When Time is Money

Share

Last night I went with my siblings to the Cheesecake Factory for National Cheesecake Day where if you dined in you could get some of their famous cheesecake for $1.50. Given the popularity of the joint and the late hour of our arrival, we waited an hour to be seated, just to get a piece of cheesecake and then it took another two hours before they finally served us and gave us the check. We entertained ourselves while we waited, but we cannot comprehend what took so long to procure four slices of cheesecake for our entourage. I jokingly told my brother he owed me two hours of sleep (I normally retire around 22:00).

To be honest, I felt disappointed. The cheesecake was good, but hardly worth a three hour wait in order to save $5, when it cost me precisely that after tip (my siblings didn’t tip). I could have popped in, bought a piece right then (around 20:00), and been back at home doing something else in short order. Even I am not so much of a cheapskate to wait hours to save a few dollars. I often skip to Buy-It-Now on eBay to save the frustration of waiting to see IF I win. If I really liked cheesecake that much, I’d simply pop in, buy it, and depart in short order.

However, the government seems hell-bent on spending a dollar to save a dime. They conveniently leave out of all their calculations the value of human time, and how our technological and transportation advancements enable us to make more with less and maximize man’s utility. Some legislators want a return to the 55 MPH speed limit as a means to help cut costs on fuel. Government, to save the poor pennies, proposes billions in extra cost for commerce.

So many gas saving tips trade pennies for gobs of human time. Drive more slowly, pump your gas more slowly, pool trips, ad infinitum. This policy excludes provisions for the mercurial nature of a world in flux. It is only worth going the distance if you cannot in the same amount of time do something more worthwhile to offset the opportunity cost. I previously discussed why I do my own auto repairs since the hourly cost exceeds my hourly earning potential. However, at the time of our excursion to the Cheesecake Factory I could not make money to offset the cost, and I utilized the time to bond with my siblings, which is an activity of arguable worth.

For many years, I have stopped to pick up pennies off the street. However, it would be inadvisable for me to drive around the neighborhood looking for them when I could be at work, working out, playing with my dogs, writing this blog or one of my books, or talking to friends. There is a value added tax to everything we do, and the government wants to tax individual productivity to save us a few pennies. Spending a dollar to save a dime makes no fiscal sense, but then again, they don’t teach economics, finance, and accounting in the law profession. Biochemistry didn’t require it either, but I’m sure glad I took those courses. It may not make me an expert, but I am thereby certainly no fool.

Prussian Pedagogue

Share

This morning on the radio I heard two stories that made my skin crawl over the prospects of Prussian pedagogues returning as compulsory commencement of formal education. Both of these pundits preferred all-day kindergarten as a means to alleviate them of the burden of being parents so as to free them to pursue other goals, vocationally aggrandizing in nature and form. Parents who abdicate their adult duty as parents do subsequent generations a disservice, as their children suffer under the “care” of individuals distal to their children in motives and goals.

No matter how you slice it, all-day kindergarten constitutes nothing more than taxpayer subsidized daycare. One woman, herself an educator in the Washoe County Nevada School District, demanded all-day kindergarten. Despite the fact that her husband works and her parents offered her money to pay for a private school, she demanded as a perk of her education that the district offer this option so as to free her from her financial burden paying for daycare. What hypocrisy to turn away help from parents and demand that the populace at large foot the bill for education.

Kindergarten offered the first opportunity under the Prussian Weimar regime to indoctrinate the young. It takes children from the safe and arguably more altruistic environment of home and hearth into the company of strangers where they are taught “acceptable behavior” and acceptable thought. When parents abdicate this duty, honor and responsibility, tyrannical pedagogues appear on the scene to mold children how they see fit, regardless of our wishes, traditions, and morals. Many, like the woman in this story I heard, do so for financial or vocational gain. If you bring children into this world, you and you alone are responsible for the care and nurture of these magical creatures.

While you may reach the dream you hold of financial or corporate success, pawning off your children to all-day kindergarten promises to bring you only sorrow. They will learn to love and support liberal maxism, and when you are brought down in your gray hairs to tyranny, you will have no choice but to accept that they are what they are because you did not make them what they ought to be. No success can compensate for failure in the home. There is no greater calling or work in life than to be a good parent. Anyone can donate sperm, but it takes a real man to be a dad.

Our world becomes what we make of it. By electing to do nothing, we in essence side with those who attempt to change the world to a socialist utopia. Remember how the Prussians fared. They are no more, and the Poles now roam their homelands. What a legacy.

If you want to send your children to daycare, that’s your business, but don’t you dare ask me to pay the bill.

The Werndlegasse Effect

Share

Five months into my mission in Austria, I transferred to the city of Vienna. That first night in the city, Elder Nelson and I went to visit one Alfred Pitzal in Werndlegasse, which lies approximately central in the 23^rd borough of the city of Vienna, just north of the Danube. From Werndlegasse, the main transport hub sits but a few hundred yards away, obscured by proximal buildings and whatever foliage survived the fact that nobody actually takes care of it. The city planners situated the hub near Werndlegasse on purpose, on the auspices that those people put into the government housing that peppers the neighborhood might have easy access to any number of transportation options from buses to streetcars to the subway to the regional trains that service the outlying areas of the city.

As we entered what Alfred referred to as his apartment, I stood in shock and awe. Alfred’s apartment measured in total 10 feet wide by 25 feet deep, with a single window at the back in his living/bedroom of what passes for a studio apartment in Vienna. Electrical and plumbing lines, added as an afterthought, ran along the ceiling, exposed to plain view, giving the ceiling an eerily industrial look. Everything was chipped, pitted, rusted, or otherwise dilapidated with age (the building being about 17 years old at the time), and everything reeked of cigarette smoke. We all sat on Alfred’s bed, seeing as how he lacked any other furniture for sitting, having besides his bedroll naught but a television and a table, which was strewn with reading material.

Granted, Alfred paid nothing for his domicile, he being a recipient of government-subsidized housing, but I could not abide the fact that, as I got to know Joseph Lamell, Dietrich Schlemmer, and other residents of the Bauhaueser as they are called how people in such an apparently affluent and civilized country could abide and endure living in such squalor. For me, it was like living in the third world.

This was not the first time I’d seen government housing and the effects that “subsistence” level prestidigitation by bureaucrats. Back in 1994 as part of a federal disaster aid relief volunteer brigade, FEMA assigned us to a neighborhood full of row houses. The people in that part of town turned us away once they found out we didn’t have money. They didn’t care about their things, their homes, or anything else unless you came with a check in hand. Despite living in one of the most prosperous and affluent countries on earth, these people preferred not to take part in the activities that made it that way, preferring instead to wait for whatever crumbs fall from the rich man’s table.

If at that time I neglected to express gratitude for my state of affairs, allow me to correct that error and tell you how much I appreciate where I live. Living and working in Austria helped me appreciate the land of my nativity and the blessings we enjoy here more than any other single experience of my life. I can only imagine how much more abject the lives of people seem in places like Somalia, Uruguay, and Micronesia, without some of the niceties and conveniences of modern life. Meeting and working with the residents of Werndlegasse made me glad to go home every night to the comfort of a clean and comfortable apartment in the 17^th borough.

By and large Americans know very little about how blessed they are. Those among us considered “poor” do better than the average joe in most countries and far better than did most of our ancestors. For my own part, my pioneer ancestors eked out a living by the shore of the “Pond” among other fledgling colonies, in the swamps of Illinois, at the edge of the frontier in Missouri, and in the shadow of the Great Salt Lake. From those inauspicious beginnings, we enjoy the opulence and prosperity I know today. While others around me piss and moan about their plight, all the wealth they’ve “lost” in the down economy, I still consider myself richly blessed.

One other thing about the Werndlegasse to mention is how it came to be. During World War II, allied bombers nearly leveled much of the city of Vienna. As people flooded into the cities, the government built row housing and then apartment buildings for the abject and homeless poor. Americans today have absolutely no idea how lucky we are. The last time an enemy successfully invaded and leveled large portions of our cities was in 1812-1815. Seems we’ve already forgotten the devastation of 11 September 2001 when a handful of terrorists brought down some of our most impressive buildings, killing thousands in a few hours. We have no idea how good we have it here.

I wrote before about Great Expectations Americans have. We enjoy by far a very opulent lifestyle, and when anything threatens it, we balk, notwithstanding that our ground state rests far above the ground state of other people around the world. We forget those advertisements that run every Christmas trying to guilt trip us into sponsoring children in the third world that paint a picture of abject poverty and focus on minute perturbations in the value of our IRA. Each of us needs to spend some time with folks from a Werndlegasse. With things properly in perspective, persnickety people pass away.

Nuclear Waste is Good for Nevada

Share

Ok, now that I have your attention, I really do feel that way. The fact of the matter is that no matter how Nevadans feel about it, the waste is highly likely to end up here. Both of the major political candidates support Yucca Mountain and the money allocated towards development of the project was approved for this year’s budget, meaning that the federal government has tons of vested interest in it coming to fruition. Legal battles to block and stop waste from crossing neighboring states and from being deposited here have all thus far failed to stop the inexorable march, and instead of fighting the inevitable, the time has come to make it worth our while.

States that currently produce nuclear waste incur expenses related to storage and disposal of their waste. Nevada should capitalize on that and become the recipient of such funds. Nevada should accept waste from other states on condition that producers and the states in which they reside pay money to a corporation in our state set up to handle the waste and process it and to the state for purposes of maintaining safeguards in the state.

Not all of the spent fuel constitutes genuine waste. Once a rod falls below critical mass, there remains a significant portion of the rod that constitutes useable nuclear fuel. If Nevada could encourage and foster a partnership with industry to set up a reclamation facility, we could process much of the waste and store only those fractions that serve no useful purpose. Many isotopes are useful in science. Some byproducts are useful in military weaponry. Other byproducts can be used as fuel in different types of reactors. Let all those environmental wackos know that Nevada will lead the way in nuclear waste recycling, and since we don’t have much in the way of nuclear materials to mine, the repository becomes a renewable source of those materials for many decades to come, and we can burn for fuel in Nevada what other states deem as dross and refuse.

Once we have access to nuclear fuels in the state, it behooves us to use those fuels towards our own energy independence. With Lake Meade water levels on the decline and Las Vegas populations on the rise coupled to brownouts in Washoe County and vicinity occasioned by reliance on California for energy (can anyone still remember Enron?), it behooves Nevadans to turn to other forms of energy, and since we’ll have other places paying us to take nuclear fuel off their hands, I think we should use it and build some reactors. Hoover Dam runs about 18 inches of water through every night to generate electricity for Clark County and Kingman AZ, but a nuclear reactor in the state could provide much more energy than that, without adverse effects to the watershed.

Further stipulations are possible that can serve Nevada’s better interests. For example, we tell the government it can put it here if they release to the state some portion of federal land currently inaccessible to the state. Increased revenues to the state from the waste could lead to suspension of the state fuel tax, and we could ask the federal government to exempt NV from federal fuel tax. Furthermore, the safeguarding of waste both enroute and once it arrives creates job opportunities in Nevada. My prior suggestions create jobs in reclamation and nuclear technology which are tech jobs, which elevates our tax base, attracts those kinds of industries that cater to successful people, and provides incentives for high-tech industry to gather around a place already deeply embroiled therein.

Nevada must do something. For decades, politicians have told you that keeping the waste OUT of Nevada is in your best interests, but one way or another, it WILL end up here. You might as well get something out of it. Outlandish though these propositions may seem, they represent alternatives to some other serious problems we face. If Hoover is not enough, then what do we power our cities with? If it comes here and we get squat, then what good was all the litigation for? IN the end, compromise is better than being dictated to, and this is a fight in which we retain very few options.

What’s in a Name?

Share

Last Saturday, I met the first Doug I’ve known since high school. It’s not a very common name, and when I lived in Austria, the Austrians pronounced it “Duck”, much to my chagrin. My family, however, by and large uses normal names compared to most families, and while I hold nothing against those with uncommon names, I think the desire to be different, when it comes to naming of children, does our posterity a great disservice.

Growing up, my name, benign though it sounds, attracted all sorts of mockery. The Nickelodeon cartoon series of same name became the source of the jokes, but since I had never seen it, it bothered me only that my compatriots chose to mock me. When you give your child a name that’s easily mocked or difficult to use, it sets him up as a target for the vitriol of mean-spirited persons whose fragile egos depend on their ability to look less foolish than the next person, they having no accomplishments with which to prop up their curriculum vitae.

This week, I’ve read two articles excoriating this practice. In the first, a blogger I respect wrote about newborn babies in a nearby hospital:

Orangejello (Or-an-juh-lo) and Lemonjello (Le-man-juh-lo)

And joked about another:

Analtouch (uh-null-toosh)

Today I saw about how a court in New Zealand forced a name change for a poor baby named Talula Does The Hula From Hawaii. In the ruling, the judge wisely proscribed:

"The court is profoundly concerned about the very poor judgment which this child's parents have shown in choosing this name," he wrote. "It makes a fool of the child and sets her up with a social disability and handicap, unnecessarily."

My sister attended school with a girl named "Shithead (shi-tay-ed)" and a friend from college married a girl named Kris Miss Day. Sometimes the name is happenstance, like my grandmother’s high school sweetheart who was named Harry Pitts. When it’s purposed, that’s irresponsible and sets up children for psychological damage and insult. Furthermore, you run other risks. In college, a classmate of mine from Uganda named “Justice” admitted that his parents fled the nation as political refugees, his name having attracted government attention to their political dissidence. Names put people in predicaments.

It seems that everywhere I go, everyone wants to be different. Almost every girl I meet now sports an uncommon nome de plume, born of some strange tradition in their family to either use alphabet letters, famous persons, seasons, colors, cultural references, etc., with which the world around them are not familiar and which serve as a tool for the butchery of their good name, i.e. their character. We need no longer judge men on the color of their skin when their name will do.

I already mentioned working with a coworker of a darker complexion who shared this sentiment. Cameron could not understand why he had to be an African-American and not straightforwardly an American. Denominations like African-Americans, Iraqi-Americans, Italian-Americans and the like separate people who should be drawn together. The enemy knows that in order to beat us, it must first drive us apart, and this is just another guise planted in our mind by liberals by which to divide Americans along demographics (those with unique names and those with fuddy-duddy ones). The first tool of an abuser is to isolate the victim.

We are Americans. I really love the scene in the first Spiderman movie where the man yells down from the bridge, “You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us.” This enjoinder to unite or die is a theme of the Revolution- our Founding Fathers knew that only with a united front can the armies of darkness be driven from the bastion of freedom that is the United States. Instead of celebrating what sets us apart, we should be celebrating what draws us together.

Service to God

Share

I just read a story that makes me really mad. Yahoo Sports wants to make readers think that it’s a crime for the military to ask graduates of West Point to actually fulfill their obligations as officers in the United States Army. Knowing that we are at war, Cadet Campbell tried to broker a deal with the NFL and the War Department to keep him in football as a recruiter, thereby effectively pulling a maneuver to keep out of harm’s way. Now that a new policy supercedes his arrangement, Campbell and his advocates in the media are crying foul.

Forget the fact that an Army officer swears to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic”. The absent clause about winning a superbowl far outweighs that heavy duty. In my opinion, one joins the military, not because of what the military can do for him, but because he loves his country. Clowns like Campbell, who use the army as a stepping stool instead of as a real commitment to duty, account in large part for the general disdain among the populace for the military. Once upon a time, I respected anyone who served in arms, my father himself being a disabled and decorated war veteran. Then I heard about John Kerry and others who as far as I know never loved liberty.

While I personally oppose war, I maintain that we must all learn not to make war simultaneously or it will not happen. Despite liberal arguments against war, in all likelihood, men will find themselves at war until the end of the world.

That being said, I know many fine folks who joined the military in time of peace to take advantage of the many benefits it offers. I do not denigrate their service, for without exception despite all being wounded in the line of duty, all of my friends maintain the utmost level of devotion to the Constitution and freedom, and they speak no words of denigration against the nation’s foreign interests for which they bled.

A soldier’s first duty is to his country. A soldier’s first response to an order from a superior officer should be in the affirmative, assuming the order is moral and right. Anyone who tells you differently is selling something. I’m not buying this argument, and neither should you.

God willing, I will join Cadet Campbell and his fellows in arms and take the fight to our enemies. Godspeed the right.

Communication Without Communicating

Share

The other day, I reported my status to everyone who asked as “Smurfy”, in reference of course to the cartoon The Smurfs produced by Hanna Barbera from 1981 to 1989. Whenever any member of that cartoon society described anything, they always described it as “smurfy”, which by my estimation means both everything and nothing. Using that word allows me to answer without giving an answer, and the recipient assumes based on the imagery from the cartoon that smurfy equals good.

Fact of the matter is that smurfy for me rarely ever means good. If I tell you I’m well, I really mean it, unlike so many in society who use the inquest as to state as a greeting without really caring for or listening to the answer. Over the years, I’ve tried many responses:

Terrible, thanks for asking.

About average, but other than that not bad.

Wellish.

All of these basically deal with the same prospect, but smurfy also seems to imply that I’m in a bad mood. While that is almost always a good guess, it’s not the image I’m trying to convey. I really want people to get to the point, so I seek a phrase that allows me to be honest and let them think what they want to think.

This technique is used by almost every politician I’ve ever met. Even John Ensign (R-NV) when I spoke to him dodged the questions by answering with a non-answer. Most politicians answer the question they wished you asked and go way off target. The rest, like Barack Obama (D-IL) give long speeches about absolutely nothing. Nobody says nothing better than Obama.

Conservative Talk Show Host Sean Hannity pointed out that Obama has that skill, and on his recent Mideast trip, Obama proved the point when he in a 40 minute speech used bridging phrases (um, er, and…that like) that totaled almost 8 minutes of his speech. That means that 20% of what Obama said was gibberish off the top, beyond the contradictions, generalities and duplicities.

Unfortunately, communication problems spill over into everything, and account for many if not all, of the conflicts in life. From marriage to finances to politics, we can learn something from Orson Scott Card’s novel Ender’s Game, in which the buggers were annihilated because the humans could not understand their apologetic overture.

Editorials Masquerading as News

Share

I filled out a political survey yesterday that really got my dander up. Take a look at some of the questions and tell me if they’re not leading/biased. Scale is 1-7, with 7 being strongly agree.

How much do you agree with the following proposals?

• Eliminating the tax on inheritances to help small business owners and farm families pass on their livelihoods to future generations even if it also increases the concentration of wealth among a small percentage of the population?

• Making George Bush's tax cuts permanent even if it means that most of the benefits go to the wealthiest Americans because they pay the most taxes?

• Imposing significant new state or federal taxes on the sale of tobacco products, even when the revenue from higher tobacco taxes goes to programs that have nothing to do with smoking?

• Raising taxes on dividend payments from stocks even if it would disproportionately hurt retired people who live off the dividend income from their investments?

Even if…even though…a clear slant here to the liberal mindset. I bet they threw out my responses. Now for my rebuttal:

1. My grandfather bought his home 49 years ago for $32000 cash, which was a lot back then. His home in upscale Salt Lake City is now worth $1.3 million, which means that in order for any of us to inherit it, we have to pay about $500000 in taxes. None of us have that kind of money, which means we can’t keep the family home, and you can’t buy a home in that neighborhood with the residual funds. My family is not rich, and the government inheritance tax works to prevent us from becoming rich. Despite what liberals tell you, they do not tax the rich- they tax those who are trying to become rich. Note that Senators Kennedy and Rockefeller are very wealthy, not to mention the Clintons, but their wealth is not taxable INCOME. I am working with my grandfather to put his wealth into a trust so as to shield as much of it as possible from the inheritance tax just like those very wealthy people do.
2. It is a fallacy that rich people pay taxes. See above. People with high WAGES pay taxes. Also, some of Bush’s tax cuts were on capital gains. I have been invested in the stock market since I was 13, and I’ve never received all of my money back. IN fact, during the Clinton administration, although I was earning $4.25/hr, I had to send the IRS a check because I made $492 in the stock market (I had no withholdings but owed tax on my capital gains). I am still not rich, but Bush’s tax cuts have helped cushion the blow of the stock market losses this year.
3. This one I actually agreed with, because I know that Nevada took the tobacco settlement money and set up a college scholarship fund. I’m still trying to figure out what that has to do with preventing smoking. The so-called sin tax is something I’ve previously addressed, and if you’re going to tax us for roads- use it on roads. If it’s for healthcare, earmark it for healthcare. At present, taxes just go into the general fund and go to whatever whenever and wherever, even if it has nothing to do with the reason we’re taxed in the first place. For this reason, I oppose ANY new tax. Period.
4. I also agree with this one. If, like I hope to one day, you live off of dividends, the liberal policies of His Royal Highness Barack Obama will raise taxes on the retired and elderly. How does he reconcile that with his assertions that Democrats protect the elderly?

Nothing Obama says is straightforward. Obama only knows what he’s been taught. He’s not a thinker (Rush Limbaugh 21 July 08). I’ve also never taken a poll that was slanted conservative. They are probably fishing for people who agree with them so they can dishearten the rest of Americans who still love liberty.

A while ago, I responded to another fishing expedition on whether or not drilling would drop gas prices. Just before the end of the “question”, the individual posted this editorial:

So, all this extra drilling may save you 8 cents a gallon by 2027 but make the oil companies billions of dollars. Is this another example of Republicans spinning the facts in order to make the oil companies richer?

Oil companies make money through sales. If they have more, they sell more, but if they have more, the price goes down. Any idiot who took economics can tell you about the supply-demand curve. He betrayed his true colors in this editorial, so I responded in kind.

This is not a question or an inquiry. This is a chance for you to spew liberal talking points. It's clearly evident from your tone that you already know the answer and you just want other people to agree. Go to the Department of Energy's website. Oil companies earn $0.09 per gallon compared to the federal government which earns $0.17, and they DO JACK SQUAT to provide the oil. Now, drilling is no panacea. If we drill now, it will take years to bring it online. If we had started 10 years ago when Clinton vetoed it, it would be available now. In 2004, Nancy Pelosi promised to bring down gas prices. Gas cost $2.79/gal locally where I "live", and I know it's currently $4.25/gal. So, stop scapegoating and flame baiting and get a clue you hack.

Like Obama, this person only knows what he’s been told, and everything to which he pays heed tells him that Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Retail, are the enemies but Big Government is his friend. This duplicity of opinion really bothers me about liberals, and their ignorance annoys me. They cannot be convinced, and that’s not the purpose of this blog- it is to affirm and confirm the faith of those who believe in the traditions of the Founding Fathers. Liberals follow the admonition of Michelle Obama who said, “sometimes it's easier to hold on to your own stereotypes and misconceptions. It makes you feel justified in your ignorance”. Amen. Rationalize yourselves liberals.

For the earnest reader, I recommend to you one of my favorite postings on liberal economics. Please read the Buccaneer Theory of Economics. It may surprise you.

About Comments

Share

If you're going to attempt to publish a comment that is critical of me anonymously, don't waste your time.

I don't hide my beliefs on this site, so if you don't have the guts to at least identify yourself, I'm not going to waste my time publishing your comments or replying to them.

Naysayers and Soothsayers

Share

In thinking more on the subject of the impossible dream, I thought about all of those who say it cannot be done and try to dissuade people from making an effectual attempt at things that ought to be done. When I first started doing Franklin/Covey, I learned really quickly how tempting it was to check off lots of nonessential things for a sense of accomplishment instead of tending to what I considered most important. Furthermore, the problem is exacerbated by the fact that since politicians define success as “getting things done (Rush Limbaugh)”, we end up with a ton of legislation that does more harm to the nation than good.

Many people, including apparently some readers, consider themselves to be good leaders, despite lack of credentials on that front. While I make no claim at being a great leader, I have been in charge of several different types of organizations where I supervised other people. I see in many, especially in many liberals, the tendency to provide naught but destination without direction, which equates with a man who gives you a cargo to deliver to San Antonio but neglects to mention it's the San Antonio off the west coast of Africa.

At a previous job, my manager told me all about the creative things he did when he was at my level that helped the organization prosper. When I asked him to give me examples, he refused to share. My father thinks he didn’t want me to advance and by so doing held back the entire organization. In the movie “Dave”, Kevin Cline’s character says he’s going to make it the job of his administration to find jobs, but the reporters point out that his affirmation is short on details about just how that’s going to be accomplished. Many people dream, but without vision, the people perish. Without a plan, a dream is just a wish.

Then of course there’s leader type who thinks his solution is the only viable one. Consider the situation with the one in the group who poo-poos an idea without suggesting a better alternative. His destructive criticism leaves the group sans any ideas at all. Or the leader who, enveloped in his own brilliance, attempts prognostication of projection, pointing out all the benchmarks as foregone conclusions with the assumption that it will come to pass exactly as they see it. I made a nuisance of myself by attending scientific conferences and asking just two questions: what is the practical application, and where are their statistics? Most of them cast out flagrant conclusions without evidence, making their ideas largely opinions masquerading as facts. You cannot underestimate the value of statistics in evaluating ideas, especially where money is concerned. What is the likelihood for success?

My final grouse on leadership revolves around drifters and dreamers of the type unwilling to roll up their sleeves and pitch in with the hoe and ax. They want to direct everything without doing any of the work. My immediate manager at my last job would do that- get in the trenches when the going got tough. His manager…only saw him once, and that’s when the general manager was also in the trenches. Leadership is more about giving orders. It involves gaining respect, and you don’t gain respect by talking down to people.

Many of the intelligentsia among liberals abide by the Miss America Pageant theory of leadership. They talk big plans and big ideas about how we need them and then and only then will the world be better. Anyone who proclaims world peace without concrete strategies by which to arrive thereat only knows what other people tell him, and that’s not a leader, it’s a marionette. Although I may not see all ends, I see more than just the end, and unlike so many naysayers and soothsayers in society today, at least I'm working toward my vision instead of trying to convince all of you to actualize it for me.