Enjoying and Learning from Nature

I have neglected to post to this blog for far too long. Today's column by Nick Kristof - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/opinion/02kristof.html - has hit a deep seated chord. He talks about hiking with his 11 year old daughter and the wonders and minor challenges of these experiences.

I was extremely lucky to have been brought up in rural upstate New York where walking through fields and over mountains was just "natural". So natural, in fact, that I walked normally like I was crossing the furrows in the farm fields. As told by my Father, my Mother cried all the way home after leaving me for the first time at the RPI freshman dorms since I walked like a farm boy.

As an adult, parent, and now grandparent, I have enjoyed countless hours of hiking with family and friends. Although our daughters grumbled at times about another hike in Smoky Mountain National Park, up Mt. Kilamanjaro, or to the summit of a 14er in Colorado, the enjoyment and learning from these outdoor experiences have brought us closer together and have shaped our lives.

Thanks Nick for reminding me to celebrate the joys of family and nature. And, literally, we are off for a hike in the Rockies.

Healthcare Reform - A counteragrument

The editiorial in the Wall Street Journal , http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124692973435303415.html#mod=djemWMP, argues that the Obama healthcare reform proposal will ration care like that which is done in the UK. I agree with the fact that any government managed healthcare program includes concepts of rationing service. This is, however, true of Medicare and Medicaid in the US and almost all healthcare programs in other countries around the world. We lived in the UK and used National Health. It was far from perfect, but it was freely available to all (including Americans living and working in the UK).

I disagree with the implied conclusion of this editorial that the US should not adopt Healthcare Reform because there would necessarily be rationing of service. I believe that the US would be a better society if all residents had a public option for healthcare. If an individual wanted to stay with her/his private health insurance, they could do that and receive the level of service (rationed or not) associated with that insurance policy. If a person wanted to have most every drug and procedure covered, and had the money, they could purchase that higher level of insurance. By the way, that is exactly what happens in the UK and other countries with some form of universal healthcare. So, the Obama proposed plan, like most other social programs (Social Security, Medicare, and others) gives everyone a humane level of service, even though that may be rationed. And the higher level of service needs to be paid by those who want and can afford that level of care.

Healthcare Problems, Policies, and Priorities

The Obama administration has an unprecedented set of problems: financial crisis, two wars, healthcare reform, energy policy, Iran, nuclear proliferation, education reform, and others. Having read, thought and taught strategy, I believe in making choices and prioritizing the use of resources. Although far from over, I think that the financial crisis is past the worst of the peril. Globally, the complex collection of problems in the Middle East and Central Asia are the highest priority. On the domestic front, I believe that healthcare reform is the most important. So today, I am going to comment on healthcare.

There are many thoughtful points of view on healthcare reform. The Obama administration's arguments in favor of an overhaul of the healthcare system include: increased coverage of the uninsured (was universal coverage, but this has been diluted due to costs), increased quality, reduced costs, and the public option. Proponents of healthcare reform include Paul Krugman (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/) and Robert Reich (http://robertreich.blogspot.com/). Opponents of the administration's approach to healthcare reform include Greg Mankiw (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/) and Newt Gingrich (http://newt.org/). Persons with moderate views in favor of reform, but concerned about costs, include David Brooks (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/davidbrooks/index.html) and Ross Douthat (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/rossdouthat/index.html).

As I see it, the logic for healthcare reform follows this line of thinking; 1) the US pays more per person than any other developed country for healthcare but has health outcomes that are worse than most developed countries and 2) the US has about 40 million uninsured inhabitants which is a significant cause of the poor health outcomes and is not consistent with a highly civilized society. I believe that these arguments are compelling for increasing coverage, increasing quality, and decreasing costs of healthcare. In order to increase coverage and to keep private medical insurance costs in check, I think that the public option is absolutely necessary. Therefore, the final question is the cost and affordability to individuals and the nation. There is a good article on the Economix blog (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/is-health-care-reform-worth-16-trillion/?hp) which puts the $ 1 trillion or $ 1.6 trillion over 10 years in context. Although a large amount of money, it is about 1% of GDP over the decade. I would argue that this total is reasonable to improve the health and fairness of the American society.

I believe that healthcare is a high priority problem that deserves a high priority reform. The reform should be accomplished with efficiency and effectiveness in order to maximize the benefits and minimize the costs. I am an IT professional and teacher and believe that healthcare IT is an important part of the solution. I will change my curricula this year to emphasize the importance and impact of IT to healthcare quality, coverage, efficiency, effectiveness, and cost.

Middle East, Information Technology, and Change

The column by Thomas Friedman, "Winds of Change?" -http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14friedman.html, tells an encouraging story about the change occurring in the Middle East. One of the four forces he discusses is technology. The Internet and applications like Twitter, Facebook, and Blogs have enabled the horizontal flow of information that is necessary (but not sufficient) for awareness, freedon, and democracy. As AT&T's optical communications business unit president in the 1990's, I testified to a US congressional committee on export controls of high technology equipment. The line of testimony that I used was that communications technology opened up societies and made governments more accountable to their citizens. And, therefore, the risk of military use of communications technology against the US was less that the risk of an aware and connected populace within an oppressive regime. So, I am pleased to hear Friedman say information technology is playing a role in opening up the Middle East.

Diligence and Intelligence

Nick Kristoff's column "Rising above I.Q." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?_r=1&em captures my experience in industry and academia. Persons with similar I.Q.'s achieve significantly different levels of performance based on diligence and love of learning. As Kristoff states in the column, the policy implications are clear, "education, education, education".

Mental Health and War

Bob Herbert's column, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/opinion/19herbert.html, tells the well known, but under-reported, story of the mental health victims of war. Although the physical wounds and deaths are horrific, the often quiet mental suffering during and after war surely dwarfs this bodily pain. And the impact of the warriors' mental health problems affects their family, friends, and society in profound negative ways. And the mental health suffering of the civilians overwhelms even that of the military.

Having recently watched the twenty-six hour documentary of "The World at War" (British documentary of WW II), the necessity for war in certain cases and the horrors of war are both vividly portrayed. However, if as the United States Declaration of Independence stated, the "inalienable rights" of man include "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", war restricts the inalienable right of happiness.

Best CEO's are boring

David Brooks column - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/opinion/19brooks.html - suggests that, "In other words, warm, flexible, team-oriented and empathetic people are less likely to thrive as C.E.O.’s. Organized, dogged, anal-retentive and slightly boring people are more likely to thrive." Oh-well, that is what I observed over 40 years.

The Power of Art

I am a manager and engineer by training and experience. I don't claim to know know much about art, but I deeply enjoy visiting art museums and exhibits. I just finished watching Simon Schama's eight hour video series, "The Power of Art". Schama has produced fascinating movies about the lives, times and art of Caravaggio, Bernini, Rembrandt, David, Turner, Van Goch, Picasso, and Rothko. Each video is filled with biography, history, psychology, and magnificent artistic creations. I was enthralled by the influence of contemporary events on the artist and the resounding impact of the art on history. You can order the DVD for $50 at
http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=2742279&cp=&sr=1&f=PAD%2FFormat%2FDVD&kw=the+power+of+art&origkw=The+Power+of+Art&parentPage=search or watch segments on YouTube at http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=2742279&cp=&sr=1&f=PAD%2FFormat%2FDVD&kw=the+power+of+art&origkw=The+Power+of+Art&parentPage=search. Enjoy.

"Green President"

Thomas Friedman's column entitled, "Moore's Law and the Law of More" - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26friedman.html, includes a cogent proposal as to energy and environmental policy for the Obama administration. Although David Brooks frequently argues that Obama is attacking too many large issues, I disagree. The Obama administration has competence and coherence. Embedded in healthcare reform, education renewal, and this environmental revolution are noble long term objectives introduced pragmatically.

A Culture Soaked in Blood by Bob Herbert

Here, again, is a compelling argument against unregulated guns in American society by Bob Herbert.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/25/opinion/25herbert.html?_r=1

Humans against Guns

I am enraged with us human beings that we cannot control guns. Bob Herbert's column, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/opinion/14herbert.html, tells a compelling story about the horror of the our society's inability to remove the vast majority of guns. In addition to soiling our own society, the ubiquity of guns in the US contributes to the lawlessness and destruction in Mexico - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/us/15guns.html?hp. Guns serve little or no purpose except to terrorize communities, neighbors, friends, and family. I am going to try to get a group going on Facebook, "Humans against Guns". Please join me.

With Finance Disgraced, Which Career Will Be King?

Having been in high school when Sputnik was launched by the Soviet Union, I was part of the generation of students in America that was motivated by national pride, fear, and an opportunity to make a difference, into science and engineering. We were encouraged by society's respect, jobs, and money. I became a chemical engineer and went to work for then the most highly respected industrial research laboratory (AT&T and its R&D arm Bell Labs) to do development work in semiconductors. After the oil crisis in the early 1970's, I transferred into materials recycling research and then recycling operations for Bell System materials. As part of that series of assignments for AT&T, I was transferred to the U.K. to manage the enginering design for the recycling facility that AT&T was buiding in South Carolina. While living and working in London in the mid-1970's, it was clear that U.K. society did not value engineering and technology. The brightest and best of British youth went into government, medicine, and commerce. Engineering was not esteemed by the populace and so the best went elsewhere for their careers. The marginal tax rate in the U.K. during the 1970's was 80%, so there was little financial incentive to make higher salaries. Without societal recognition or economic reward, the best talent was steered away from engineering and technology.

During the Thatcher and Reagan governments in the 1980's, marginal tax rates were dramatically reduced in the U.K. and the U.S. Financial incentives were increased for the first time since the 1930's and compensation drew the best into finance, technology, and enterpreneurship. The benefits (GDP growth and productivity) and the evils (greed) escalated during the 1990's through 2007. During the current economic crisis, careers in finance have lost their luster. In today's New York Times article, "With Finance Disgraced, Which Career Will Be King?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/weekinreview/12lohr.html?_r=1&ref=weekinreview), the authors discuss the situation facing university students. As in the past, society's respect for various careers impacts the students and their parents' perception of the best jobs. With careers in finance in disgrace, I have seen a significant shift in technology jobs toward government, healthcare, and education.

Environment, Energy, and the Economy

I love natural beauty and want to protect the environment. I also have seen the benefits of economic growth for people, both poor and rich. I often struggle with conflicting priorities between the environment, energy, and economic growth. Thomas Friedman's column, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/opinion/12friedman.html, describes policies and regulations in Costa Rica that compliment the environment and the economy.

Experts - no better than mice

Nick Kristof's column -http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/opinion/26Kristof.html- makes the argument that "experts" and "pundits" are only slightly better at predicting the future than random guesses. He discusses that "experts" are believed more often by the public than partisans. The story in Kristof's column about "hedgehogs" and "foxes" is especially insightful.

"Indeed, the only consistent predictor was fame — and it was an inverse relationship. The more famous experts did worse than unknown ones. That had to do with a fault in the media. Talent bookers for television shows and reporters tended to call up experts who provided strong, coherent points of view, who saw things in blacks and whites. People who shouted — like, yes, Jim Cramer!
Mr. Tetlock called experts such as these the “hedgehogs,” after a famous distinction by the late Sir Isaiah Berlin (my favorite philosopher) between hedgehogs and foxes. Hedgehogs tend to have a focused worldview, an ideological leaning, strong convictions; foxes are more cautious, more centrist, more likely to adjust their views, more pragmatic, more prone to self-doubt, more inclined to see complexity and nuance. And it turns out that while foxes don’t give great sound-bites, they are far more likely to get things right."

I hate "screamers".

So whether you are a professor, a family advisor, an "expert", or a true friend, be a humble "fox".

Prejudice

Nick Kristof's column today is "right on" (using 1960's lingo to show that I most like views that agree with my prejudice) - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/opinion/19kristof.html?_r=1. It makes the point that each of us, whether liberal or conservative, seeks inputs that confirm our own pre-existing points of view.

I am socially liberal and fiscally middle of the road. I "pride" myself in reading opinion pieces from a variety of sources like the "Wall Street Journal" and the "New York Times" and blogs from Greg Mankiw and Paul Krugman. But, do I really? I have a wide spectrum of political input set up as RSS feeds. However, I read the ones that I agree with first and get to the ones I disagree with "if I have time", which is less frequent. I quote the ones I agree in this blog and in debates much more often than I quote the ones that challenge my current thinking. So, my "pride" should be discounted like "mortgage backed securities".

I have just returned from a week of skiing in Colorado where a bunch of "old-guys" ski all day and talk all night. This "8th Annual March Ski Madness" has been one of the most stimulating weeks of the year for me. The mix of personalities and political perspectives have instigated vigorous debate. An objective review of the eight years of dialogue, however, would indicate tolerance and intolerance. One disappointment is the fact that conservatives have stood up for their views, felt unwelcome, and returned less often in subsequent years than the liberals among us. I should recruit more diversity of opinion for this annual event.

I will re-dedicate myself to immerse myself in diverse political, social, and economic perspectives.

Education, Teaching, and Stimulus

As clearly articulated in Nick Kristof's column, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/opinion/15kristof.html, education is a critical element of long term financial development. Although some argue that the current economic stimulus should not "spend" our way to recovery, I believe that investing in human resources is the best way to consistent long term growth. Therefore, spending on excellence in teaching provides the immediate economic stimulus represented in the teachers compensation plus the long term benefits of better educated youth.

Young innovators are an important part of the solution

This Thomas Friedman column http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/opinion/15friedman.html describes eco-energy innovators who, I believe, are an important part of the economic - financial crisis.

Creative Destruction

This article in the New York Times - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/technology/26spend.html - tells the familiar story of innovation and creative destruction. Although most people have read these stories and understand them objectively, I understand creative destruction viscerally. When I went to work for AT&T in 1971, this firm had 1 million employees making it the largest and most enduring company in the world. Although a US Department of Justice Consent Decree caused the diverstiture of the Bell Operating Companies in 1984, AT&T still had 350,000 employees and was the largest company by market capitalization in 1992. What occurred during the next decade was hard to believe for those of us who had spent our adult lives being proud of our careers with "The Telephone Company". Deregulation, competition, globalization, spin-offs, acquistions, the Telecom Bubble and Collapse was the epitomy of "Creative Destruction". Even though AT&T survives as the largest telecom company, it has been sold, bought, re-structured, re-engineered, and fundementally changed. But the innovation that created its greatness - telephone, transistor, laser, and optical communications - have never regained their status as the primary drivers of the firm.

While a technology company is in rapid ascent (Google in the early 2000's, Microsoft in the 1980's and 1990's), there appears to be no stopping the profitable growth. The excitement makes these firms the darlings of the business world and the place that the most talented graduates want to work. This virtuous cycle extends until a new "more innnovative" company takes the mantle leaving the previous superstar (IBM since the mid-1990's, GE since the early 2000's) struggling for modest growth.

During the current economic and financial crises, new innovative firms will emerge somewhere in the world to shine for the next few years.

Halleluiah

Having just seen the inauguration of President Obama, all I can say is "Halleluiah". In addition to the inspiring inaugural address, the moving music, and the eloquent poems and prayers, the huge crowd of support was stimulating. To Obama's call for responsible action, count me in.

"Let's be Friends"

When family squabbles or business disagreements erupted, I half jokingly would say, "Let's be friends". Part of this declaration resulted from an innate dislike of conflict and part of this exhortation came from the practical progress from consensus. Today, I am delighted that Barack Obama will be inaugurated as President of the United States. He is a uniter and pragmatist, who in an unsophisticated moment, might say, "Let's be friends".

On this inauguration day, David Brooks' column -http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/opinion/20brooks.html - states these principles more eloquently. I greatly dislike the George W. Bush administration's requirement of loyalty - "You're with 'em or agin 'em". I think that honest, thoughtful debate from many perspectives is the only way to approach a fair and realistic solution to complex problems.

In contrast, the "Think Again" column by Stanley Fish, entitled "The Last Professor" - http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/18/the-last-professor/?em - paints a stark choice between utilitarian and non-utilitarian higher education. As an engineer and businessman, I should naturally come down on the side of practical education to the exclusion of liberal arts, but I do not. Having attended Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as an undergraduate and Princeton University as a graduate student, I saw the extreme differences in these academic philosophies. With another engineer as a roomate, and another engineer as my baseball teammate, learned engineering efficiently at RPI. At Princeton, my roomate was a linguistics major and my table mates at dinner in the Graduate College studied philosophy, physics, and medieval history. During my life and career, the combination of insights from the arts and humanities were at least as impactful as those from engineering. So, I disagree with the premise of "The Last Professor". I believe that there should be a "grand debate" about higher education and the that a rich and chaotic mix of the practical and the humane forms of intellectual pursuit should continue for another 800 years. And to the proponents of these distinctly different types of higher education, "Let's be friends".

Financial Crisis and Psychology

David Brooks' column on the financial crisis and the failings of classical ideology from both the left and the right is outstanding - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/opinion/16brooks.html?_r=1.

Poverty and Sweatshops

This column by Nick Kristof argues persuasively for manufacturing in poor countries even if the conditions are considered "sweatshops" in developed countries, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15kristof.html. It has been my experience from over 30 years working in developing and developed countries that a manufacturing facility in a developing country increases living standards and offers jobs that are desired by the local population.



Having planned and managed manufacturing facilities in over 25 countries including China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Korea, Taiwan, Poland, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, I do not feel that I have exploited people in poor countries. Nevertheless, some family members and others that I have discussed these experiences with, have felt that I taken advantage of poor persons in these developing countries. I am reading "Factory Girls" by Iris T. Chang which is an excellent non-fiction depiction of the lives of young women who "came out" from villages from the poorer provinces in China to the manufacturing centers in southern China such as Dongguan and Shenzhen. The working conditions described in "Factory Girls" are very familiar to me since I had the responsibility for a joint venture in Guangdong Province for the manufacture of printed circuit boards for AT&T in 1988. Young women from Sichuan, Hunan, and other rural provinces lived 8 to a room in the dorms and worked 10 hours per day six days a week for 50 weeks a year. Although I would not have wanted my daughters to have worked under such conditions, I was told through interpreters that most of them saw work in this factory as an opportunity to improve their own lives and those of the rest of their family. The working conditions in all of the other factories that I managed in China, India, and elsewhere were significantly better than the one in Guangdong Province, but a common message emanated from the vast majority of these experiences. People flocked to these factories as a means of improving their own standard of living and that of their families.



This past summer, I read "The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can be Done About It" by Oxford Developmental Economist, Paul Collier. This is the best book that I have ever read about poverty. This book not only detailed the horror of poverty, but gave concrete causes and suggested remedies. Many of the points were counter-intuitive to me. Nevertheless. one key theme was that the poorest countries must develop a globally competitive manufacturing industry to bring individuals and societies out of poverty.

Even the very, very bright are just people

This Ben Stein article, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11every.html?partner=rss&emc=rss, captures my thoughts about persons who think they have all the answers to this financial crisis. I greatly respect bright and thoughtful people. Nevertheless, I have observed hubris (including my own) at AT&T, Rensselaer, and the US government cause immeasurable human and financial loss. So, I think that curiosity and humility are necessary characteristics of all persons, especially those that are very IQ smart.

Stimulus package should stimulate the mind

Thomas Friedman's column says is well: Stimulate the mind. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/opinion/11friedman.html?_r=1

Risk Management

Joe Nocera's column in the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/magazine/04risk-t.html?partner=rss&emc=rss is excellent. Since I don't know much about risk management, this article put the mistakes made during the recent financial crisis in perspective.

Welcome to Your Brain

I have just finished reading "Welcome to Your Brain" by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang. I found it to be a fascinating book for the serious general reader. The authors blog about the book is at http://www.welcometoyourbrain.com/. It is relatively short (about 179 pages) and chocked full of interesting science and practical applications.

In today's New York Times article, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/health/31memory.html?partner=rss&emc=rss, a link is shown between blood sugar control at memory loss. I can understand the key points in the article better having read "Welcome to Your Brain". Excercise is again shown to be a good antidote to blood sugar spikes and memory loss.

Probably too late for me, I am off to some snow shoeing in the mountains of Colorado this afternoon.

Global Competitiveness and Cultures

Thomas Friedman's columns are frequently compelling. His column today, "Time to Reboot America" http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/opinion/24friedman.html?_r=1 represents my views completely.

On the train from New York to Boston last Friday, I sat next to a man from Korea who ran a global logistics company. He had moved to Shanghai ten years ago to run his company from the global financial and competitive capital. He said many fascinating things, but the ones that I remembered most clearly were those about culture, competitiveness, and corruption. He said that Confucian based cultures including those of China, Korea, Japan, and other east Asian countries, respected parents, age, hierarchy, and education. Although we generally know this background, I was unaware of the point that he made next. Because Confucian based cultures defer to age and rank, there is no absolute right and wrong. Judeo-Christian based cultures define right and wrong irrespective of age and hierarchy. This Korean suggested that Confucian concepts were best for "developing" economies where a degree of order is necessary. But for "developed" economies, individual freedom and "meritocracy" were most appropriate for innovation. Korea, China, and other Asian countries have grown economically at a higher rate for the last 25 years. But they will not necessarily continue to grow at a faster rate than the US without encouraging individual freedom and innovation.

Healthcare IT

This article in the NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/business/27record.html?_r=1 summarizes several aspects of electronic medical records and their potential impact on health care productivity. I believe that information technology will have the greatest postive improvement in health care and government (e-government) over the next few decades.

Government agencies like the Veterans Hospital Administration (VA Hospitals) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have the opportunities to influence the quality of life and the economic well being of the US in a significant way. Large companies in the healthcare IT industry such as Epic Systems http://www.epicsystems.com/index.php and Cerner Corp. http://www.cerner.com/ have a large opportunity to benefit society and their shareholders. Small companies like Blue Slate Solutions http://www.blueslate.net/site/homepage?url=homepage and DualAlign http://www.dualalign.com/index.html should enhance the quality of life of people and subsequently benefit from the Obama administration's investment in healthcare IT.