Looking for a Party

No I didn’t teabag, but like many other Americans, I share frustration with the current state of affairs and concern for the future of a great nation. So I’m looking for a party that shares, not defines, my principles. I don’t care about the name, I don’t care about who is endorsing, I don’t care if it’s COOL, or if it’s new. I care about results. The following 15 points describes the type of leadership I will support in order of priority:

1. National Defense –The number one privilege is to live life in safety and liberty. Any governments’ #1 priority is to keep its member safe both at home and abroad. Being the Nice guy has NEVER stopped or prevented aggression on the contrary, it encourages it (ever deal with a bully problem at school?). Fear of not being liked in my opinion is not a good policy for defense or leadership. Preventive is always best, but we need to be in a position to do so. Was it a coincidence that renegade leaders in Libya and mad nuclear sceintiests fell in line shortly after the attack on Iraq?

2. Freedom – we are who we are because of our rights. The constitution is timeless and the Rights differentiate us from the rest of the world. If you’ve spent any time in Russia, especially outside the tourist areas, you’ll notice the reality between real freedom and suppression.

3. Law Enforcement – Freedom without Rules is chaos. Try playing a game without rules, without parameters, without disciplined skill. Not very fun and not very safe. There may be the freedom to play, but what you can actually do is limited to your abilities and knowledge of the game. Although we have freedoms, there are limits, and there are consequence when we test and go beyond those limits, regardless of intentions. There is a way society works, and law enforcement is there to make sure of that. Again, prevention is best, but when not, enforcement should be swift and with resolve in a way that supports prevention.

4. Opportunity – I’m a second generation immigrant. My parents with little but their education, and my father learning a new culture and language, they were able to build a very successful life and impart those values in their children. America should return to a performance based culture, which gives EVERYONE opportunity, not handouts, regardless of status, culture, religion and any of the other ways people segregate. Like any good game, the value is offered, the qualifications set, and rules enforced. The results belong to those who choose to participate. The only real failure goes to those who choose not to. Government should only participate if it plays by the same rules. Inefficiency should never lead.

5. Government – the constitution is clear, the government is divided into 3 branches with 3 separate powers for balance. The legislative legislates, the executive – executes, and the judicial JUDGES. Problems arise when they extend or ignore their roles. Judges should NOT legislate or execute. Legislature or Executive should not be judging. And none of them should be running companies, unless they play by the same rules as everyone else.

6. Society - the US is by the people for the people not by the government/power/corp for the government/power/corp. We project and protect the liberty of the people. We’ve lost that. A high percentage of the social programs that are supported by the government, and not equally so by the people are…wait for it…corrupt! Why are the people paying for in taxes these organizations that don’t represent the values of the American people? Let the markets decide who succeeds in the market and likewise the people decide what affects our society. Why does this work? The American people are #1 in the world for giving and charities both home and abroad.

7. Responsibility – how can the government of the largest and one of the best economies in the world be SO inefficient and irresponsible with performance? It makes no sense. The only one remotely close that was serious about it was Ross Perot, that would’ve been interesting. Is it really so hard?

8. Education – there’s no reason for a country with the best universities in the world producing such poor education k-12. No reason. And there’s no reason that getting there demands more tax payer money to do so. In the world’s most competitive society of bigger, faster, stronger, our education is top-heavy, limping, and weak.

9. Legal – the US is the joke of the world in terms of legal compensation. Of course there needs to be law, and civil law creates societal balance but it’s out of control and ruining our economy. It adversely affects the costs of Healthcare, Education, and Production. The Legal system in the US currently runs as extortion, and it needs to be reined in.

10. Healthcare – only after frivolous civil lawsuits are under control can we begin to tackle healthcare. But tackle it we must. However the solutions must be fiscally responsible. There are many great proposals. Throwing money we don’t have into a system we can’t afford is NOT a solution. Simply copying another country is sophomoric, since we have some of the best and most creative minds in the world.

11. Taxes – another huge waste. Let’s have a policy that makes sense, that encourages growth, and competition both home and internationally. The best minds in the world are NOT in government, they are competing in the markets. We should be using living organizational principles to take advantage of that, not tax it. This is part of Efficiency (#7) Step 1: reduce government, Step 2: institute a responsible fiscal policy: a flat tax or fair tax. Step 3: reduce spending.

12. Corruption – corruption exists when there is a lack of regulation enforcement, a lack of transparency, and an arbitrary distribution of value/wealth. We need leaders who are not afraid to step up.

13. Accountability – in light of #12, strong leadership regulates itself firmly, not waiting for it to hit the press, or wait for a crisis event, but knows what it is doing and takes care of it. I would expect nothing less from the companies I invest in, why would I expect less from my government?

14. Moral Issues - I’m not a fan of government dictating moral stances, rather give it up to popular votes and state management.

15. Candidates - I don't think it's too much to ask to have the best most qualified candidates to choose from, not just the ones that have legacy, fill quotas, or are simply the "next-in-line."

Any suggestions?

The Games Women Play: The Appeasement Approach Part 1

The world of dating and relationships is a lot of strategy, movement and coercion as we seek to find ourselves, our mates, our satisfaction, while at the same time protecting our vulnerabilities to get to that ultimate place called intimacy.

In the hunt for serious relationships, I've never really understood why GAMES were so much a part of the recipe, especially if intimacy is the goal.

I once dated a girl who told me that she knew how to manipulate men. It was the beginning of our relationship, she was absolutely beautiful, strong-willed, and very confident in her abilities. She claimed that she could get men to tell her and eventually do whatever she wanted.

I told her, I doubt she could with me and feel free to try.

She smiled as if to say, let the games begin.

Of course, the relationship didn’t last, but I have to admit, it was a very good attempt. She had me absolutely confused a majority of the time. My emotions were all over the place. She had me completely out of my element. I was amazed at the limits she would go through to compete.

I once heard a theory that most women get the exact relationship they want. If what happened is not what she wanted, I don’t understand how she would’ve gotten anything else out of it.

What I got out of it was a lesson in the games women play. Maybe not all women do it, but if yours does, be careful!! :-)

I intended to show men why, if you really care about your partner, you just can’t seem to do anything right. And maybe help understand how that amazing women you fell in love with sometimes shape-shifts into this irrational emotional train-wreck propelling you to call your local exorcist.

As we begin we need to understand the Appeasement Approach . To appease means to get rid of or eliminate anger or pain, usually by concessions. In terms of relationships it means everyone ultimately wants to have a peaceful loving relationship and will appease their mate to any extent possible to keep the relationship amiable.

A strong tool in the game is to take advantage of people’s uneasiness with conflict. Displaying extreme and/or irrational emotion puts the responsibility of the relationship in the other’s hands mostly through guilt and therefore sets them up to be controlled.

Many have seen or experienced a child in a store who has been denied their immediate desire quickly resort to tantrums on the floor waiting for a prize of appeasement. To the placating parent, denying a simple candy bar is definitely not worth this embarrassment, so concessions ensue and an abusive relationship is established.

In adult relationships it gets a bit more complicated because it is no longer the risk of public embarrassment, but anger, emotional withdrawal or guilt. In an effort to be responsible and to create the best relationship possible, many adults accept the need to compromise. Some will be willing to compromise too much. In any case, it is extortion.

The abuser in this case is usually the one who is not willing to solve problems, make concessions, compromise, and talk it out. They tend to be blamers and avoid any responsibility thrown their way. In fact, in the effort to “workout” problems, the abuse only intensifies.

The communication between men and women is known to be difficult. The sly gamer will take advantage of that fact and make it incredibly difficult to realize when the problems are real or fabricated. So, if one is found out, she can always claim innocence, denial or even betrayal of her loving partner.

The game involving the Appeasement Approach is a series of levels designed to get her man to approach her in terms of appeasement. Because, when you are the one approaching, they win. "Baby, I'm sorry..I don't know why or what I did, but obviously I did something wrong and promise not to do it again."

The levels are used in succession depending on the extent of stubbornness or tolerance to pain you’re willing to endure.

Since we're in the habit now of publicizing secrets and torture techniques, next week I'll share the details of the appeasement game...if I live long enough to tell it.

Change without Transparency leads to Rebellion

People spend a majority of time adjusting to circumstances in pursuit of comfort. And once there, our natural inclination is to resist change until a new opportunity justifies it. Yet, even in the process of change, there are comfort levels, be it pace or degree, and forcing people beyond those limits regardless of intention will be met with resistance. In times of radical change, the onset of rebellion can be thwarted by transparent leadership.

Good leadership articulates an inspiring vision and guides the formulation of a strategy for its pursuit. Transparent leadership then at minimum shares that vision and the strategy to get there with constituents.

This is what encourages the athlete through the struggle of training, the patient through the pain of rehabilitation, even the student through school. This is how Winston Churchill was able to bring the English through WWII.

The lack of which has lead to the coup’s in Africa, the potential revolt in France and the tea parties recently in the United States.

Why?

In terms of understanding, the world is divided into two groups, How and Why. “How” people are focused on the here and now, they take information as is, they are more satisfied being told what to do and where to do it, then the reasons behind it. They can easily focus on their tasks. They are people of the present.
“Why” people are focused on the big picture. They interpret information and seek meaning, they don’t break information into its parts, but seek relationships between the information, and focus less on the what is and instead try to project on the what-will-be, they are focused on the future.

How people are satisfied with what is happening and their role in it, why people simply can not move unless they know where they are going.

I once worked with a development group that was quite successful. I had a good relationship with the leader and the staff and enjoyed growing with the group. One day the leader returned from a convention and started to change everything. Which startled the staff, but we followed. However, the changes being implemented didn’t make sense, and in many cases were not only against what we had done in the past, but were simply wrong. I started to ask questions and wasn’t getting answers. Our relationships started to split and my resistance was seen as a threat. I wanted to follow him, but I for some reason just couldn’t and didn’t understand why. Eventually, I quit.

Years later, I came to realize that it wasn’t some adolescent rebellion against authority or sophmoric resistance submission. But very simply, I needed, information and was paralyzed without it. I am a “why” person, and have a natural need to understand the big picture, to see the vision, the strategy to get there and how I fit in to it. Radical change was happening and I couldn’t find the rhyme or reason for it. Therefore I could not find my place, so I could not support it, could not be a part of it. And since the direction seemed to be off, I could not just blindly follow.

Radical changes are happening the US, and many people are demanding information, not because they are from another party, not because they are not the same color, but because, it is mentally impossible to move without that information. People are seeing steps that are inconsistent with their former path. There are things being done that are against what they had been living for, in some cases it just looks wrong, and in interpreting the decisions to where they are heading, the direction seems off.

No one seems to know the vision (Change is not a destination). So it’s no wonder no one knows the strategy to get there. The transparency that was promised is partial, which is actually propaganda. And unfortunately platitudes and diplomacy also don’t work because people NEED that information, regardless of which party is holding that office.

In history, radical change without transparency has ALWAYS led to either rebellion or oppression. Either the people will react out of need, or the authorities will subdue with force.

Let's hope the Transparency promised the US comes soon.

The Dumbing Down of America: A Capitalistic Solution

I was once invited to help a school in Thailand to upgrade its curriculum. The school had few books and little money, which is common in the less affluent areas of northern Thailand. With a little bit of creative resourcing, we were able to create curriculum that met core skills necessary for the area including reading, writing, mathematics, local trade and science. The trick was not buying new books, not investing in new technology, but very simply finding and motivating teachers that could teach.

In most professions is it common to compete for positions, undertake annual performance evaluations and punish for mediocrity. As important as education is to our society, why would we demand any less?

The most effective education institutions in the US and also in the world, are private, those whose survival is based on performance and meeting market demand. Sounds like capitalism.

So adopting the success of those schools, a simple solution is to allow market principles to drive school development by instituting the following:

1. Allow a school-of-choice voucher program. The US invests an average of seven-thousand dollars a year per student for education. An effective program would cover costs for attending the local public school or allow other choices to be subsidized.

2. State sanctioned standardized tests at grades 4, 8 and 12. Students in any system (public, private, home-school) must pass to receive recognition and continue. Grade 12 is equivalent to a GED. Each state has the authority to determine the measurements and standards of what is deemed acceptable at each of the grades as long as it meets the national minimum set by the Department of Education. It should be stated the negative implications of schools continually just meeting the national minimums.

3. Top performing schools/programs may be eligible for expansion funding. Incentives for top performing teachers and principles.

4. Probation for failure – failing students will go under a probationary period for assessment until a secondary test is under-taken. A repeating failure will put the student under advisory to determine the necessary steps to rectify the learning problem. Schools reporting high failure rates will also go under a probationary period to rectify the problem. After which time, if an acceptable solution is not found, the school will lose funding, accreditation or force the school to replace the administration.

A true capitalistic approach is outcome based, fiscally responsible, and fair. Not a lot of costs in this program, whereas the No Child Left Behind for some reason claims over 24 Billion in federal funding annually. And still the teacher’s Unions and critics are demanding more money, less regulation, lowering minimum standards, and plenty excuses for failure.

I guess that’s what you get when Government gets involved.

Travel Log: "Not Arrested" in Slovakia

After getting settled into my first apartment in Bratislava, I contacted a couple friends to party in the capital for the weekend. They were old American football buddies that played with me in Europe. We spent the weekend going through the center, visiting pubs, clubs, and even knocking ‘em dead at the karaoke bar. We were out late every night. Sunday night, my friends decided to stay out late, so since I had to work in the morning, I decided to head home early. As I left, I turned to my friends and said half jokingly, “Be good.”

Slovakia isn’t the most civil place in the world, and if a couple of drunk foreigners want a little mischief, well, it usually turns into nothing little. Plus I was new in the country and just starting my visa process, so getting in trouble was not an option.

In the morning, I awoke to a knock on my door. I got to the door and paused, I didn’t know anyone that would actually knock on my door, so I waited to open it. There was another knock, and I asked who it was. “Po-leet-sia” came back the reply. I opened the door to see a police officer who blurted something in Slovak. I told him in English I didn’t understand. He motioned as if he was putting on a coat and said, “Sako!” the pointed down the stairs, “You, Me, Go, Now.” I shrugged, “Why?, Where?” He replied, “You have Friends?” I turned around and realized that the apartment was empty, my friends hadn’t returned.

So I grabbed a jacket and went outside. They put me in the back of a police car and sped away. I asked the officer in the car where we were going. He said, “Police house.” I asked why. He said, “you have friends?” and smiled. I was scared. What happened to my friends? Where they ok? Where they alive? The officer looked at me, motioned like he was drinking and said, “Friends!” And laughed. My relief that they were ok, quickly turned to anger.

We got to the police station and in direct line of sight from the door was a small damp jail cell built under the crumbling concrete stairs. Standing inside with his hands on the bars and head hanging low avoiding my gaze was one of my friends. My blood started to boil. The officer led me past him to a small room. The room was empty except for a single chair and a radiator. Handcuffed to the radiator sitting on the floor was friend number two. The officer asked, “Friend?” I said, “Not Friend!” The officer looked confused, “Not friend?” I paused, took a breath and complied, “Yes, I know him.” So the officer uncuffed him, then let my other friend out of the small cell, and asked us to sit in the hall and wait.

No one said a word.

Eventually the officer called me to an office and gave me the phone. On it was another officer that spoke English, “Hello, you speak English, yes? “ “yes I replied. Why are my friends here?” The officer then explained. “You know these men? They say they know you, they are staying with you and their things are in your flat.”

“That’s true, “ I replied. “What did they do? What is wrong?”

“Oh, no problem,” the officer assured me. “There is no problem.”

“But you arrested my friends.”

“No, not arrest. No problem.” He replied.

“Then why did you lock them up like animals?”

“Oh, a little drunk. No problem. We just need to make a small report and everyone can go. It will take a little time to get a translator to you. Just wait. Not arrested. Everything is fine.”

“Wait, so you arrested them because they were drunk? They did nothing wrong? No problem, just drunk?”

“No, no problem. Not Arrested.“ replied the officer. “A little time and you can go. Wait please.”

So I gave the phone to the nearby officer and went back in the hall.

My friends looked at me, I was still angry, but calmed down and actually started to smile. “No problem, they said, just that you were a little drunk.” I turned to one, “What the hell happened?”

My friends looked a bit peeved, and started to explain the story.

They stayed in town til early in the morning. When they got back to my apartment, they realized they forgot a key. So they rang the door buzzer hoping to wake me up. I didn’t. So they went around the building, and since I lived on the first floor, started to throw small rocks at my bedroom window. I still didn’t wake. So eventually they went back to the front door and tried the buzzer again. All of a sudden, a police car jumped the curb, lights flashing on them and police officers jumped out and pulled their guns. Immediately after, another police car showed up followed by a SWAT truck with more bodies and guns and now dogs jumping towards them. My friends froze, still ringing the doorbell, shocked, scared, wondering if this was the end. After a minute, one of the officers said something, and realizing it was a mistake, got everyone to calm down. The officer asked them in broken English what was happening and my friends tried to explain to him that they live here, forgot their keys and just wanted to get inside and go to bed.

It turned out that a neighbor had called, we’re guessing thinking they were mafia and making a hit. After arriving the police quickly realized it was a mistake.

So with the other officers leaving, the one cop started to ring my buzzer. I didn’t wake. Then he walked around the building and started throwing things at my bedroom window. Nothing. The cop then said to my friends,

“He not here.”

“No,he’s here.” My friends explained. “He’s sleeping.”

“He not here.” The cop replied, “He is….at….police.”

Confused, my friends looked at each other, looked at the cop, “No, he’s not at police, he is here, he is sleeping.”

The cop said, “No, he is at police, we go.” At that, one cop car pulled up, one friend was thrown in the back seat, and the car sped away. Then a second car came, my other friend was thrown in the back, and they sped away as well. When both arrived, they police took all their things and locked them up til I came.

“What time did you get here?” I asked. “about 5 am.” They replied. So they had been locked up in the jail now for over 2 hours, for nothing.

Just then one of the officers pulled me in the back room and started to ask me questions. Where I was from, how long I had been in Slovakia, why I was here. Then he confiscated my idea, wallet, phone and all my possessions and told to wait in the hall with the others. I was being “Not Arrested” as well for some reason.

The translator did not come til about 12 noon. 5 hours after I arrived, 7 since they “not arrested” my friends, tired, hungry, a little hung over. Finally, we could file the report and get out of there. When the translator arrived, they took me in a back room, and started to ask me what happened. As I explained, an officer was typing my response through the translator pecking with two fingers on an old typewriter I swear had DDR engraved on the side.

As we finished the report, I asked the office if this would affect my visa application. He said, “not arrested.” I replied that I understood that, but they were making a formal report, and how would this affect my visa status. To which he just shrugged his shoulders and replied, “vee vill see.” Nice response. After which, he pulled the paper out of the DDR manual typewriter and threw the paper on a stack of other papers in the corner of the office about a meter high. I started no to worry about it.

I left the room, they took us to pick up our things and we left. My work day was shot, my friends missed their planes, we were tired, hungry, and a bit frustrated from an incredible ordeal of being, “not arrested.” As we left, the cops called to us, waved, made drinking gestures, and said in their best English, “Have a nice day!”

Welcome to Slovakia.

The Dumbing Down of America

Working with international education, I’ve helped a lot of foreign students prepare for international exams and exchange programs to the US. On average, most European students function 2 years higher than their American counterparts at the same age.

A 2003 international study ranked the US students 25th among participating OECD countries including those in Eastern Europe which fund schools and teachers at a fraction of US spending.

Internationally, the US is in the top 3 in per student spending, yet students continually score only average among developed nations in terms of basic skills in math, science and reading.

The issue of improving US education is not new, and recently started the rise of outcome-based education, which requires an expected level of performance as a result of investment. Not dissimilar to business and sports.

In 2001 GW Bush passed the No-Child Left Behind (NCLB) act which is built off the principles of outcome-based education. The key premise to the act is a standardized test measuring the acquisition of skills and learning at various levels set by each state. Basically it means a student passing the 4th grade should be able to demonstrate basic and minimal 4th grade level skills. Makes sense, right?

Critics, primarily coming from the Teacher’s Unions, complained that new curriculum was necessary and held out for more money. Weird. If what they currently did wasn’t good enough for meet minimal levels, it begs the question of what they were doing in the first place.

Another solution also introduced in the during the previous administration was the voucher system. This gave students the choice to choose the school they wanted to attend, lifting the burden of being locked into a poor school system based on where you lived. The federal funds for that student would then go with the student. It is a hybrid between private schools. Schools that have a large exodus of students basically close down for lack of funding.

A schooling system which polices itself through market-demand, a system that thrives on competition? Sounds like the US collegiate system, which is the best in the world. Sounds like capitalism.

This program had seen great success in Washington D.C. which is notorious for the worst schooling systems in the US. Yet, despite that success, despite the fact that the program cost 7500 USD per student vs. the public system which costs 15000 per student, the program was recently killed by the Democratic congress in passing the Omnibus-bill, questioning if the voucher system was a “good-use” of federal tax dollars. Ironic.

Michigan recently began a similar voucher system. However, this program has been showing different results.

Many of the teachers I interviewed had left or were in the process of leaving. Not because of competition, but because they claimed they couldn’t teach. Competition among schools, which normally motivates and drives performance, had changed focus from increasing quality to quantity. The schools were catering to students’ felt wants, instead of market needs.

In so doing, the schools changed marketing from the best education to the most pleasant experience. If you’re a 16 year old kid, what do you want? Less homework, easier classes, more free time, fewer annoying teachers. I was shocked. The teachers were left with little to no authority, no recourse for discipline and thus effective classroom management, and in some cases were forced to pass failing students.

Yes, this area does not support NCLB and therefore does not submit itself to statewide comprehensive exams. So, their only accountability is enrolled students measured by meeting costs.

We can only assume that the school administrators are either ignorant and irresponsible or intentional.

Ignorant and irresponsible capitalism focuses on the short-term bottom line, money, ignoring the long-term gains from running a quality program. In this case, the corruption in the system comes from the lack of measuring minimal standards, what NCLB was meant to do.

But what if it is intentional?

When talking about change and development, it is naïve to assume the current situation is unknown. That means, things are the way they are, because the powers to be benefit from keeping it that way.

So the question is, who benefits from a lack of standardized measurement of school performance? Who benefits from keeping Americans dumb, ignorant, unquestioning, and undiscerning?

The Alternative to Capitalism is Corruption

Margaret Thatcher once claimed that in terms of capitalism, there is no alternative. Critics claim otherwise. Like gravity is to Physics, Capitalism isn’t an economic system, but a fundamental principle based on our basic human urges to gain value (money, position, status, relationships, etc). It is about value and how that value is obtained in a fair objective way that is transparent and regulated.

Let’s take a look:

Capitalism is about fair competition for value.
Take competition away, then how is value obtained?
It is evenly divided, proportioned or simply delegated.
Basically it comes down to the value of the provider.

The problem comes in humanity. We are naturally progressive, ambitious and competitive. Very few are satisfied with enough. So we seek ways to increase value.

If value is then delegated arbitrarily by a provider, the game becomes ways to suede that provider. It is now a new competition yet isn’t transparent or regulated. This now, is where exists bribes, extortion, blackmail, threats, etc. This is where corruption lies.

All economic system is being used, in the end, are capitalistic. All governments compete for value in terms of money or power. They just obtain it within their borders differently. Where a Capitalistic society earns it from the prosperity of its members, others earn on their poverty.

The lessons learned from the communist experiment included the failure to stop the human urge to increase value. It will be sought, either through a transparent and regulated system, or one hidden and therefore corrupt.

A Capitalist system acknowledges this and regulates. A non-capitalist system ignores it and incriminates.

Even in capitalism, there is corruption, true, but that happens when competition leaves transparency and regulation, i.e. when governments get involved. Rules are somehow ignored or glossed over, competition seems to favor certain entities etc.

So in effect, Thatcher was somewhat correct, there is no alternative, because corruption should not be a choice.

The problem with Capitalism is Government

Much of society today blames the current economic crisis on capitalism. But really digging into the reasons of the crisis and comparing it to history show that the problem with capitalism isn’t its inherent greed, the problem is Government.

To start, there are a lot of misconceptions about what capitalism is. Most attribute capitalism to consumerism and propagation of planned obsolescence, this is not true. Consumerism is only one approach to capitalism. However, capitalism isn't a philosophy, it is a system of human behaviour. It is not about money, but about value and how that value is obtained.

All living beings are self-serving, and will do what they believe to be in their best self interests. When what is valued is limited, competition then determines who gets what. It is the natural order of things to seek greater gains to cover loss.

Capitalism is simple
1. Identify and establish value: money, position, victory, acceptance, relationship
2. Understand qualifications to obtain that value
3. Compete within set parameters or rule

Built into the system are natural checks and balances such as competition and risk which keeps the system going. Prices and products are market controlled meaning income must be greater than cost on the low end, and competition keeps prices in check on the high end.

Also inherent in the system is ambition, motivation, loss and reward. It is a system that seeks efficiency, progress, development, and relationship. It is what gets people up in the morning and what drives them to be better.

When entities enter without these basic principles, it throws the market out of whack. Take away competition, i.e. monopolies, and prices become arbitrary and most likely above market value. Take away risk or the need to make a profit then prices are unrealistically below market value and again, destroy the market. Take away reward, and people get lazy in their personal lives and in their relationships.

But who can afford to do that? What entities can enter the markets and not care about losing their investment? What entities don’t’ care if their customers are unhappy with service or product? Government.

Think of it this way, markets are like the flow of a river. They are driven by self-interest and flow within natural boundaries. Drop a wall in the middle of the river, and the river still runs. Only it starts to break the boundaries, flows outside its banks and start to flood the land.

This is exactly what happened with the crisis. The Government introduced loans that normally banks would NEVER do because of the risk. The Government told them to do it anyway. The banks and creditors were stuck with a product that was sure to create loss. So what happened? The river still flows, so the market did what the market does, and sought ways to turn a loss into a gain. So new instruments were made that the markets would take, it entered the flow and started to be sold.
Whose fault was it? Those who created and sold a less than desirable product or the Government who broke market rules and forced that product into the market to begin with?

Throughout history, every time non-market entities got involved without following the natural rules, it was an utter failure. Also every time the rules were not enforced, disaster ensued.

Since the Government is NOT capitalistic, meaning it is not normally driven by profit or increasing value, it should NEVER get involved in the markets. Politics running companies, is there any ONE government program that was successful and sustainable? Not one.

Now to be fair, I do believe the Government could enter the markets, but only if it plays by the same rules and takes the same risks.

Otherwise, the Government’s role is regulation, that’s it. And in terms of the sub-prime loans, its own product, it couldn’t even do that right.

Capitalism works even in crisis, when the Government stops playing with it.

A Problem of Labels

For all the Atheists I’ve met, I’ve never met anyone who truly was atheist. Each of them, when discussing further, expressed a belief in…something. But in rejecting religions such as Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism, they felt Atheism was the best label. If you find yourself constantly misunderstood, mischaracterized, and always having to defend yourself; if you find yourself doubting your beliefs or find them to be inconsistent, you are probably a victim of labels.

Labels, like symbols, are mental tools used to categorize characteristics through associations. By tying a lot of information into a single idea, labels associate those who share similar characteristics: Baptists, Mother’s Against Driving Drunk, University Alumni, and Lobbyists. The problem comes when labels instead of associating members’ values, defines them.

Republicans may be understood by some as logical, laissez-faire, libertarians; while others see them as simply wealthy, white, war-mongers. What an individual who carries the Republican banner actually believes is lost in the assumption. Those who associate under symbols or labels are understood, not according to the beliefs of members, but according to what is communicated to the general public.
Both people and institutions prefer to interact with the world around them with clean, fixed, categories and definitions, and once established are resistant to change. We then tend to define others by the categories we’ve become accustomed to and if people don’t fit neatly in those categories, because they have values and beliefs that are inconsistent, the extra information is ignored, or attribute those people are weird, wrong or confused.

Not only are people placed in categories, but whatever defines those categories also then defines you. If you are Christian, then you most likely are republican, pro-life, anti-stem cell and watch Fox news. It is also called profiling, stereotyping, or simply prejudice.

Although used to build understanding, untrained, it leads more time than not to miscommunication. Once you’re labeled and categorized, associated values are assumed to be yours, regardless if they are or not. Everything said, then, will be seen in regards to that perception.

The same applies introspectively. I am [label] so I should believe or feel [value]. I’m a Catholic, so I should be pro-life? I belong to this team, so I should reject everything and everyone from the other team? I’m African-American so I should unquestionably support Obama? These doubts come because instead of building association based on values, you’ve assumed values based on your association.

Getting around the Labeling dilemma starts with getting to know yourself, understanding your own values before labeling it and realize there is probably no label that completely fits you. Resist the temptation to fall into a simple category, and be ready to communicate yourself in terms of values rather than labels.
At the same time, realize any prejudices applying the discernment you’ve gained by exercising the 80/20 rule of world peace. Practically that means, understand before assuming; be critical before categorizing; and listen before labeling.
Not only is it about avoiding the negative, but at the same time not missing out on the positive.

Your janitor may not be poor.
A capitalist may not be greedy.
A conservative may not be republican.
A Christian could be anti-religious
An Atheist not be atheistic.
That blonde may not be dumb.
That Asian may not be smart.

But then again, they could be.

Don’t let labels define you. People tend to be a lot more than the labels they even give themselves.

The difference between Election and Inauguration

Whether you support the new US administration or not, the events the President’s recent European trip, including the “bow” or “low hand-shake” given to the Saudi King, raises the question if the administration knows the difference between election and inauguration.

In Election mode, YOU are the President. It is a celebration of accomplishment, of victory. The election is about you, about the struggle, the strategy and the execution of your plan. You are the center point, you are the focus, you are the chosen.

In Inauguration, you are The PRESIDENT. It is about assuming responsibility, taking up the reigns and fulfilling the lead seat of the land and the most powerful position in the world. You don’t make the position, you step into it, it is no longer about you, but about what it represents, the people, the history, and the spirit of the most powerful and influential country in history.

Should that country bow to the Saudi King? Should it claim and apologize for arrogance, especially the French? Should it demean itself to the Turkish people? Should it ignore, excuse, and even give audience to the tantrums of a rogue nation who refuses to follow any rule or law? Should it pause when a few rebels attack US ships?

As an individual, it is debatable and possible quite diplomatic. As The PRESIDENT, that answer is no.

It seems the current administration is still campaigning and needs to know the election period is over. The Presidency is not and never has been about the individual, regardless of how the media would like to portray it. It is no longer about Obama, but about America. This is not college life, this is not theoretical discussion, this is real power with real consequences. The behaviour and even policies may be ok for the president of a student union, not the action of the President of the Union of States.

Hopefully the current administration will realize and understand that when you represent the position, the country supports you. When you use the position to represent yourself, the country will not.

The election is over. Where is THE President?

The Superhero exposes the problem: Jealousy

The US economy was rocked when Barak Obama FIRED the CEO of General Motors, what Michael Moore called a “…Superhero move.” What supporters missed is that the “move” didn’t just attack and remove a problem, but rather exposed one.

Michal Moore gloated over the bold unprecedented move, not because of mistakes that the CEO supposedly made (which have yet to be made public), but that, “it should send a chill through all Americans who believe in free enterprise.” “That the government is in charge here!”

What is clear here, is exactly what the founders of the constitution were afraid of happening, Government taking control away from the people. While Michal Moore and others cheer the latest move, it shows a huge ignorance to history and exactly how far away we are from American idealism.

No government in any country in history has ever successfully RUN its own companies.

But more than that, it exposes an even greater problem in American society. That which thwarts progress and development all over the world. A human emotion called, Jealousy.

U2’s Bono explained it best in comparing America with his native land Ireland. In America, he says, you buy a new home, you invite your friends, who upon leaving think to themselves, Man, I can’t wait till I get something like that. And start to plan their own bigger prize. In Ireland, a man buys a home, invites his friends, who upon leaving start throwing rocks through the windows!

America used to be the land of opportunity. The land of hopes and dreams that one day, with enough hard work and fortitude, each man can have his success, his castle. It used to be taught in schools, ingrained in children and filled in movies that the little guy can do BIG things. This used to be a land of optimistic hope. It was something that differentiated Americans from people all over the world.

In Moore’s representative attack on free enterprise, one in which he also benefits, he is actually denying people that right. It is exposes what is happening in our schools and universities, it explains behavior of community groups. We’ve become so accustomed to fight for the little guy. That we’ve left the “encourage people to fight and persevere to succeed” attitudes that made the US the most prosperous economy in the history of the world, and now instead trade hope for blame, fight for complain, and optimism for oppression.

Sure, Obama only attacked a BIG EVIL CORPORATE GIANT, who DESERVED what he got, because THEY ARE BIG. But the precedence is now set, especially with Geithners push to take over ANY company, to do the same to anyone, anytime, anywhere. The supporters do not even ask nor care why he was fired, only that he was.

Jealousy. Not a strong virtue. But becoming a prevailing US characteristic.

Under socialism there was a commonly understood phrase, “the tall grass gets the blade.” In those cultures, success and popularity were NOT good, because it created exposure which lead to attack. In these lands, you get a new car, people don’t envy, they call the police. If it’s something new and expesive, it was stolen.  If you got a promotion, it was corruption. If you have something nice, don’t’ congratulate and aspire to get your own, find things wrong with it and bring it down to your level.

The US used to be a place where people strived for the limelight. Now, people are starting to run away. It’s pathetic.

Careful, Mr. Moore, Obama’s next superhero move could be against you. I wonder who will be cheering then.