Thought for the Day

It Takes a Village. That phrase is used often in public discourse. It refers to the cooperative, even collaborative actions of a community dealing with common issues. Practical solutions come from being close to the problem in question. Sharing the task and duty with others builds camaraderie and commitment to the desired results. Trial and error will tweak the methods until the desired result is attained.

Perhaps we can use this approach for other problems we face in common but at a farther distance?

I wonder what those might be?

May 16, 2015

The Rights of BP?

I’m still upset with British Petroleum. They have global operations in oil discovery, recovery, refining and distribution. They have operating agreements and contracts with many nations to accomplish their work. They are a major provider in the supply chain of energy products, mostly oil and its many by products, as well as natural gas.

I’m sure they are a reliable partner in their operations. But there are questions to be asked and answered.

In 2010 BP’s oil rig, Deepwater Horizon, exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. The rig sank 5000 feet to the ocean floor. Eleven crew were killed. In a space of 87 days an estimated 3.2 million barrels of crude oil had spewed into the Gulf. The site of this disaster is 42 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Believed to be the worst oil spill in the history of the US, coastal damage extended from Florida to Texas befouling beaches and any business operations (retail or commercial) relying on those beaches. Worse still was the ecological disaster wreaked on fish and fowl life in the region as well as the delicate sand/soil and flora Eco systems that protect marine life and land masses along the Gulf coast.

In response to the disaster our federal government asked BP to fund a $20 billion recovery fund for businesses and communities damaged by the oil spill. Five years later the fund has yet to be fully disbursed to claimants. BP also pledged $10 billion to reclaim the oil and restore Eco systems as best they could. Whether all of those funds have been fully deployed on their mission is not known to me. However, it is known that much of the ecological chaos from the spill remains to be cleaned up.

Now comes the news that BP is appealing some damage claims of its Gulf oil spill.

I beg your pardon? What about the havoc Gulf coast communities and businesses endured and still have unpaid claims? What about the enormous ecological damage sustained in the region which continues to ask for help with the problems?

The risk of deep water oil drilling is huge. Yes the rewards are also huge, and those rewards are felt by society as well as the owners of the oil corporations that take on the financial risk of exploration, discovery and recovery. But so are the risks felt by everyone. The price of oil and its by products are not fully reflective of that risk.

The Deepwater Horizon was thought to be a high quality, high tech rig. It turned out otherwise. BP and its contractors were proven to have taken shortcuts that increased the risk of failure. The shortcuts were to reduce costs. Instead they increased costs exponentially. Risk assumed; loss realized.

The issue here, however, is the whole cost to the American society for the loss incurred by the corporation. So far their cost is $30 billion. The entire cost, however, is likely to exceed $50 billion. Who makes up the difference?

And yet BP is appealing damage awards to claimants. That is truly a paradigm of chutzpah! The nerve of this company to be claiming it is a hurt party! The nerve!

Energy is a vital topic to the well being of the global community. Energy supplies must be plentiful and reliable. They also must be ecologically viable, both in extracting the supplies, and the use of the supplies. Is the planet better off with this form of energy?

That is a large question that must be asked, and the answers developing over the past 100 years increasingly point to a large negative. Oil-based energy is a net liability to the global community. It is time to find replacement forms of energy. Physics and other scientific disciplines are tracking energy sources for the future. How soon will they be ready to supplant the role of oil? Perhaps it is too early to say, but it is also true to report that oil interests are slowing the acquisition of those new forms of energy. They have much to lose if oil is replaced by another dominant energy form.

Maybe it is time to turn this critical task over to academic consortia? Let them research, discover and propose the best solution for the long term? This may damage asset values for oil companies, but who knows what they would gain if they were part of the solution rather than the obstructionist?

The energy free market is encumbered by too many risk-limiting subsidies. It is not a free market in reality. We the people are actually taking on the risk, not the oil producers. It is time that governments protect their publics against this unconscionable risk.

Researchers to the rescue, please! Let the free market of ideas and discovery rule in this matter. With proper government protections we may actually find a solution to the big energy questions. The trick is to ask the big questions and honestly look for the best answers.

May 15, 2015

 

Trusting Government

Well, this is one hell of a topic to tackle. Think about it – we trust our very lives to police and fire personnel everyday. We don’t even think about it. They are there when we need them in disasters, accidents, fires, explosions, riots and crime scenes. They take charge of the scene. They immediately restore order and save lives. They administer health care and transport to hospitals. They catalog our names, roles in and at the scene, and begin the documentation that will later be used to understand what happened and why. This is detailed work. This is also dangerous work. Their lives are on the line just as ours are as victims.

Extraordinary effort, training and judgment are required of these responders. I think we take them for granted. We also expect them to place their lives on the line to protect us. This may never happen to us, or once in our lifetime, but for the responders it is frequent. Each situation is a hairy one.

For some reason we expect their devotion to our needs and yet we pay them what? And do we provide medical care, health insurance and retirement benefits in accord with their spectacular service? Well, that depends on the figures at budget time, doesn't it? Most often we attempt to get these incredible services at the lowest cost, forgetting what these people bring to the table daily to serve and protect us.

I’m embarrassed by all of this. I think we owe so much to these people it is impossible to calculate what we ought to pay them. I want their lives to be as meaningful as I hope mine will be. I want them to be as happy as possible in spite of the terrors they are subjected to. And I want them to know they are respected by us, the taxpaying public.

On a daily basis we are served by armies of public servants – teachers, doctors, nurses, military personnel, researchers, statisticians, writers, clerks, computer system managers and developers. All are on the mission to serve the public in ways the rest of us cannot possibly understand or appreciate. But when budget time comes around we somehow devalue these people.

I worked for the University of Illinois for 17 years. I loved working for the institution and its people. The work we accomplished provided value added miracles to the lives of each student, their families, their employers, and their communities to say nothing about the state of Illinois. We took our jobs seriously. What we did mattered in the broader scheme of life and community. We couldn’t accurately map our results, but we took it on faith that our efforts mattered.

Cynics would say that all public employees are feeders at the public trough and suspect. But then I think of the people who staff the courts, the parole offices, the rehab centers for all kinds of addictive behaviors, the detention centers for youth who are woefully off track. Who cares for these people? Who attempts to salvage them from the pits of hell if their problems are ignored and allowed to grow and fester? Someone needs to. And that job belongs to society as a whole.

Not all tasks belong to government. But government is our social conscience and needs to be aware of problems, potential solutions, and the resources to address the same. Some resources are voluntary; others are charitable organizations; still others are religious communities doing their good works. But when families fail to contain the damaged persons and their effects on others, then it is society which needs to step in. Do we really think volunteers can handle all of this?

No. So we need other responders to contain the damage and hopefully return the sufferers to a productive role in society. That’s why we heal and cure patients. It is why we teach students. It is why we serve and protect the public in the first place.

So why do we so easily distrust segments of the government and their agencies?

I spoke to a senior citizen the other day – active, involved, highly productive – and he claimed facts are made up, reported as true facts, and policies are formed by government contrary to reality. He was especially riled about the EPA. He doesn’t believe in global warming in spite of the fact that I reported to him that scientists now can measure current global warming and project the variances from norms long term of this phenomenon. These same scientists can measure the causes and behaviors behind global warming. They can monitor our attempts to moderate global warming to learn which methods are effective and which not.

He didn’t buy my argument! I guess when his ocean front vacation home is inundated in 40 years he might change his opinion; but wait! he won’t be around unless we make truly remarkable gains in medical science.

We pay people to pursue science and guide policy makers to better serve and protect the public. That public includes future generations yet unborn. They will be our progeny. We do not serve and protect just the current public, but that which is yet to come.

The planet is our home. Whatever we can do to protect it so it is healthy and capable of sustaining life on the planet for the future is something we ought to be doing. Ought to be doing. It is an ethos. What is wrong in believing we have a custodial obligation to leave the planet as healthy as possible in spite of our use of its treasure for the short term.

I trust in government. I believe in monitoring government. I believe in telling government my opinions and concerns. But I also cooperate with government so good things happen. Shouldn't we all play a similar role?

It seems to me that the real problem here is not trust in government as much as it is distrust in politicians who manipulate public opinion. Now in that we have more control!

So why don’t we exercise that control? Because I think too many of us are lazy and leave the hard work to other people while we selfishly pursue our own happiness regardless of its cost to other people.

It is easy to fall into this lazy cycle. But then we must face the challenge of undoing the cycle. Too much is depending on us not to do so.

Please join others in discussing these issues so next time we can vote intelligently and make real change possible.

Thank you!

May 14, 2015

More Bits and Pieces

There are a lot of news stories bouncing around that just beg some reaction from me. I can’t help it. Really!  I tried. But no; I am uttering some words now on these beauties.

First is the lawsuit by a Raleigh, North Carolina police lieutenant who bought a cup of coffee from a Starbucks outlet, returned to his police car, and proceeded to spill the coffee in his lap. In truth, the cup was defective (it collapsed too easily), but rather than seek help immediately, he returned to his police station, transferred to his own truck, drove home, remained there for some time, and finally, two and a half hours later, sought medical care.

This event so unnerved the officer, his Crohn’s disease kicked up, and he was treated for several months including surgery to remove a portion of his intestine. He was out of work for a prolonged time but less than a year. His wife joined the lawsuit claiming loss of consortium during his prolonged and difficult recovery. They sued for $750,000.

The jury decided in favor of Starbucks. Defense attorneys were successful in demonstrating that the plaintiff was already battling diseases that were debilitating and that he was unable to prove fault on the part of Starbucks.

Comment:  Thank God the jury got it right! Drinking coffee is hazardous because the liquid is hot and expected to be so. Portable paper cups are unstable by nature and an added hazard the consumer knowingly engages in order to enjoy a portable cup of coffee. Taking inordinate time to seek medical care begs the question just how serious was the customer’s injury? There are risks we all take responsibility for just stepping out the front door to go to work. This is one of those daily risks.

Second, if public authorities deliver shocking news to a citizen, they cannot sue those authorities when the details turn out to be incorrect. Such was the case when police reported the death of a loved one to a family only to learn later that they had mistaken the identity of the family. They had notified the wrong family, who in turn, sued the police authorities for the pain and anguish of the shocking news. The court, however, had a different take on the matter and chose in favor of the authorities. They said such unintentional errors are not made with the intent to harm and thus damages do not apply.

Comment: Try as they might to get the facts straight, police personnel have an often chaotic set of circumstances to deal with in determining what happened, who were the responsible parties, who receives medical attention, who gets the coroner’s services, and who are the next of kin to be notified. Think about that. The confusion, adrenaline and emotional upset of first responders. The family is not present in this situation; others are on their behalf. The family cannot possibly appreciate the pressure to perform most police accept as their daily burden. Perfection is not easily accomplished in such straits.

  

Third, who is the Middle Class? Does anyone truly know? What data sets are uniformly applied to define the middle class? And are the denizens even willing to admit they are middle class? The answer is not clear. Most of us identify as middle class but age, household income, education, employment and housing quality are not necessarily solid delineators of middle class status. Most of us aspire to higher incomes, more disposable wealth, secure financial investments to be used in retirement and economic downturns, and fancier cars and homes. But we don’t all actually acquire these things. Even if we do not, all of these are a sign of wealth but a harbinger of enormous debt! And thus more worry and fretting.

The middle class standard of living would be made up of many aspects, many not measurable. Until the discussion includes adequate details I think we need to monitor our conversation on this topic. Do the research. Ask for expert inputs. Determine the norms. Then discuss. Now get to work!

Fourth, Russia and its role in unsettling global power. I've hazarded opinions on this in the past. In this instance, however, Russia marked the 70^th anniversary of the end of the Second World War with a massive parade of military personnel and equipment. And speeches, oratory, really, ballyhooing Russia’s involvement in the war. Missing were most of the allies who did the heavy lifting during the war. Also missing was Russia’s honesty in representing the chronology of their engagement in the war. They were begged to step in much earlier but did not. England and France played an early role. Later, so did the United States who went on to the bitter end making commitments to defeat Hitler and rebuild war torn nations in Europe. At the same time they waged a successful war against Japan. Two theaters of war across two oceans separated by a vast continent. Where was Russia in those terrible times?

Well, at least they can hold parades and flaunt war materiel as though they are ready to continue their heroic command of the global community. They toy with peace like a child. Empty nonsense history already knows about.

That’s enough for this go around. There’s more of course, but that is for another time. Until then, read the news with care and ask questions! Then begin to understand the facts.

May 13, 2015

Roles of Government

I attended a business meeting the other day and was early to beat traffic. Had a surprising discussion with a colleague I hadn't expected. It focused on his belief that government isn't working very well, that executive functions are going well beyond their authority and holding private enterprise back from what they could be accomplishing in our economy.

I took this to mean that private enterprise is shackled by government regulation thus extending the current economic recovery. He said no, the problem is that executive departments of the federal government have overstepped their bounds and are making regulations and ‘law’ that were never intended.

I asked which departments he was most concerned with. His reply: the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and we also talked a little about the IRS (Internal Revenue Service).

When asked for more details he didn’t really have any specifics. But I did remind him these agencies may be ensconced in the Executive Branch of the government, but they were formed by the Congress, are authorized by the Congress, are further driven by policy and protocols designed and written by Congress, and are subject to oversight by Congress. These agencies are part of the Executive Branch in name only. They are congressional beasts and the upset or blame for their actions need go directly to Congress.

Congress, of course, is super partisan and cannot administer itself out of a paper bag.

In the case of the IRS, Congress even authorized a separate administrative court system and protocol to keep the massive case count out of the normal court system and keeping the latter from getting bogged down. The unintended result: the IRS is a government unto itself and fully the super organizational beast of the Congress. They have full control and authority over the IRS, not the President or Executive Branch.

My colleague went on to complain that people don’t speak about facts. Rather they make up things and label them facts. How this complaint pertains to government specifically was left unstated. My contention is that partisan politics have poisoned the halls of government in Washington, DC so badly that no meaningful dialog is possible at this time. I suggested to my colleague that political parties should be ignored and that we all ask our elected representatives to begin the arduous task of identifying issues of importance, ranking them for priority of solution, and then getting down to fixing problems without determining political ideology.

I pointed out that political ideology has distracted the American people and its government from actually getting anything done. Gridlock is not a productive partner for any dynamic organization let alone a government.

He didn’t accept my point of view, but at least I did not pretend polite agreement to forge a false working relationship. We both have points of view. Both must be expressed equally or both should remain silent. A little push back from time to time might be helpful.

In the meanwhile I came away from our interaction deflated. I had thought there was more intelligence and deeper reading of current events in my circle of colleagues but evidently I am wrong. I truly respect and like these people. However, increasingly I am aware of their ever present reactionary conservatism that accepts broad ideas and positions as correct without analysis. It’s in need of giant fact checking all the time if honest discussion is even possible.

Luckily this group of colleagues is in their 70’s and 80’s. They are all retired careerists. Most all of them led quite successful business lives. But they have a huge blind spot: public sector, non-profit organizations work on the basis of grand ideas and purpose rather than the profit motive. Dollars earned at the end of the year by the organization is not the motive of such organizations. Social purpose and mission are the motives. And they work for the common good of the society at large. Some of them are fueled by public tax dollars, but most make giant strides with private dollars raised in the good old fashioned entrepreneurial fashion. 

They seem blind that such organizations are positive contributors to private enterprise as well as social stability. Such is the operating environment for private business, an environment that builds success and healthy living conditions for most.

Non-profits are not always charities. They are social service agencies, environmental protection entities, educational organizations and research and development structures of formidable genius. We need them all if our nation is to succeed. We need them all if entrepreneurs are willing to take on an investment in a less risky environment.

There is a balanced approach to viewing all of these issues. It is not healthy to jump to the conclusion that a conspiracy or ideological war is at work. Better to calm down, assess the facts – all of the facts – and then set about doing the work in need of doing.

These retired captains of industry should know better and do better. Is that why I’m suddenly in their midst? Hopefully not; that would be a mighty task for one person to take on. Oh but then the mighty prayer of serenity enters the play: “Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

Alas, the entire prayer is tough to live; but the last phrase begs a wisdom few possess!

May 12, 2015

Racism in 2015

Yes, I think we still have a problem. Much of the anti-Obama political noise seems rooted in racism, that is white people looking down their noses at people of color.

I find this prospect hideous. I’m white. Born in 1943 to a middle of the road republican family, we respected all people, foreign and domestic, of Asian, African, European descent or whatever. I followed the news reports on TV and in Life Magazine regarding civil rights problems, protests and violence. Well into the 1950’s this unrest was recorded and reported broadly. It disgusted me then as unfair and decidedly un-American.

By the 1960’s I got more involved. Realizing the extent of America’s racism, I got involved in party politics (Republican), marched with protesters peacefully and wrote letters to the editor of local newspapers on the subject. When Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated I took personal action by enrolling in the seminary so I could work towards peace and justice constructively.

I remained in seminary only one year. I returned to the work world and built a career maintaining principles and ethics supportive of peace and justice. I worked for the University of Illinois at Chicago for 17 years. In that part of my career I worked with youth helping them develop organizational skills to use in furthering social concerns and civic activism. Such work supported healthy citizenship not disruptive political unrest.

By the 1970’s racial harmony in our nation was forming well. Standards of living for all citizens were expanding well across all boundaries of gender, color and nationality. The well being of America was very well spread throughout the nation and all of its peoples.

By 2000 I thought we were mostly home free on racism. Evidently that was to be short lived. By 2015 we are faced with all manner of discrimination – gender, sexual orientation, race, nationality, and immigration status. For a nation built on diversity America is sadly evidencing a sorry spate of discrimination.

San Francisco has been an urban area of pride for me. Accepting of gay and lesbian communities, the Bay Area has been mostly non-discriminatory. Once Harvey Milk’s assassination was fully accepted into the area’s history and understood, the urban community made strides in accepting people of color, gender identities and immigrant history. San  Francisco was a vibrant, multicultural Mecca for acceptance, and social integration. Inventiveness marked this population and today it is a high cost, high reward region that drives an economy with remarkable vivacity and long term health.

Yet there seems to be a problem, a very large one. It seems that the San Francisco police have uncovered among their police officers widespread phone texting of racial and homophobic themes. It appears to have become a sport among the officers. So much so that police administrators are reviewing 3000 arrests for fairness and sustainable legal status. If any of those cases are tainted, they will be reversed and a whole hell of a mess in the courts will result.

What’s worse is the trust that will be lost among the public for the very people they rely on for law and order in their community. If the police lose the trust of the people, the entire community will be in trouble.

Racism is a cancer of the body politic. Governance itself will be in question if racism is a reality. Even worse yet is homophobia. San Francisco is the home of the free gay and lesbian community. If the reality is opposite from this, then the Big Lie will be shown to be true. If so, how horribly sad it will be.

This problem is appearing throughout our nation, especially racial unrest. Police departments are seemingly the center of the action at this point. But I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg. Think Baltimore, Ferguson, Mo., and a lot of other communities as well. Trust in the local police is quivering a bit in the eye of the public. That’s a problem for community leaders and police administrators. The public defines these issues, not the politicians. In the end trust either reigns supreme or it doesn't. If the latter, community doesn't truly exist. Trouble will follow soon.

Freedom of speech in our land is costly. It is imperative to maintain. But it is also expensive in terms of public distrust, unproven conspiracy theories, and cheap political strategies that destroy public trust and confidence.

Raising issues on abortion, gay marriage, gay rights, immigrant rights, border protection, and raw racism as public issues will surely destroy our nation. It has shaken us before.

It is time for true leaders to step forward and raise the quality of the discussion. The tone of political discourse must be improved. Religious freedom should not trump all other issues. Besides, each of us is free to worship as we wish without interference. What we don’t have the right to do in the name of religious freedom, is cram one person’s theology and belief system down the throats of everyone else.

All the major religions are peaceful and peace loving. They also work tirelessly for social justice. This is true of Islam, Judaism, Christianity and all other religions as well. Why a few distort the voice of entire religions and turn them against others is a true tragedy for all. America is better than that. It is time to prove it.

All of us need to raise our voices accordingly. Speak and be heard.

Now, let’s get back to business and deal with the issues that matter the most. Last time I checked, they had nothing to do with religion, gender, sexual orientation, race or nationality. So what are we waiting for?

This battle has been fought and won. Let’s get on with the business that needs to be done.

May 11, 2015

Thought for the Day

Preferred Listening

Think about the topics that bother you. How often do you encounter these topics during the normal day? And by what means? Is it TV, radio, newspaper or some other media? Or are these topics on the tongues of friends and colleagues you deal with frequently?

What can you do to lessen the bother? Is there something else you could listen to that would replace the bothersome content? If so, listen to that instead. Maybe it is silence; turn off all media for an hour, maybe two, perhaps for an entire day?

Try it. Avoid the bother and tune in to the preferred.

May 9, 2015