Real Name: Ernie Cash Member Since: November 11, 2007 Last Signed In: October 15, 2008 Profile Views: 672 Blog Views: 712 Fixing America: The Financial Crisis Fixing America A Score Card for Decision 2008 Fixing America's Problems Oil Companies Going Green!! The High Cost of Misinformation Fifteen Minutes of Fame Is Anyone So Type A Indispensable? Despair, Desperation or Depression - Decision 2008 Building Bridges - A Special Event February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 
RSS 2.0    |
|
|
Fixing American: The Financial Crisis I read an interesting article today entitled “All That Money You’ve Lost – Where Did It Go?” The piece had to do with all the imaginary wealth many of us have had in stocks, bonds, real estate or other sectors of what’s commonly known as “investments” the value of which vary from day to day. The gist of the article was that the expected value we had in those companies or those financial instruments is only in the collective mind of other investors. It’s not really “money” until you sell the investment. The article went on to state that since American – and the world – have gone off the gold standard, even the money we have in our wallets is only worth what those who would accept is believe it to be worth. I have to agree – so far. Only when money was actually something of actual value – gold or silver most notable – did “money” ever have any actual worth. At this point the article parted company. What is gold worth? Or Silver? I suppose one could eat gold or silver but I wouldn’t necessarily advise it. One could build a house out of gold or silver but I’m afraid he might need a very sophisticated alarm system. So what, then, does have value? It seems to me the only real definition of value is something I have that someone else wants. (We won’t get into those who consider that the definition of “something I want to steal.”) If I have something, be it something material or a skill that you have a need or desire for we may come to an agreement to barter what I have for what you have. Money – even gold or silver money – is simply a universally accepted medium of exchanging goods and services. In short, money’s only worth what you and I agree that it’s worth when we’re talking about otherwise trading our goods or services. If you and I were the only people left in the world and I had ten tons of gold but you controlled all the food, who’d be the richer one? But if it starts raining like an old cow tinkling on a flat rock and I know how to build a house, we’d probably be more likely to reach an amicable agreement. So where does that leave us with the current financial crisis? Well, first of all I’d suggest honing a skill or acquiring something others will want when this all comes down to plowing the short rows. People will still want to live in some sort of shelter and they will have to have food – or at least a plot of ground to grow it on. Beyond that though, assuming we don’t get all the way to a survivalist scenario, I believe we’ll continue to see financial markets work but I also think we have to severely limit the speculative aspect. Using stock as an example, a share of stock equates to owning a piece of the company that issued it. If that company uses the money I’ve “loaned” them to buy an office or build a factory to produce a product I ostensibly own a small part of that office or factory. In other words I own something tangible represented by the piece of paper in my hand. Where we’ve gotten in so deep is when speculators come along and put up an amount of money to wager (and I don’t know a better verb to use) that the value of my stock will go up or down. The speculator then owns no part of the company; nothing tangible. He owns simply a part of my confidence or lack thereof. I can’t put out my hand and touch confidence. In essence he’s attempting to create value out of blue sky and fresh air. I believe this is, in large part, what’s led us to the current financial meltdown. Another author hereabout has previously compared the world to an island and theorized that once all the resources of the island are used up by its inhabitants that micro-civilization is bound to disappear. I don’t wholly agree. First of all, many of the resources are renewable. Food can be grown on the land year after year. Animals reproduce. Trees continue to grow. As long as it’s possible for these resources to continue to renew themselves, life can continue. As long as the inhabitants know how to turn lumber into shelters and to eat civilization will exist. Confidence, on the other hand, waxes and wanes. Much of the problem we now face exists because confidence turned to euphoria. No one seemed to believe the markets would or even could go anywhere but further up. Welcome to reality. I believe owning and trading stocks is prudent but when the euphoria of the investment community is so heavily tilted toward putting money in blue sky and fresh air, something has to give. The factory my stocks represent are no less capable of producing left handed widgets today than it was yesterday or will be tomorrow. That factory still has value. The people working there still have the knowledge to make perfectly good widgets and there’s still an ample supply of knotty pine to make them from. But if the conditions have changed such that widgets are less in demand, the “value” of my stock may be less today than it was yesterday. On the other hand, the speculator who owned nothing but a share of my confidence lost…what? Imaginary money? Now, multiply that speculator’s position by trillions of dollars. The same dollars you and I agree have a certain value. Should we be bound to give him trillions of dollars for….what? I don’t think you can buy your confidence back. Money was designed (by the Chinese actually, centuries ago) to represent something tangible that has “value”: something that I have that you want or need. I believe the corruption of that basically sound tenet by allowing that same medium of exchange to represent nothing more than a piece of paper is where we are now. I believe we need to halt the buying and selling of confidence. That’s all the regulation the market needs. Futures, margin trading, commodities trading (except buying the actual commodity) all need to be halted. Our money MUST represent something tangible not an emotion or a feeling. Otherwise it has no real value at all. Ernie In an attempt to further an effort I started in an earlier blog I want to start a new thread of blogs here. The existing format not lending itself to an ongoing blog “thread,” the last effort got lost on the second page and, like so many others, was never heard from again. This will be an effort to continue that effort while keeping the issue in front of the regulars. In so doing I’m attempting to tap the same resource so many successful companies utilize to provide grist for the R&D mills. One of my company’s slogans is, “Our people are our greatest asset.” The same is true for our country. WE know what’s broken and many times we also know what we need to fix it.
With that said, I think I have a solution for the Social Security problem. It begins with the premise that people should be – and must be – responsible for themselves.
Fixing America: Social Security
Social Security must be privatized.
It would be, however, foolish to believe that everyone has the good sense to provide for his or her own future welfare. Some people simply are not capable of making good decisions. Some think they aren’t able to save the necessary amounts to provide for their futures. And let’s face it, some simply will choose not to make good decisions. How then do we deal with the inevitable situation that some people will become old without the resources to fund their “golden years?”
Privatization of Social Security does not mean doing completely away with the system. The government must mandate that every worker save no less then 15% of his pay. Since we have that level of taxation already, the transition should be relatively painless. We simply mandate the saving practice but leave the methodology to the individual and his employer.
A vast majority of American businesses already have a 401(k) benefit so no great change will be required to the existing business structure for most companies. The infrastructure is already in place. Certain regulatory measure must be included in the national mandate to insure we avoid Enron-esque scenarios but beyond that the Social Security Administration will largely become a thing of the past. (This may well be the difficult hitch in my plan. No government agency, once established, has ever completely disappeared from existence.)
I have been hung up on one problem with this plan up to today: the transition from where we are now to where we need to be. Getting from point A to point B presented a problem because for the millions of Americans currently relying on Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid simply can’t be “cut off” when this plan replaces the current one. A transitional period will be required.
To work out that transitional period I offer the following.
Beginning in 2010 a phase-in transitional phase will begin. In 2010 each employee and each employer will begin by replacing 1% each of the combined 15.3% to personal Social Security accounts held by the employer. The remaining 13% will continue to go into the federal SS fund to continue paying current SS recipients. In each succeeding year the percentage will increase until we’ve transitioned from the current system to the targeted privatized SS system.
At the same time we must begin working on the other end. In 2010 recipient entitlements will be frozen at current levels. Then in 2011 benefits for newly eligible recipients will be reduced by 2%. Retirees already on SS benefits will continue to be funded at their then-current levels and the newly eligible recipients will receive benefits at the levels they begin for their lifetimes. Each year’s new recipients’ benefits will be reduced by a corresponding percentage.
During the transition, the SS trust fund will necessarily be depleted as the benefits being paid out will exceed the funds being paid in but the depletion should occur at a relatively predictable pace that must be monitored to keep the system solvent during the transition. Once the transition is complete the system will be completely between the worker and employer to administer. Again, this should present no problem since the administrative function will simply be an adjunct to companies’ already existing structured benefits plans.
So…. Tell me where the plan has holes I haven’t considered and let’s work on filling those in.
Ernie
How will we make up our minds as voters in the 2008 Presidential Election? What criteria will you use to determine who you’ll pull the lever for about 60 days from today when you saunter into that voting booth?
Obviously there are the much-touted “issues” to consider: the economy, Iraq, healthcare costs and availability, energy, the wars on terrorism and drugs, the federal deficit and continuously growing national debt, illegal (and legal) immigration, NAFTA, CAFTA, national security, and on down the line.
But Lee Iacocca, in his new book, Where Have all the Leaders Gone, proposes his “Nine C’s” checklist to aid voters in unraveling the complex miasma of political speeches, promises and action of the available candidates. I’m sure Mr. Iacocca’s criteria alone are inadequate to determining who we should vote for in November but they sure go a long way toward making that decision both more logical and, hopefully, the one that will benefit our country and our society better.
Since I only have the hard copy of Mr. Iacocca’s book I’ll apologize and clarify that any typos or errors of omission in the following are mine, not the author’s.
“…my Nine C’s of Leadership:
& nbsp; Curiosity
& nbsp; Creativity
& nbsp; Communication
& nbsp; Character
& nbsp; Conviction
& nbsp; Charisma
& nbsp; Competence
& nbsp; Common Sense
“…What are the leadership qualities these times cry out for? I’m going to go out on a limb and name four in 2008, Curiosity, communication, character, and competence.
“CURIOSITY: We need an expansive leaser who will seek input from a wide range of people, including the contrarians. This leader is interested in mastering a global point of view and strives to understand what motivates people to seek progress around the world.
“COMMUNICATION: We need an open leader who doesn’t hide the bad news or motivate us with fear. This leader speaks the truth even when it’s hard to hear, and inspires us by asking us to share in the obligations of democracy.
“CHARACTER: We need a leader, honed by crisis, who demands equality of sacrifice, starting in the Oval Office.
“COMPETENCE: Finally, we need a leader who is committed to making America great again – not just in its ideals but in its factories, farms, communities and families.”
So… here’s my “scorecard”:
*Curiosity: This is a tough one and I fear I’m at something of a loss to call a winner. “Global point of view,” and “tries to understand what motivates people around the world.” IMO, it’s a tossup between McCain and Biden based on their respective foreign policy experience.
Creativity: Iacocca defines this as “Leadership is about managing change.” and “A leader has to … go out on a limb, be willing to try something different. You know, think outside the box.” Ok, Bush is probably the most NOT outside the box thinker our government has ever known. But as has been recently and frequently pointed out, Bush isn’t in the hunt this time around. I have to go with Palin here.
*Communication: Obviously Obama is the best orator of the bunch but as the author states in his first chapter, “I’m not talking about running off at the mouth or spouting sound bites. I’m talking about facing reality and telling the truth.” In this category, as with all of the others, Ron Paul is the unquestioned, without-a-doubt, hands down winner. But it’s as unfortunate that Dr. Paul won’t be on the November ballot as it is fortunate that GWB also won’t be. So of the four we do have to pick from, Palin wins again.
*Character: Ron Paul. No question. But again, he’s not a viable option. The first loser in the group we have to choose from: McCain. With Sarah Palin a strong runner-up.
Conviction: “That means knowing the difference between right and wrong and having the guts to do the right thing.” McCain wins mostly based on his military experience and history. Palin on her willingness to face off against those doing the wrong things regardless of which side of the aisle they sit on.
Charisma: Obama takes this one. “I’m not talking about being flashy. Charisma is the quality that makes people want to follow you.” While I think Obama definitely fits the criteria here, I think his charisma is more in the televangelist or lemming category than any serious leadership ability. I mean, televangelists and lemmings are leaders too, one just can't say much for their followers – but that’s just my opinion.
*Competence: “A leader has to be a problem solver, and the biggest problems we face as a nation seem to be on the back burner.” Man, did Lee get *this* right! We have inflation, a staggering national debt, wars in the Middle East that are financially strangling us even more, runaway illegal immigration issues and debilitating reliance on foreign oil. And what has Congress and the current administration done about these burning issues? They’ve raised the minimum wage. Ho hum. This is a toss-up again between McCain and Biden.
Common Sense: Is there any in politics these days?? Iacocca quotes Charlie Beacham in his book, “If you don’t know a dip of horsesh*t from a dip of vanilla ice cream, you’ll never make it.” Well, you might survive but I doubt it’s going to be a pleasant existence. Going on gut instincts alone here since I’ve never been hunting with any of these folks or had to get one of them to help me cement a well, it would seem to me that someone who’s raising a family, governing a state (Alaska, no less.) and still finds time to hunt the occasional moose wouldn’t have survived without a good bit of knowing the difference between moose scat and a mooseburger. Palin takes it.
So if I discount Ron Paul (who wins, at least by these criteria, by a country mile) and allow two points for a clear win and one each for a tie or strong second place finish, that’s Obama – 2 ; Biden – 2 ; McCain – 4 and Palin – 8. Although the McCain/Palin ticket may be reversed, it’s a landslide for the team. Considering his knowledge and experience though, it’s only fitting that McCain lead the team.
And considering John’s age, I sure feel a lot better about having Ms. Palin being only “a heartbeat away from the presidency.”
Ernie
I started to write this on the current thread where there's so much political bandying back and forth going on but it didn't seem much appropriate to "Writer Says Obama Has Ties to Terrorism." So let's start a trend here. I challenge all of you to describe a problem America has today. Now. And what you'd advocate to solve that problem. Give me a non-partisan solution to one of the problems you see as a serious issue in 2009. Obviously many of these issus will lead down a side road or two. Some will probably affect or be affected by hundreds on ancillary causes and effects. That, I think, is one reason our problems seem to be growing every day. It's a very complex system with every issue affecting almost every other issue. It's so easy to look at the big picture and get so discouraged we're tempted to simply throw up our hands and capitulate. But we have to start somewhere, yes? Let's start here and take the issue on one at a time. But just as I tell my guys at work, "Don't come to me with a problem if you don't at least have a suggestion for a solution." I'll start. Capitalism is at the very heart of our society. Businesses provide jobs, jobs provide people with incentives to work to survive and also to better their lives and those of their children. Businesses also provide incentive for people to invest in those businesses in hopes of "sharing the wealth" in the form of dividends and increased value of the stocks they hold, their shares of the businesses. That's what's right with the system we have. But there are things wrong with it as well and one of those things is executive compensation. When a hometown boy decides to take the big step of starting a new business it's likely he's his only employee. If the business is successful he may hire a few people, paying them what he can afford and still manage to keep the good ones from abandoning his business for greener employment pastures. As the business grows it's only to be expected that the one who put his money, his reputation and his livelihood on the line have a larger stake in the profits than his newly hired employees. It's not unusual for the business owner to enjoy a salary twice or three times the new employee. However, in 2005 in this country many company executives (not owners, mind you, but a corporate executive hired to run the company) made upwards of FOUR HUNDRED times the average worker. Many of them do so while the stock value of the companies they run plummets into oblivion then leave with multi-millioin dollar severance packages while employees are left to watch their retirement hopes dashed on the rocks. It's just not right. Government intervention is NOT the answer. It simply won't work for government to tell a business what it's employees can or can't make nor, I believe, is it right for the government to attempt to tax a business into corporate responsibility. So what's the answer? I propose that any executive, CEO, CFO, COO or board member be given a "starting salary" commensurate with employee compensation of the company for which he seeks to serve. Perhaps the formula would be simply total compensation divided by the total number of employees to arrive at an average annual salary. Let's say that average salary is $100K. The executive would then be hired for that salary for his first year only. In addition he or she would be given a percentage of the company's stock, say 5% or so, to be held in his name BUT that he would be forbidden to sell. Again, our CEO makes $100K his first year and gets, say, 5000 shares of company stock. In succeeding years however, he has NO salary and his compensation is based solely on his stock's value. If the stock returns 10% the executive would be allowed to sell an amount of stock equal to the increase in value of his company stock as his compensation for his second and succeeding years. It's called "Pay for Performance." As a retirement and/or severance package the executive can take his stock with him when he retires or seeks other employment. If he's ruined the comany and the stock's not worth the paper it's printed on, c'est la vie. Guess he won't be retiring to that villa in the south of France *this* year...... I think something similar might solve the federal deficit quicker than we could blink our collective eye. The feds collect taxes from us and they get to divy up what's left after paying the bills - including paying down the deficit by not less that 5% every year. And they can't print more to make up any shortfall. Want to see a budget deficit AND pocket lining politicians disappear in the same whisp of smoke?? Ernie Well, ‘tis the season…. Yes, it’s election season again and as we all know, the candidates are in full rut mating regalia looking for “friends.” As any psychologist can tell you, one of the easiest and quickest ways to make new friends is to find a common enemy. Enter Big Oil, stage left.
In the current flux surrounding crude oil prices and the ever increasing cost of gasoline, the oil companies reporting record profits have emerged as one of the favorite whipping boys for politcos and candidates who are finding ready allies among citizens hard hit by $4/gal gasoline. Works like a charm too as long as certain facts are ignored, which they certainly are by those wishing to exploit the common-enemy avenue to secure more votes in November.
Here’s the kicker: Petroleum prices are regulated by a little thing we in the capitalistic society of America like to call “Supply and Demand.”
I know. I know. It’s a shocker and completely unheard of in a capitalistic economy but suck it up, my friends, it’s the facts. __ [click] _/_ “Sarcasm mode is now disengaged.”
Even more correctly, petroleum prices are set by current events and how those events are likely to affect the future price of a barrel of oil. That’s called futures trading on the commodity markets and I’ll leave the discussion of how acceptable that practice is to the SEC and their ilk but several events can affect what price these speculators are willing to pay for oil at some time in the future and, as we all should know, the resulting price of gasoline, diesel, heating oil, fertilizer, plastics and hundreds of other products derived from crude oil – including the Vaseline so many of us feel in need of presently. And again, I leave that image to your imagination.
The events affecting crude prices include such things as: social unrest or political strife in oil producing/exporting countries, revelations of significant new discoveries of petroleum reserves that promise increasing supplies, emerging economies indicating increasing demand and promising supplies of alternative sources of new energy sources.
Let’s take a look at these:
Social unrest or political strife in oil producing/exporting countries: Need I even mention the Iraq War, terrorism, continuing social and political unrest in the Middle East (like, 3000 years worth of unrest)? All with the net effect of increasing petroleum prices.
New discoveries that promise to increase supplies: There are several: ANWR, offshore reserves in the Pacific and Atlantic, Russian and Chinese emerging production, discoveries of oil shales in N. Dakota, Montana, Wyoming and Colorado. Unfortunately our congress has recently disallowed the exploration and development of known petroleum reserves in ANWR and off both coasts. And the development of the heavy oil shales in the Midwest will require technologies and methodologies that are more expensive than those for current “routine” drilling and production. That being the case, prices will have to remain elevated for these discoveries to prove viable for the oil companies to pursue with some expectation of profit. So the net effect of events that would normally tend to send prices downward have instead been rendered, at best, moot by our government or have even become a force sending crude prices higher yet.
Emerging economies: China, Russia, India, Argentina, and a host of others. While China and Russia are emerging as suppliers of oil and gas, the new demands they’re placing on the market as emerging economies have outstripped the supplies they’re adding to it. Net effect – increasing oil prices.
Finally there is the much touted development of alternative energy sources and supplies. In short, it is to smile. The fact remains that current alternatives are 1) barely competitive with crude oil at current levels, 2) no where near a point in their development to even significantly affect the demand for petroleum in the near term and 3) largely unproven (as in the case of the current legislation to increase ethanol production when we are not even yet sure that it’s a viable alternative). Net effect – increasing oil prices.
Doesn’t leave much room for the expectation of falling oil prices does it?
Now some will probably argue that I make these arguments in light of my affinity to the oil industry. I freely admit that the energy industry has provided my living and sustenance for my family for nearly thirty years but nothing could be further from the truth than stating I cite these facts out of personal interest. With any luck I plan to retire from “the patch” in a year, give or take, and I have every confidence that the oil business will continue to make my pension for as long as I’m bound by this mortal coil. I would like to see the development of alternative “green” energy sources, particularly nuclear, as much as the next person – well, ok. Maybe not as much as your die-hard tree hugger but still, $4/gallon costs me as much as it does the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker. But I have no concerns that my pension is in danger from these sources because 1) my company will adapt as it always has and actually is currently and has been for years the leader in technological advances within the energy industry and 2) oil isn’t going anywhere anytime soon except into the same fuel tanks it’s been going into for 70 years. My posting of these facts is simply a matter of following that age old advice to write about what you know.
So next time you’re wincing from the $80 price tag for fueling your Suburban, if you feel the need to vent somewhere, thank an environmentalist – not an oil company.
More about where your gasoline dollar goes in the next installment.
I’m sure you’re all waiting with bated breath…. :-)
Ernie
...And now for something completely different. Now this may start off like just another one of those feel-good pieces but.... stick with me here. I think you'll find it - interesting to say the least. :-) Got a letter from my parents today - specifically from my mom. Yeah, I know. In this day and age of computers, the internet, cell phones and the like a letter is a bit old fashioned but you have to realize my folks are in their 70's and would hardly know how to turn on a computer. They did finally break down and get a cell phone but beyond dial, talk and hang up, they're lost. The appointment calendar, camera and personalized ring tones go completely to waste. It is more normal for them to call for a chat but there was a reason this time for the snail mail. Mom sent along a page from the local newspaper (circulation probably somewhere around 12 or 13). It seems it's that time of year for the Beaver (OK) County Fair again so the paper had done a nostalgia piece about the fair that was held in 1971. Why they chose that year I have no idea. It's not as though this will be the 25th or 30th or 50th anniversary of that one after all. Maybe it's just that they found these pictures in the archives and decided '71 was a good year. Well in 1971, I was a junior in HS in the booming metropolis of Forgan OK (pop. 450 - on a good day and all the kids were in school). I turned 17 the previous October and since the area schools always let out on Friday when the County Fair was going on, my best friend and I were there tasting the chili contest entries and doing some county fair judging of the area livestock. (And no, I don't mean the beef cattle - if you get my drift....) As we were strolling the midway we heard an announcement on the PA that a much-anticipated contest was forming up and entrants should make their way to the arena, which doubled as the rodeo arena during the fair and the 1/4 mile stock car race track every other Saturday night. Mike and I decided, "What the hell?" and meandered over to the grandstand and put our names in the hat. You've probably already figured out the end of this story and you're right. We had to enter in the Men's Division since we were both 17 which, it would seem, would have put us at a slight disadvantage but when it came my turn the stars aligned, satellites linked up and.... well, the western OK wind gusted just so and my entry sailed 150' straight out from the toe-line, in bounds and bounced in one piece to a stop in the soft dust. When it was measured and everyone had finished I'd beaten #2 by a good fifty feet. There were pictures to be taken for the paper and they wanted a quote. (I have no idea what I said...) Cheers and applause and the awarding of the "trophy." It was all quite heady to an adolescent who'd had quite a different expectation of the outcome for the day. (Something that included a trip to the infamous sand hills after dark had been more on my mind than fame and fortune.) Drunk on the adoratoin of my fans and not a little nauseous (from the chili, I think) I never did make it to the sand hills that evening but all in all it was my fifteen minutes of fame. With that I give you: ErnieCash, Cow Chip Throwing Champion of the World, 1971. Oh, the ignominy of it all! A friend of mine was killed on Tuesday..... by a cell phone. I was notified by a company wide email yesterday that one of my fellow co-workers had died in a tragic accident near Midland. While I can't claim the gentleman as a close friend, I did know him. We had met at probably half a dozen company functions over our 20-plus careers with the company and I'd found him a sensible and friendly man. He had chosen to take early retirement last year after 29 years with us. On Tuesday he was out riding his bicycle on the generous shoulder of a west Texas highway when he was struck from behind by a pickup almost certainly doing at least the posted 55 mph speed limit. We're talking West Texas here, folks. If any of you have been to the Midland-Odessa area you know that it's so flat out there that you can stand on almost any highway on a Wednesday and see Sunday coming in one direction and going in the other. There's not a dozen trees between Midland and Canadian border. This spot was no different. So why was my friend killed after less than a year of enjoying the life he'd worked so long to be able to enjoy? A cell phone. The driver of the pickup is obviously such an extremely busy Type-A personality that he cannot take time out of his busy schedule to devote his faculties to operating a 5,000 lb. pickup traveling nearly a mile a minute. And now a blameless gentleman is dead by his hand, and a wife, children and grandchildren left behind to grieve Jerry's senseless passing. If you're one of the hundreds of Victoria drivers I see everyday doing the same thing, please, do yourself and the rest of us a favor: hire yourself a chauffeur before you kill yourself or someone else. Ernie I am soooo afraid I may have to vote for a Democratic candidate for president this year. Far from doing so by virtue of any confidence in either of the contender’s policies or platforms to fix America’s problems, it would be more the decision of an “if-you-can’t-beat-‘em-might-as -well-join-‘em” desperation.
At age 13 I started working on my grandparents’ farm in Missouri during summer breaks. Since that time I've continuously worked part or full time but since my years in college I have never been less than full time employed for more than one week at a stretch and not more than three weeks combined. I've held dozens of and worked as many as 140 hours in a single week; rarely less than forty unless I was on vacation.
I was the first of my parents’ eight children to attend college and worked at various times during those years as a bowling alley mechanic, janitor, convenience store clerk then manager, grocery store sacker and checker and even the erstwhile gas pump jockey. (That was back in the days when there were still full service gas stations! Remember those?) In the summers I returned to my roots working for local farmers chopping cotton, herding sheep (the dumbest animals I have *ever* seen) and harvesting the milo and cotton crops around Lubbock TX.
Three years out of college I landed a position with my current employer. From truck driver/ equipment operator to crew supervisor to computer security officer, I worked and studied my way to an engineering position, HazMat specialist, service manager, safety and compliance coordinator and finally sales and service quality coordinator, I’ve held my job with my current employer for thirty years come July 17th of the current year.
All told that’s some 40 plus years of earning my keep and I’ve always held to my grandfather’s advice to save something for a rainy day. Due in large part to my maternal grandfather’s wisdom and urgings, I began putting a portion of my wages aside almost as soon as I began earning some. His advice and my attention to it over the years have paid off. Far from becoming rich, I’ve managed – or at least thought I had – to put back enough to be able to comfortably retire in early 2009 at the age of 55 and start doing a lot more of what I want to do – golf, devote more time to volunteer work, pursue part time my love of the law through a paralegal certificate and travel – rather than what I’ve always felt I had to do – work and support myself and my family. After forty years of long hours at all times of the days and nights, I feel like I deserve it. That I’m *entitled* to enjoy the fruits of my labors and frugal decisions and to have the time to give something to society.
Little did I ever suspect that my plans would be waylaid by the growing segment of society that has, over the years, come to feel “entitled* to share the fruits of my labor through no effort of their own. Nor did I in my wildest dreams fear the government I voted for would legislate that those who have done far less for themselves are *entitled* to enjoy as much or more than I, the one who labored to earn them. Oh there have always been those who want the proverbial “something for nothing” and have neither the motivation to work for it nor the self pride nor integrity to care much how they get it or from where. Some such have become rich by rising to power in the Enrons and WorldComs and undoubtedly many who haven’t been found out yet (and oddly enough it is the government that convicted some of these after themselves writing what could quite correctly be entitled the Kenneth Lay Economics Playbook! Except that Ken took from the working man and just kept it instead of wasting most of it).
But increasingly there are those who simply rely on the government to hand it to them. Sadly and to me, shockingly, there is certainly no lack of elected officials willing to trade handouts for votes. Since these elected leaders – and I use the term only in the loosest sense of the word – are allegedly elected by a majority of the voters it’s not surprising that they attend to the wants and the desires of the largest bloc(s) of voters. This then leads me to conclude that evidently those wanting more *entitlements* from Mother Government have overtaken the number of Americans who believe they can and should make a better life for themselves by their own efforts.
It’s not right. It’s not right that so many of us have worked hard for so long to have to stand by and let government take what we’ve earned and buy the votes of those who want and feel entitled, simply by existing, to an even share of what we’ve earned. I have no malice toward helping to support the truly less fortunate. I would prefer to give assistance for those truly in need voluntarily though than to have it wrested from my paycheck to be disbursed by an uncommitted and inefficient system to recipients who, as often as not, are prevaricating, posturing and pouting to get it. True giving feels good and begets the desire to do more. Socialistic redistribution breeds mostly animosity and grudging contempt.
So Decision 2008 boils down to the question of capitulating to the masses who suffer some syndrome or other, some “ology” this or disorder that or one of the million other victimology symptoms we’ve concocted over the past fifty years to shirk responsibility (in the old less educated days we had terms like “slow” and “lazy”) or remaining true to the belief that we *should* reap what we sow and hoping that, at some point, the government will agree.
My heart tells me I’d rather die with integrity than live with ignominy. My brain keeps trying to convince me I should just join the throng, vote Democratic and apply for the assistance that will be there until they bankrupt us all fiscally and morally.
Unfortunately the alternative that claims to be Republican is little better with a disastrous foreign policy and no clue about economics.
Sometimes I think it will have to come down to “prying my cold dead finger” off the trigger, not in response to some gun control legislation but in pursuit of the revolution for honest government.
Ernie
Ok, so I have now officially joined the ranks of rambling bloggers. Shoot me... I wanted to post a notice though, about an event being planned for Victoria and get a feel for how it may be received. In association with a couple of charity groups we are involved in planning an event to raise funds for Golden Crescent CASA, the Boys and Girls Clubs and possibly the American Heart Association. At the same time, we hope to raise awareness, understanding and tolerance between a couple of groups that are very much in the news today and, at best, at an uneasy peace; the American people and the Muslim community. Hakeem Olajuwon has begun a program called "Building Bridges" in the Houston area and wants to expand the program. Through a mutual friend, we met with Mr. Olajuwon and a couple of representatives of the Iman Academy of Houston to discuss the possibility of his coming to Victoria for a fund raising event. We're in the process of finalizing a dinner and forum at Victoria Country Club for approximately three hundred people to meet this former Houston Rockets center and discuss the Muslim/American relationship with him and Dr. Hamed Ghazali of the Iman Academy. A second event is also in the planning stages for a preceeding event to be held on the same day (as yet to be determined but hopefully sometime in May). Mr. Olajuwon may be able to convince a few of his teammates to participate in an exhibition game. There will be memorabilia autographed by Hakeem and other Rockets available for a donation to the charities. We're also considering auctioning off opportunities to go for a little one-on-one with the Rockets or to have your team play a little roundball with them. I'm sure too that Hakeem will want to do a short talk about the Muslim community. For all you regular readers out there, let me know how you feel about such an event. We hope the forum will offer an opportunity for attendees to pose questions to and about the non-reactionary Muslim community that will serve to further understanding between.... the people we share the planet with. All proceeds from these events will be donated to the charities mentioned above. Thanks, Ernie 
1
|
