenging.  It is embarrassing, but eventually the boots were on and I was ready to go.

Thursday noon is a good time to ski.  No lines.  Interestingly the slopes appeared to be used mostly by people like me, people skipping work.  There were not many young people at all and no kids.  The snow falling made everything feel even more quiet and cozy, but it was damn cold…at least for me.  My clothes were not quite right for today.

On my first run I thought it was strange that my fly felt open.  I usually wear ski pants, but I had only a pair of wool dress pants today.  I presumed the wind cut into the pants more easily than they would ski pants.  Makes sense.  But when I got to the bottom of the hill I had to check and lo!  My fly was open.  I wonder how often I wander around with that happening?  Unless I’m racing down a ski hill in 10 degree weather, I might not notice.

I fixed that problem and skied for another 30-40 minutes.  It really was a little too cold and feelings of responsibility started to creep up on me.  I felt great though.  My face was frozen and smiling.  I went back to my car, took off the boots (a little less clumsily than putting them on), and got into the car one very, very relaxed guy.

Ski Pants Have Come A Long Way

The snow continued to fall, even picked up a little, as I pulled out of Afton Alps.  Memories of riding home as a young boy through what was then mostly farm land made me feel very good.  I daydreamed a lot on the way back toward the office and felt absolutely calm and happy.  As soon as I started seeing the gaudy convenience stores and fast food restaurants, stop lights and dirty traffic, however, my mood changed, and changed in a bad way.

Reluctantly I drove back to the office, driving past the ugly freeway cityscapes that make me feel sour.  I had some work to do, but I wasn’t in the mood to do it. 

Eventually I got on the phone and called some clients, cleared some issues at the office, and dropped off some paperwork.  All the while I was kind of scratching my head…wondering what I was doing.

Related Articles

• Advice for Improving Your Skiing and Snowboarding Skills (inclinevillagecabin.com)
• 9 Pro Tips For First Time Skiers (wepay.com)
• 3 Ideas for avoiding injury on the slopes and trails (inclinevillagecabin.com)
• What Type of Skier Are You on the Slopes? (prweb.com)

Deconstructing The Rhetorical Right

The recent effort to pin blame  — or maybe more importantly to evade it — by the political left and the political right since the Arizona shootings last Saturday offers an opportunity to become a Monday morning deconstructionist. 

Jaques Derrida. It has been a while.

And, actually, I think there might be some legitimately rational conclusions drawn from such an effort.  So let’s go!

Almost immediately after last Saturday’s shooting, critics on the left made connections between the increasingly partisan and bitter rhetoric they believe comes from the right, including language that references violence and revolution, and the actual act of political violence in Arizona. 

The result has been a lot of finger-pointing and the now-expected call — almost a necessary cliché — to find a calm middle ground and share the blame.  Politicians and the media alike qualify their comments with “balanced” statements which are intended to reflect even-handed objectivity. 

I don’t care about that, not in this post.  That finger-pointing blame game occurs on the periphery of what the debate reveals.  I have my opinions — I do think words and ideas create real environments, both good and bad — but I think if you want to look at what the blaming fracas truly reveals, look not only at what people are saying, but how they say it.

Think of a schoolyard.  When something bad happens, what do children say?  How often do the guilty deflect guilt?  The window didn’t break because I threw the ball at the glass.  It broke because the other kid didn’t catch the ball.  Right?  That’s an easy one. 

But how often does the child about to be punished scream and point at the other children and say “they did it too”?  (Who is “they”, by the way?)  But that’s another easy one.  We all know this.  Simple.  Guilty children, especially little brats, rarely accept responsibility with dignity; they’re children afterall.  When a child caught red handed cries that it isn’t his fault, the child essentially confirms his guilt.  And that, I believe, is the smoking gun.

Hidden within the bluster of people like Limbaugh and Judson Phillips is a trace of what they are not saying.  By rising up and taking an aggressive position countering the blame coming from the left there is, I think, a tacit acknowledgement that blame exists.  What is said is defined by what isn’t being said.   

Look at it this way.  Most rational people would not argue the point that a specific statement by a politician had the direct or intentional result of causing an otherwise rational person to act violently.  No one would draw a  simple direct link like that.  Conservatives, however, are trying to control the debate by framing the criticism precisely in that way.  This is key.  The debate shifts from criticism of dangerous rhetoric generally to the specific absurdity that a specific text (Palin’s sharpshooter map, for example) caused a specific outcome (the Arizona shootings). 

If the “lock and load” rhetoric from the right were not dangerous, they could say as much, but by trying to say that the other side is as much to blame as anyone else, the right admits that there is something wrong with the language that people like Palin and Bachmann routinely use to rally support. 

That’s the key that I think we need to talk about.

The right simply cannot go out and say their combative and divisive speech is nothing more than harmless metaphor and clever rhetoric because the argument would fall flat.  We know they understand this not so much because they choose not to defend the violent language, but because they choose to attack the critics.  In their efforts to say they alone are not to blame they very much admit that fault exists, not specifically for any single act of violence, but for the destructive language of us versus them that poisons public discourse today.

Left, Right, and Some Guy in the Middle.

Finally, language does not have to directly cause violence and killings to create a dangerous environment that enables violent behavior.  Human history shows what happens when we create a divide between us and them, when we create the other.  Rarely do we create divides that flatter the other side.  We don’t create difference to reach out and be more like them.  We do it to create a hierarchy.  This hierarchy exists in the political language of our country and the debate that has followed the Giffords shooting exposes it in a very real, but perhaps somewhat hidden, way. 

The problem is the increasingly bitter and even violent tone of that debate and public discourse generally.  We can — and we should — ask if one group is out of line.  If we are the great democracy we want to be, we should not shirk responsibility.  Own up to it, correct it, and move on.

Related Articles

• False Equivalency Watch, Cont’d (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Clinton warns against demonized rhetoric (thehill.com)