According to the experts, much of this country’s wealth – what’s left of it – is concentrated in the hands of relatively few. How do you pry those funds out of the death grip of those gotrocks who have them? They’re hanging on to it for fear they’ll lose it. Of course, if the economy collapses altogether, whatever they have will be worthless. The wealth has to be put into circulation somehow.
What’s needed is a broad-based incentive program for people to spend money. Apparently, lower prices aren’t good enough, nor are appeals to patriotism. There needs to be a bonus for parting with cash. How about tax credits for buying a car, or big home appliances? Is a flat-screen TV a qualifying home appliance? What would be the harm? How about credits for travel or eating out?
The private sector has been doing things like this for decades, maybe centuries, and it works. I just signed up for a program whereby a company gives me airline miles for using my credit card to eat at participating restaurants. Some of my favorites are on the list. I’m already hearing you: a) I shouldn’t be using a credit card, and b) I shouldn’t be eating out in these times. But with the airline miles I might be able to take a nice trip someday – or not. I’m at least thinking about the deal, though – why? Because I’m getting something extra. The bonus in these programs is often unrelated to the product they’re based on. The kicker with the restaurant rewards program is that there’s a time limit to qualify for extra airline miles – if I don’t spend within a certain period, I lose those miles. So there’s both a carrot and a stick.
What about all these executives that got their zillion dollar bonuses when their companies were failing? You can’t take their millions away from them. But is there a way to basically force them to spend it? That’s a penalty you’d think they could live with. Get them to put their money in circulation somehow. Whether we like it or not, much of our economy is based on consumption. Hold guns to their heads and make them consume.
Here’s something to think about. What happens if all of us conspicuous consumers get used to the idea of living with less? Then I guess we’ll be in real economic trouble.
There, now I’ve said it.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Properly Placed Pride
A few months ago, before Michelle Obama became First Lady, she got into trouble with some folks for saying that her husband’s candidacy for President represented the first time in her adult life that she had been proud of her country. So how did you feel before that, the critics asked.
Well, I’m proud to be an American, but it’s a little hard to be proud of some of our recent behavior. Let’s face it, folks – the current world economic crisis is basically our fault. Wasn’t it we who invented credit default swaps and sub-prime mortgages? Didn’t more than a few of us lie on those home loan apps? Didn’t our regulatory system fail miserably, with Bernard Madoff as the poster boy? Haven’t our auto companies been making vehicles with no future, and haven’t we been buying them? If you want to expand the view somewhat, don’t our baseball players take steroids and our Olympic gold medalists smoke pot? And single mothers have 14 children? And not long ago, wasn’t torturing prisoners of war OK?
But the good news is, we can still be a role-model for the rest of the world, as we admit our mistakes and work ourselves out of the hole we find ourselves in. Those are hallmarks of being American. We’ve done it before, and we can do it again.
And of course, there’s pilot Chesley Sullenberger and his crew. So we still have a few things left to be proud of.
There, now I’ve said it.
Well, I’m proud to be an American, but it’s a little hard to be proud of some of our recent behavior. Let’s face it, folks – the current world economic crisis is basically our fault. Wasn’t it we who invented credit default swaps and sub-prime mortgages? Didn’t more than a few of us lie on those home loan apps? Didn’t our regulatory system fail miserably, with Bernard Madoff as the poster boy? Haven’t our auto companies been making vehicles with no future, and haven’t we been buying them? If you want to expand the view somewhat, don’t our baseball players take steroids and our Olympic gold medalists smoke pot? And single mothers have 14 children? And not long ago, wasn’t torturing prisoners of war OK?
But the good news is, we can still be a role-model for the rest of the world, as we admit our mistakes and work ourselves out of the hole we find ourselves in. Those are hallmarks of being American. We’ve done it before, and we can do it again.
And of course, there’s pilot Chesley Sullenberger and his crew. So we still have a few things left to be proud of.
There, now I’ve said it.
Monday, February 9, 2009
In Crises, We're All Local
In an earlier post, I mentioned how the Christmas gift of an Internet radio had changed my life -- or at least my media consumption habits. It has reinforced my faith in the value of local radio.
I have spent the past few days listening to the live stream of 3AW 693 in Melbourne, Australia. The station has been providing continuous coverage of the devastating brush fires which, as of this writing, have taken more than 170 lives. As is the practice with many American news/talk stations, the usual programming has been suspended to devote full attention to the fire coverage. The only difference, perhaps, is that the station is running its full load of commercials, including spots for car dealerships, real estate companies and even funeral parlors. If that seems insensitive, it doesn’t seem to bother the audience, who recognize their local station as a vital resource.
While cell phone, messaging and Twitter might otherwise be a source of competition in newsgathering, communication out of the worst fire-affected areas has been difficult. Callers to the station who are put on the air ask about the fate of loved ones in the disaster zone with whom contact has been lost, and often, other callers phone in to report that this one or that one is safe.
While the news reports have been full of compounding tragedy, the fact that the station is there and doing its job is a calming community influence. All of the talk-show hosts are filling their regular shifts. Even the weekend specialty hosts who normally deal with gardening and other subjects have shifted gears and turned into news moderators.
Admittedly, the BBC, CNN and other major news outlets have been offering full and accurate coverage of the disaster, but there’s no substitute for hearing how the locals do it. And with live Internet streaming, this local coverage is now available worldwide.
While the accents of those on the air are different, the coverage strategies are the same – as, at bottom, are the stories: the tears, the heroism, the generosity toward those most impacted. The next phase, of course, will include the effort to catch arsonists and to make a review of evacuation policies and brush clearing rules in residential areas. Welcome to California.
We have a lot to learn from each other and a lot to share, and Internet streaming shows just how critical traditional local sources of news are to a community. The method of distribution may be new, but there’s no question in my mind that what we call local radio is here to stay.
And let’s let the Australians know that we may be on the other side of the world, but we hear them.
There, now I’ve said it.
I have spent the past few days listening to the live stream of 3AW 693 in Melbourne, Australia. The station has been providing continuous coverage of the devastating brush fires which, as of this writing, have taken more than 170 lives. As is the practice with many American news/talk stations, the usual programming has been suspended to devote full attention to the fire coverage. The only difference, perhaps, is that the station is running its full load of commercials, including spots for car dealerships, real estate companies and even funeral parlors. If that seems insensitive, it doesn’t seem to bother the audience, who recognize their local station as a vital resource.
While cell phone, messaging and Twitter might otherwise be a source of competition in newsgathering, communication out of the worst fire-affected areas has been difficult. Callers to the station who are put on the air ask about the fate of loved ones in the disaster zone with whom contact has been lost, and often, other callers phone in to report that this one or that one is safe.
While the news reports have been full of compounding tragedy, the fact that the station is there and doing its job is a calming community influence. All of the talk-show hosts are filling their regular shifts. Even the weekend specialty hosts who normally deal with gardening and other subjects have shifted gears and turned into news moderators.
Admittedly, the BBC, CNN and other major news outlets have been offering full and accurate coverage of the disaster, but there’s no substitute for hearing how the locals do it. And with live Internet streaming, this local coverage is now available worldwide.
While the accents of those on the air are different, the coverage strategies are the same – as, at bottom, are the stories: the tears, the heroism, the generosity toward those most impacted. The next phase, of course, will include the effort to catch arsonists and to make a review of evacuation policies and brush clearing rules in residential areas. Welcome to California.
We have a lot to learn from each other and a lot to share, and Internet streaming shows just how critical traditional local sources of news are to a community. The method of distribution may be new, but there’s no question in my mind that what we call local radio is here to stay.
And let’s let the Australians know that we may be on the other side of the world, but we hear them.
There, now I’ve said it.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Clearing the Raised Bar
No, Michael, they won’t let you do it: puff away on a bong, like thousands of other people your age. You might squeak into a Cabinet post if you didn’t figure your taxes right – but only after a considerable dose of red-face time. But when you’re up on a pedestal, it comes with the territory.
How many of us lower lights would pass a drug test, or survive a tax audit? Relatively few, I expect. But some of the laws have become so complicated or even hypocritical that beating them is kind of a game. Pot is a no-no, but if someone took a picture of Michael sipping a vodka tonic, that wouldn’t be held against him – even though alcohol is many times worse than marijuana in terms of the number of lives lost. And with our tax laws as complicated as they are, does the average bear compute the consequences of everything that happens in life before filling out a return?
But those are the perks of being a lower light: You can get away with stuff, and no one is really going to care. It all may not seem fair, on the surface, but I submit that it is. Smoking pot may be a peccadillo down here below, but if you’re a star and you take big money from those who think it’s a big deal, you have to play by their rules. When it comes to Cabinet positions, the consequences of not doing so fall not only on the nominees, but also on those doing the nominating and the vetting.
The fact is, role-models are more of a necessity today than ever before. If you don’t think we value them – think about all the attention we’re giving pilot Chesley Sullenberger and his crew for their heroism after the Hudson River airline accident. Or just look again at the pictures of almost two million people who stood out for hours on a recent cold winter morning in Washington, D.C. to watch something extraordinary happen.
If you find yourself up on that pedestal, the world will give you a lot – but get used to the idea that the world expects a lot in return, too.
There, now I’ve said it.
How many of us lower lights would pass a drug test, or survive a tax audit? Relatively few, I expect. But some of the laws have become so complicated or even hypocritical that beating them is kind of a game. Pot is a no-no, but if someone took a picture of Michael sipping a vodka tonic, that wouldn’t be held against him – even though alcohol is many times worse than marijuana in terms of the number of lives lost. And with our tax laws as complicated as they are, does the average bear compute the consequences of everything that happens in life before filling out a return?
But those are the perks of being a lower light: You can get away with stuff, and no one is really going to care. It all may not seem fair, on the surface, but I submit that it is. Smoking pot may be a peccadillo down here below, but if you’re a star and you take big money from those who think it’s a big deal, you have to play by their rules. When it comes to Cabinet positions, the consequences of not doing so fall not only on the nominees, but also on those doing the nominating and the vetting.
The fact is, role-models are more of a necessity today than ever before. If you don’t think we value them – think about all the attention we’re giving pilot Chesley Sullenberger and his crew for their heroism after the Hudson River airline accident. Or just look again at the pictures of almost two million people who stood out for hours on a recent cold winter morning in Washington, D.C. to watch something extraordinary happen.
If you find yourself up on that pedestal, the world will give you a lot – but get used to the idea that the world expects a lot in return, too.
There, now I’ve said it.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Halfway Meetings
No one can say that our new President hasn’t been breaking new political ground, schmoozing the Republicans in Congress. Cocktails and Super Bowl parties are just part of the process. It’s behavior we haven’t seen from the White House, at least in a very, very long time.
But the Republicans, while they appreciate the respect being shown, aren’t budging, at least publicly, when it comes to the economic stimulus. Mr. Obama’s plan didn’t get a single GOP vote in the House. So what’s missing?
Compromise has to go further than a cocktail party or a meaningful chat. To many, the word compromise means, we’ll get along just fine if you just do it my way. But it all comes down to: What is my side going to give up to get your support? The congressional Republicans genuinely appreciate President Obama for his outreach, and he has loads of popular support, but it doesn’t mean they’re going along with something they don’t believe will work. What are the Democrats willing to give up?
We all agree that sacrifice in these times is a good idea, as long as we don’t have to do the sacrificing. Wall Street may be largely responsible for tubing the entire world’s economy, bur when it’s suggested that compensation limits be imposed on firms taking bailout money, what we get back is, you don’t understand the Wall Street pay structure, that bonuses are like the tips waiters get in restaurants. In like manner, when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to save a billion or two by calling on California state workers to swallow two unpaid furlough days a month, their unions head for court.
So while the boat is sinking, most of the passengers expect the other guy to pick up the bailing can – after all, wasn’t it the other guy who punched the hole in the boat in the first place? Everyone’s ankles are wet now – soon, it will be their knees.
The problem is, all those things we believe we’re absolutely entitled to are only there by mutual agreement and based on conditions that may not apply at this moment. Are we all prepared to give a little – give up a little – to get something back, like survival? You’d think when you consider the alternative, the choice would be clear.
There, now I’ve said it.
But the Republicans, while they appreciate the respect being shown, aren’t budging, at least publicly, when it comes to the economic stimulus. Mr. Obama’s plan didn’t get a single GOP vote in the House. So what’s missing?
Compromise has to go further than a cocktail party or a meaningful chat. To many, the word compromise means, we’ll get along just fine if you just do it my way. But it all comes down to: What is my side going to give up to get your support? The congressional Republicans genuinely appreciate President Obama for his outreach, and he has loads of popular support, but it doesn’t mean they’re going along with something they don’t believe will work. What are the Democrats willing to give up?
We all agree that sacrifice in these times is a good idea, as long as we don’t have to do the sacrificing. Wall Street may be largely responsible for tubing the entire world’s economy, bur when it’s suggested that compensation limits be imposed on firms taking bailout money, what we get back is, you don’t understand the Wall Street pay structure, that bonuses are like the tips waiters get in restaurants. In like manner, when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to save a billion or two by calling on California state workers to swallow two unpaid furlough days a month, their unions head for court.
So while the boat is sinking, most of the passengers expect the other guy to pick up the bailing can – after all, wasn’t it the other guy who punched the hole in the boat in the first place? Everyone’s ankles are wet now – soon, it will be their knees.
The problem is, all those things we believe we’re absolutely entitled to are only there by mutual agreement and based on conditions that may not apply at this moment. Are we all prepared to give a little – give up a little – to get something back, like survival? You’d think when you consider the alternative, the choice would be clear.
There, now I’ve said it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)