Tuesday, March 1, 2011

I want

I am writing this blog as I sit on a transatlantic flight. So, please forgive me if I use some metaphors that seem "testy". Each time I make this flight, I get to observe something new from one of my fellow passengers. And, in fact, this is why I am publishing this blog ahead of the two others that I have been working on for some time. Some things just bring out the worst in people. I am talking about selfishness.

What is selfishness? It's simply putting your wants above the wants or needs of another; even to the point of being rude or discourteous.

The last time I was on this flight, I was fortunate enough to get a bulk-head seat. This means that I got a seat in the front of the cabin. Imagine two aisles on the plane. And, imagine the seat on the left aisle of the middle section; as close to the front of the plane as possible. This particular seat was on the left side of the middle section. Now, on this particular plane, there's only one bathroom in this coach cabin; at the front of the aisle next to me. This is extremely convenient for the folks sitting on the same aisle. But, it is not so convenient or those who are sitting on the other aisle; basically half the plane's seats.

Let's role play. Imagine you are in my seat sleeping (as this is an overnight flight), when you are awakened by someone crawling across the space in front of you; literally trying to step over the feet and legs of everyone sitting in this section (three people). Do you get upset with the person, or do you simply move your legs to allow them to pass? Keep in mind that this person will need to return to their seat, once they are done in the bathroom. Now, let's reverse the roles. Imagine you are the person who needs to use the bathroom, and you realize that you need to walk all the way back to the next cabin in order to get to the bathroom. Should you crawl over the people to get to the bathroom? What's the "right" thing to do in this situation? Mind you: I am not just talking about the person doing the crawling.

While you are pondering this example, I would like to give you another.

Economies are made up of producers and consumers. Consumers get their goods and services from some form of market. Producers place their goods in the market, setting the price based on their cost to produce; plus some profit. So, based on this simple model, what do you think happens to the cost of goods produced by a producer, if that producer's labor costs go up? Well, either the producer's profit would have to drop. Or, the cost of the producer's goods would have to go up. For the sake of this argument, let's just assume that the free market will act to control the amount of profit a producer can put on the goods and services they provide to the market; I want to leave the topic of greed to another post. So, the focus here is on the impact rising labor costs have on consumer prices, and the root cause for the increasing labor costs.

Have you ever thought about the impact a raise in your salary would have on those who are consumers of the products and services you (or the company you work for) produce? Or, did you simply think about your self? Ever wonder where inflation comes from? Well, I admit this is a simplified model. And, I admit that this explanation does not take in to account supply and demand. But, the correlation between labor costs and consumer prices has to be obvious. Did you ever take the time to consider the impact a salary increase would have on the broader economy? It might be a bit euphoric, but, imagine if everyone's salary stayed fixed. Would you be willing to fix your salary, if it could result in stable prices? After all, aren't you a consumer as well as a producer?

Just in case you are wondering, I have the same seat on this flight as the last flight. So far two people have crawled over my feet to get to the bathroom. Come up with an answer yet?

So, is it selfish to take a salary increase, when you know this will likely have some kind of impact on consumer prices? It's a vicious cycle. Prices increase from inflation. This leads to necessary increases in salaries; in order to keep up with inflation. But, where does it end? It's a vicious cycle indeed. Wouldn't it be nice if instead of only thinking about ourselves, we could consider the greater good?

I've been following the battles over the unions. And, when I got on this flight, the parallels struck me and motivated me to write this blog.

Unions serve a purpose: to negotiate compensation for the labor force. The intention was good (as is most always the case). If unions where used as a checks and balances against greedy business owners or executives, I would not think twice about their role. But, unions have evolved into political machines; trading power for favors just like our political parties.

Who does the union really serve? It's members? Or, does the union provide political power to it's leaders, such that this political power can be used to manipulate our government representatives. If you've read my post on "Masters and Servants", you should be able to identify unions as yet another political organization, that is interested in maintaining their political influence.

I am seeing union members protesting because they are going to have reductions in their benefits, or, they are going to have to pay more for their benefits. Tell me, do these people think they are the only ones impacted by the state of our economy? Are these people so selfish that they don't care about the perpetual cycle we are in regarding compensation and prices?

Where, pray tell, should the money come from to pay for these benefits? I could understand, if employers where treating their employees poorly. But, is this really a case of employee abuse? Somehow, I don't think so. It looks to me like these union members are not thinking about the rest of us Americans. Isn't that the definition of selfishness?

Government employees have had unions for some time. And, these folks are per capita some of the best paid folks around. Automobile workers have been unionized for decades, and they are very well paid as well. Doesn't this indicate that we should endorse unions? After all, if we all join unions, we could all have nice big salaries. Then what? Who will be left to pay? The union today is being used to the exclusive benefit of their members, and to the potential deficit of everyone else. So, are unions the answer?

What happened to the auto industry in the last decade? Two out of three companies went bankrupt. Why do you think this is? Well, perhaps the price of cars has gotten out of reach of the average consumer. What do you think drove up car costs? Industry experts agree labor costs are the biggest factor in auto prices.

In fact, if the government had not stepped in, the auto industry would have been forced to make some serious changes. So, why did the government step in? Simple: they wanted to maintain their positions of power and authority. The unions helped the government folks stay in office, and the government bailed out the unions - er, uh - the auto industry out of bankruptcy. And, we the taxpayers get stuck with the bill. How is that not selfish?

Now let's look at government employee unions. Where are the checks and balances? If unions are protected by the government, and, the government is protected by the unions, where will we end up? Well, if government salaries keep increasing, then the cost of government will have to increase as well. Guess who pays when that happens?

So, whose interests are being served by unions? Is this really something for the greater good? Or, is this a "club" of people who are selfishly looking out for themselves.

Here's the saddest part: the number of people in this country, who are thinking "I want", is quickly outpacing the number of people who are looking out for the country at large. Instead of thinking about the country's future, these people can only think of themselves.

How long before there's no one left to pay the bills? After all, being selfish is about getting something for yourself - no matter the cost or who has to pay. Ask what you can do for your country; not what your country can do for you. We need to get our financial house in order. And, I for one think everyone needs to do their part.

I saw a poll that indicated people only want to balance the budget if the services they need are not touched. In other words, let someone else pay the price. "They want" to have their cake and eat it too. But what about very one else? I find this shocking and maybe even disgusting. Why can't we put an end to a government where we give entitlements to a group of people, in order to get something back from them - a vote. Not only is this a selfish way to run things, it will breed corruption and inequity.

If we cannot decide which special interest programs (entitlements) to cut, we should cut them all. And, if "we the people" don't start putting our "I want" attitudes in check, I'm not sure what America will look like a couple of generations from now. You think I am kidding, just take a look at other nations where the population has an "I want" attitude. This "I want" mentality is really the root of America's troubles.

Checkpoint: two more people have crawled over me since my last report.

I will be the first to admit that credit cards got my generation in trouble. When I was fresh out of college, I got my first credit card. And, I quickly became enslaved to my credit cards. It took me a while to figure out that my "I want" attitude was costing me dearly. But, I was young and stupid. And, I figured it did not matter, as long as I got what "I wanted".

I was lucky. I was able to curb my appetite for "stuff", and eventually I worked my way out from under a mountain of debt. Unlike the auto industry, I did not go crying to the government for help. I knew that I was the one who created the problem, and I knew that I was the one who needed to fix the problem. I bought less stuff, and worked more to pay off my credit card debt. I wish more Americans would do the same. Clearly, this latest financial crisis is proof to the contrary.

As I said earlier, America's "I want" attitude is a serious problem. Based on the polls, and my own observations of human behavior, I'm not optimistic. This is one time where I would really like to be wrong.

Sent from my iPad

2 comments:

  1. If you continue to produce the same, then why would you probably should not get anything above the expected inflationary increase.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Still jet lagged, and still reading.

    (This is rather jumpy...)

    There is a common argument about this... if you walked along a beach and saw a high precision gold watch on the ground, would you assume that it appeared out of nothing. No. Someone must have made it, but it is too improbable. The argument continues that since we are so complex, then we must have been created.

    But I kind of like this path instead... The watch created out of nothing somehow does exist on the beach, I personally own four watches. Some improbable process must have happened to make them, and that process involved a person, which started from nothing.

    So, if one argues that there is no intelligent design because man made the watch, then who made the man, that would cause such an improbable event (the watch) to occur.

    Last thing... Moses wrote Genesis. In a very short space he had to describe to the people following him where we came from so he could establish a government and laws that they could exist within. I think introducing quantum theory at that time would have been a little difficult to understand.

    The Bible is made up from writings inspired by God, but people want to take everything literally, and when they find a flaw, they want to tear the whole thing down. For example, Cain and Able left to find wives in the land of Nod, which has no explanation in creation via Genesis. But that does not mean we were not intelligently designed.

    In our infinite wisdom, we have yet to induce evolution in anything, and we're holding all of the cards! Make it completely random, and people no believe that evolution could happen.

    ReplyDelete