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.