The Real Apocalypse in 2012
Lately it seems normally credible cable TV channels (History, Biography, CNN, MSNBC, Discovery, and others) have been offering up programs that all take the position that our world will end in 2012. These programs cite the ancient Mayan and Egyptian civilizations as having first put forth such dire predictions. Supporting evidence comes from the obscure quatrains of Nostradamus, and even the Freemasons get to weigh in because of "mysterious" carvings on 16th century Gothic cathedrals in Europe. The various prognosticators say that our world will end due to an alignment of our sun within the "black hole" of the Milky Way, causing massive and cataclysmic destruction... earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, fires, and electromagnetic disruption of all forms of communications. I watched a few of these programs over the holidays and came away with decidedly mixed feelings.
First, I am puzzled at how bereft of sanity we must be to actually place credence in the ability of these sages to forecast our future when most of their age still believed the world was flat! Somehow we should accept a prediction from a civilization that had yet to devise a common method for charting a journey across the English Channel. While they somehow avoided various purges and being burned at the stake by coddling up to royalty with favorable predictions, we should suspend disbelief and agree that their visions of a future 500 years away are highly accurate. Come on, we are only kidding ourselves!
Second, I wonder if some of these ancient civilizations and soothsayers aren't themselves laughing at our gullibility. I wonder if an Egyptian architect wouldn't say, "Hey stupid, there are 2012 steps in the Great Pyramid because it took that many to get from one level to the next." A Mayan chief might say, "Our calendar didn't go beyond 2012 because our carver died and we didn't have a replacement trained." I wonder if one of those "mysterious" Freemason stone-carvers wouldn't say, "Folks I put the lion next to the sheep because I thought it looked good above the door. As far as the scene with the sheep's head in the lion's mouth... well, it's what the lions like to eat." The point is that some of our interpretations are far-fetched and indicative of people with an awful lot of time on their hands. We are supposed to believe that obscure monuments in backwater European towns were built precisely to point to this impending apocalypse. Come on, our search for meaning can't be that far afield can it?
Finally, if the much-heralded Nostradamus were alive today he might well say that we are headed for a catastrophic end at some future date, but I doubt he'd couch his predictions with references to "lakes of fire" and "lions in waiting". Instead of some one-time astrological event being put forth as the impending end of humanity, he might say it's more likely that:
- We'll ruin things by paying less attention to our children's education than we do to the next episode of American Idol.
- We'll ruin things by mortgaging our future and burdening our children with unconscionable debt in order to sacrifice those same children to prop up corrupt governments.
- We'll ruin things by continuing the cycle of generational poverty and having over 50% of children raised in single parent households.
- We'll ruin things by so discouraging our children with all manner of greed and selfish behaviors that a lifetime of quiet dignity, honest labor and public service is unthinkable.
- We'll ruin things by ignoring all manner of ecological warnings in favor of immediate satisfaction of our wants, leaving our children to face irreversible changes to this delicate planet.
- We'll ruin things by engaging in foreign wars that serve to create more hatred and ideological intolerance among children of all nationalities, guaranteeing the continuation of acts of terrorism by the disenfranchised and retaliation by the powerful.
I doubt that Nostradamus would need a single reference to a lake, an animal, a light in the distance, or the alignment of the stars. No, he would simply say that our continued reluctance to create a lasting legacy that protects future generations is the surest ticket to oblivion. We don't need any heavenly crashes to occur when we do such a fine job of screwing things up right here on Earth.
Labels: 2012, apocalypse, Egyptian civilization, end times, Freemasons, History Channel, Mayan civilization, Nostradamus
Net Resolutions
On the first day of the New Year and at the dawn of a new decade no less, I'll propose a few resolutions that I'd like to see both content-providers and consumers alike take to heart about the Internet in 2010. Over the past two years, I have spent a lot of time reading and reflecting on the impact of this www culture, and using that to launch a web-based business venture. An unintended result was the following thoughts about how we might all improve what goes into that electronic filing cabinet and what we choose to do with it.
Here are three things that the connectors/aggregators, content-providers, and advertisers could resolve to do in 2010:
Google/Bing 2.010 - We have billions of web pages covering millions of topics. Probably only several thousand will have any lasting impact or relevance to society. Google should write one of their elegant algorithms to eliminate and permanently bury the junk that proliferates unchecked. Sturgeon's Law says that "90% of everything is crap." If that's really true, or even if you like Pareto's 80-20 rule better, I'm sure that Microsoft could find a way to have some kind of filter on what makes it into search results. If Pareto and Sturgeon are right, it may be no more sophisticated than choosing to ignore 80-90% of what is written, and with those odds you'd probably have as much chance of success as if you went hunting for dairy cows with a machine gun. Let's just agree that if your stuff isn't on the first two or three pages of search results, nobody is looking for you and what you posted is probably not any good.
AOL/Yahoo/MSN 2.010 - The content providers and aggregators should resolve to eliminate content that is clearly a waste of time and responsible for foreigners saying that we are now not only the "ugly Americans" but dumb ones too. We could start by agreeing that every celebretard, fad diet, pet tearjecker, or fringe militia group gets only three articles per year. No exceptions. Just because the web is limitless does not mean it shouldn't have boundaries. Not only is the sheer volume of information daunting, but its overall quality is often suspect. As Clay Shirky posits in his book,
Here Comes Everybody, the ability to post content on the Internet has afforded everyone a largely equal voice. Instead of "filter then publish", we have become a "publish then filter" community. Do we really need PopEater, TMZ, FanHouse and a bunch of other purveyors of yesterday's flotsam? Who are these professional bloggers with good pictures and no journalistic gravitas? I can only assume that if some of these editors had been at newspapers and magazines, we would have de-forested North America and Europe long ago.
Advertisers and Analytics 2.010 - Let's face it, some real nut-job websites attract big audiences and lots of "eyeballs" that advertisers covet. I would suggest that some of the idiots wouldn't have an "ad-supported" village to preach to if the advertisers applied better metrics to their spending patterns. Advertisers should resolve to go back to the basics... demographics, psychographics, purchasing histories, societal comparatives... and recognize that it is not how many but whose eyeballs are looking that really matters.
Here are three actions that we consumers should resolve to take in 2010:
Publishing 2.010 - This is no time to be the dumb kid who didn't study but feels compelled to be the first hand up in calculus class. Instead of a few dozen direct witnesses to your stupidity and a few more days of lunchroom ridicule, you could live in the cyber-comedy archives before millions of strangers. If you're going to post something, make sure you have some reasonable purpose and more than a passing hint of expertise. Our society wants desperately to embrace the concept of equality where everyone gets an award, even if we just "show up." Nobody ever gets cut, asked to sit down, or sent home early. Sorry, but that's not reality. Just as you shouldn't mix chemicals without an understanding of chemistry and reactive properties, you probably shouldn't post opinions without an understanding of the factual underpinnings of the subject matter.
Publishing 2.010.1 - A special but important corollary to the above deals with the world of self-published or pay-to-print practitioners. We now have more niche publications, book publishers, online specialty sites, industry blogs, affinity groups, communities, and outlets for our creativity than ever before in history. The bottom line is this. If you can't find someone to read or listen to what you are saying, it likely isn't very good. Paying someone several thousand dollars to publish what you wrote is a true fool's errand. Like the old saying goes, "just because you're standing in a garage doesn't make you a mechanic." Having a book published (especially one you paid for) is no singular indicator of expertise or relevance. I would argue that anyone driven to self-publishing is likely only an expert in an outsized ego with a healthy dose of delusion.
Writing 2.010 - If yur going to writ anething on the internet at lest spell chek it fisrt before postng. Nothing can devalue an opinion quicker than a bunch of misspellings and grammatical errors. The only things that might be worse are the woeful descents into racial and ethnic epithets, often accompanied by profanity and references to various bodily functions. More than anything, these contribute nothing to the collective intelligence or public debate. Frequently, the only revelation is the stupidity shown by the writer. The best way to look at posting any content might be to remember what any good carpenter would say, "Measure twice, cut once."
That's it from here. It's New Years Day and there's football to be watched. If we consumers take up the challenge of being more responsible, we could have a better 'net next year. If the providers take some initiative to drive quality over quantity, we could really have something expansive and worthwhile. Of course, George W. Bush could write his autobiography without any help from Dick Cheney and the Catholic Church could quit being a safe harbor for pedophile priests. Right.
Labels: AOL, Bing, Clay Shirky, Google, internet content, internet postings, MSN, New Years resolutions, self-publishing, Yahoo
Learning to Change by Sleeping with a Bug
“If you think you're too small to have an impact, try going to bed with a mosquito.” - Anita Roddick
One could be excused for thinking that a child of Italian immigrants, born in a bomb shelter in the middle of World War II England, would never amount to much. Considering that her parents divorced when she was nine years old and that she subsequently lost her stepfather to tuberculosis only a few years later would seem only to lengthen her odds. Yet by the time of her death in 2007 at the age of 64, Anita Roddick was hailed as a trailblazer in woman-owned businesses and a champion of ethical and environmentally-friendly business practices worldwide. The Prime Minister of England, Gordon Brown, called her an “inspiration and one of the country’s true pioneers.”
Anita Roddick was trained as a teacher but worked for the United Nations, traveling extensively in the Third World. She and her husband, Gordon, owned a hotel and a small restaurant before she founded The Body Shop in 1976, which she said was merely a way to support her two daughters while her husband was away on business in the United States. The Body Shop was one of the first cosmetics companies to prohibit the use of ingredients tested on animals, and Roddick openly promoted fair trade with third world countries. Starting with only 15 products sold from a storefront in Brighton, The Body Shop grew to over 2,000 stores selling 300 branded products by the time it was sold for £652 million to L’Oreal in 2006. It was voted the second-most trusted brand in the U.K. and the 28th-ranked brand in the world. Echoing the sentiments of many entrepreneurs before her, Roddick said in a 1993 interview with Third Way magazine that, “The Body Shop was a series of brilliant accidents… that always caused controversy. We knew about storytelling so all the products had stories. We recycled because we were running out of bottles. It wasn’t a sophisticated plan, it just happened like that.”
Additionally, Anita Roddick was a tireless advocate for the less fortunate in society. In 1990, she founded Children On The Edge in response to the horrific conditions for children in Romanian orphanages. Its mission has grown to be an advocacy for children affected by war, disease, famine and natural disasters throughout the world. Before her death of a massive brain hemorrhage, she fulfilled a promise to leave her estate to various charities on moral grounds.
If perspective is such a linchpin for the other qualities necessary for great relationships, then how can a mosquito shed any light on that? I think what Roddick meant as a takeaway is simply that everyone can make a difference. None of us is too small to impact another’s mood, viewpoint or life as a whole. How we do that is up to us.
We can energize a teenager about to embark on a college journey, or we can fill them with dire warnings, threats and remembrances of their past mistakes. A newlywed can be lifted up by our humorous reflections on marriage and family, or made to suspect their decision by our attitude toward a lifetime of serving someone else. We can educate a business colleague by having an orientation toward sharing and collaboration, or we can demand that they acquiesce to our position by pulling rank. Choices like these abound every day. Usually they are small choices that can have a big and, sometimes, lasting effect.
In my life, I hate to admit, I’ve sucked the life out of some relationships by being aloof, untrustworthy or just plain angry. I know that some friendships were destroyed because I chose to make a difference in the worst way. I needed to win at all costs, and that typically is not a recipe for success with other people. As I have aged and hopefully gained some perspective though, it seems that I get less twisted over the temporary stuff. There are fewer and fewer deal-breakers in my personal life and I’m less likely to burn a bridge than build one. It’s taken a long time, but my perspective is that so little of what we do every day needs to be in a win-lose context. I am not too small to make a difference. That’s a perspective worthy of any mosquito, although I hold out no hope of changing a bug’s life. What I am hoping to continue changing is my own commitment to making a positive difference in the lives of my family and friends.
Labels: Anita Roddick, personal relationships, perspective, The Body Shop
The Choice is Ours... Dust or Magic?
Here is another excerpt from my book,
Business and Relationships. It's good to have the perspective that we are powerful enough to change ideas and people... for better or for worse, it's our choice.
“An idea can turn to dust or magic, depending on the talent that rubs against it.” William Bernbach
Bill Bernbach is an icon to anyone who has spent time inside an ad agency. Nearly thirty years after his death in 1982 of leukemia, he still casts a long shadow over legions of copywriters, designers and graphic artists of every stripe. After his passing, Harper’s told its readers he “probably had a greater impact on American culture than any of the distinguished writers and artists who have appeared in the pages of Harper’s in the last 133 years.” Bernbach occupied the Number 1 spot on the Advertising Age list of the most influential advertising people of the 20th century. Quite a resume for a hardscrabble kid from the Bronx who grew up during the Great Depression.
Bernbach began his career as a copywriter and moved through a succession of New York ad agencies before founding the famed Doyle Dane Bernbach shop in 1949. He was a conservative in a world of flash and cutting-edge, yet his style nurtured some of the industry’s best creative talents and most memorable campaigns. He emphasized a low-key and focused management culture, but was fearless about editing and demanded craftsmanship. Under his leadership, DDB achieved $1.2 billion in billings yet was always grounded in the belief that the buying public had to be respected and that good advertising could communicate how products related to their users. From the Volkswagen “Think Small” campaign and the Avis “We Try Harder” series to a character as memorable as Life Cereal’s “Mikey”, Bernbach is remembered for his tendency toward offbeat themes combined with flawless execution.
Could there be anything more counterintuitive than an advertising guy showing us something about perspective? Having perspective is about nurturing… thoughts, ideas, and people. Perspective is about having a sense of timing and an eye for value. Perspective is about conveying truth without malice or hidden agendas. Perspective is about asking why and seeking to find some common ground. Perspective is about having a sense for possible outcomes of your actions. All of those sure sound like what a good agency leader would do with his clients and employees.
When an idea for a new business venture rubs up against you and it comes from your passionate but naïve twenty-something daughter, what do you do? When your wife has an idea to enter a sewing contest or take up a course of study for an obscure professional certification, what do you say? When your aging mother expresses a desire to take a walking tour of Rome, how do you respond? I think a sense of perspective allows for honest thoughts and emotions to come through in a way that earns respect and inspires trust. Perspective takes the long view and puts your subject’s best interests at the heart of your consideration. Perspective isn’t about who wins necessarily, it’s about everyone getting a chance to participate.
At the end of the day, decisions have to be made. But they can be made with a sensitivity and calmness that fosters confidence and a willingness to share more ideas and opinions in the future. I’m far from perfect in that regard and I’ve shut down more than my share of conversations with the “holier-than-thou”, stern-jawed approach to dialogue. I still think my kids tread on eggshells about sensitive subjects but I keep working to have a better sense of what’s really important. I try to remind myself that great relationships always show perspective, and that I should use my talents to create more magic not more dust.
Frankly, I can’t remember anyone I ever cared about saying they “wish our relationship had more residue in it.” Great relationships are about some sense of continuing magic, discovery, wonder, and interest in your partner. Perspective nurtures it and allows it to keep growing. Without perspective, relationships will have no talent to rub against and will just turn to dust.
Labels: Advertising Age, Bill Bernbach, DDB Advertising, personal relationships, perspective, priorities
Jack Bauer to the Rescue... of Our Economy.
OK. We're now deep into yet another season of cliff-hangers where Jack Bauer solves a basketful of crises in 24 hours. All this and he usually has time to spark a new female love interest, bury a few trusted colleagues, and be a guinea pig for more experimental drugs than Jerry Garcia. I think it's time we put him on the case that would really test his patience and his tolerance. That's right... let's get Jack to fix our economy! Before you dismiss this as mere ramblings of a frustrated entrepreneur, I think he has seven major characteristics that bode well for his success. So here goes...
- Jack Bauer is not afraid to take on the entrenched establishment and challenge all authority. Do you really think that after emerging from three years in a Chinese prison, holding a U.S. President hostage, sacrificing his girlfriend, or torturing countless terrorists that Jack would be intimidated by Ken Lewis? Bob Nardelli would return to Home Depot as a staffer at the paint desk if Jack "suggested" it was best for Chrysler. We need more than Tim Geithner jabbing at his former Wall Street buddies, we need Jack to deliver the kind of shot-to-the-shorts that leaves the under-performers on their knees.
- Jack Bauer is always committed to the cause. You never doubt where his motivation lies. He is agnostic when it comes to political agendas and ruthless when it comes to accomplishing the task. Jack would never play handball with his adversaries, unless he had a grenade on the court. Could you imagine him rescuing the boys at AIG and then standing by impotently while they threw a lavish holiday party for clients and friends? I doubt if the inner sanctum at GM would dare venture out in public if they knew Jack was managing their bailout and eventual bankruptcy. We lowly taxpayers and small business owners would need only watch the nightly news to see the miscreants quaking at the mere mention of his next move.
- Jack Bauer takes great personal risk and isn't afraid to get hurt. The Washington crowd specializes in damage control, desperately trying to protect their best interests and campaign donors. Jack wouldn't be afraid to lose some share value (and maybe even some teeth) to expose the moribund business models and incestuous labor-management relations at our automobile companies. Jack would have said "NO" to the first bank bailout and let the markets absorb the losses and rectify the poor judgements of players who have already had too much time on stage. These micro-achievers who found ways to subvert the system and play outside the established yard would have encountered an adversary who was fearless when it comes to pain and entirely ready to do the right thing. What a change from the expediency of Paulsen, Pelosi, Bernanke and Frank!
- Jack Bauer knows that collateral damage is a consequence of action. Think about it. If you are any kind of living, breathing decision-maker, you know that sacrifices will be made right along with your decision to act. Jack has a fractious relationship with his daughter who blames him for at least a few deaths of loved ones. Presidents are exiled or killed, likeable servants of the cause are imprisoned, CEOs are stripped of their dignity and their rights, and numerous government minions awaken to a new reality when Jack is on the scene. What a refreshing change from the endless hand-wringing and angst-ridden warnings of the overpaid pundits on CNN, MSNBC and Fox.
- Jack Bauer gets others involved but knows what to share. Throughout every season, I always had the sense that Jack was the only one who really had the plan. He sees around corners better than the latest Pentagon contraption but never lets you know exactly what is there. He is the essence of a leader in times of crisis. Be honest, but not to a fault. If Jack were managing this showdown, you can bet that Joe Lunchbucket would know what's going on but maybe not what's next. Jack wouldn't be running to every photo-op to make the 6:30 network news broadcast. No, he'd have his team working hard under his direction and each one would have a good part (but not all) of the story. The only one holding all the cards is the leader. Why? Because he also has all the responsibility.
- Jack Bauer never assumes it's really over. It's really quite silly that we already have policy wonks running around pontificating that the crisis is over. Can you really believe the near-collapse of our financial system will be entirely reversed inside of six months with these guys running point? Only Jack would see all the implications of these sophisticated derivatives, hedge funds, default swaps, and tax shelters. Heck, he's the guy who knew that the computer virus directed at our power grid was tied to some industrialists who possessed bio-weapons aimed at major U.S. cities. Jack is always prepared for that next shoe, and it never drops on his head. Don't you think he'd already be taking steps to forestall deflation, another oil price run-up, further real estate collapse or foreign divestiture of U.S. securities? Jack knows it's game on, not game over as some of our short-sighted managers would have us believe.
- Jack Bauer gets it done in 24 hours. OK, this one I'll concede as probably out of even Jack's capacity. But wait, this is a guy who diverted a nuclear weapon, reprogrammed a super-computer network, saved hundreds of refugee children, romanced the Secretary of State's daughter, successfully battled infections from a variety of nerve-jangling, brain-altering drugs and bugs, and did it all in 24 hours! Do you think that CDOs are more terrifying than WMDs? Any chance that his sheer force of will scares the pants off fat-bellied, golfing CEOs? Anybody want odds that his commitment to driving real change would actually produce results a lot faster than our Washington broker-dealers? Maybe he wouldn't get it done in 24 hours but he'd be a lot closer than our current bunch of posers and actors.
So, there it is. A brief run through Jack Bauer's qualifications to get us out of this financial minefield created by the Wall Street and Washington collaborators. If you don't think he's up to the task... how about Jack Welch? Or Jack Black? The bottom line is this, if you think our managers in Washington can really lead with courage and proactively guide us out of this swamp, then you don't know Jack. Too bad he's just a figment of a writer's imagination and an actor's portrayal. In that respect alone, he could be a politician.
Labels: 24, Barney Frank, economic downturn, financial collapse, Henry Paulsen, Jack Bauer, Jack Welch, Nancy Pelosi, Wall Street, Washington
Cover Up 'Cause the Storm is Coming!
The other night a friend of mine asked for my opinion on the current recession and when it might end. We had a lively discussion and ultimately found out that he is a true Pollyanna optimist and I tend more toward Scrooge. Basically, I think the saying "in for a penny, in for a pound" applies here... and we are going to get pounded. Here's what I think is coming up in America.
I think this recession will persist through 2010. Yes, 2010! Maybe even early 2011... We have yet to feel the impact of the 2nd wave of mortgage defaults (ARMs and "exotics" reset early next year) nor the 3rd wave anticipated to begin in Q3 2009 (good people with good credit and no jobs, deflated housing value, and no further access to capital). Housing prices will remain low, inhibiting many consumers' ability to refinance or reinvest. Consumer credit will remain tight to non-existent for all but the very best "risks."
Small businesses are failing at a rapid rate due to lack of access to credit, and the ones that survive will experience the "deflation" of pricing (and therefore profits) caused by too much money (thank the bailouts and economic stimulus packages) flooding the markets. Layoffs will extend into previously "safe" occupations (law firms, hospitals, schools, local government and non-profits among others). Employees who are "left alone" will see wage stagnation or even cuts, as employers won't need to pay as much when available talent is everywhere.
The dollar will become weaker against foreign currencies (again due to flooding the economy with bailout / stimulus money) and our trade deficit will grow. As our money becomes "less attractive" in foreign markets, we will see hard assets (office buildings, shopping malls, real estate, apartment complexes and entire companies) purchased by foreign investors... often at fire sale prices. The NYSE will likely not exceed 10,000 during this period. City and state governments will be forced to cut services and employees, and some may even vanish in a cloud of bad debt and lower tax revenues. The intertwined systems of the world's economies will prevent any one nation (i.e the U.S.) from dragging the rest of the world out of this mess early.
Sorry to be pessimistic but this is the natural extension of the failure of "good sense" in our financial markets and then an ill-advised "rush to triage" those failed businesses that perpetrated this fraud. The survivors will find that "Depression-era" economics and disciplines (savings as a foundation, limited consumer debt, delayed gratification) as well as "keeping your powder dry" so as to capitalize on bargains and opportunities are those things that will create prosperity after this recession fades. Of course I'll be completely wrong if we have some kind of really dramatic "stimulus" like a big, big war that allows Ford and GM to make plenty of tanks ( the kind that shoot AND guzzle fuel). As bleak as my outlook may be... that would be far worse.
Labels: business failures, credit crunch, layoffs, mortgage defaults, recession, trade deficit
Now Is No Time to Pile Up Debt
“Bad debt is sacrificing your future day needs for present day desires.” - Suze OrmanSuze Orman is one of the most popular and respected personal financial advisors in America today and her show on CNBC is watched by more people on a weekly basis than any other of its kind. Orman grew up in Chicago as the child of working-class Russian immigrant parents and after losing money due to bad investments in the stock market, decided to become an account executive with Merrill Lynch. Years later, she rose to become a Vice President with Prudential Bache and ultimately found her voice as a writer and TV personality. Orman later served as director of her own financial planning firm, resigning when her writing career took off. She has written six best-selling books, including
The Road to Wealth and
Women and Money: Owning The Power To Control Your Destiny and is a highly sought after speaker on the lecture circuit.
She writes a regular column for Oprah Winfrey’s magazine and over 1 million people downloaded her latest book when it was offered free for 33 hours on Winfrey’s web site. Suze Orman is a two-time winner of the Daytime Emmy Awards, the most successful fund-raiser in the history of public television, and in 2008 was selected by
Time Magazine as one of the most influential people in the world.
It would be easy to interpret Orman’s quote as simply that of a financial advisor with a fairly conservative approach to the market. In fact, she has frequently been criticized for being too simplistic. For me though, I think the quote is more complex and especially relevant to our most important relationships. I know I piled up a lot of bad debt when I let my immediate desires outweigh the long-term health of my relationships with those closest to me. I promised to be home right after work only to accept an invitation for “a few drinks”, usually not calling home to communicate and frequently arriving way too late and not in any condition for dinner with my family. Everyone suffered and unkept promises turned into a decided lack of trust in what I said I would do. It was particularly hard on my children. Morning golf rounds turned into late afternoon arrivals home because it was too important to continue rehashing the day with my buddies. Even something as simple as sharing the excess family money only after my needs had been taken of, created more cracks in relationships that were most dear. I nearly lost any long-term value because of my focus on short-term gratification.
About a half-dozen years ago, the light bulb finally went on. I needed to adjust my perspective and place it squarely behind the relationships with family and very close friends. Today, I might be accused of being a homebody or, maybe worse, boring but I’d rather make an investment that slowly but surely appreciates than continually seek the quick hit. Having that perspective means that I’m in favor of taking a long-term approach in my most personal relationships, revealing more of myself and helping others instead of being the quick-witted prankster or shallow conversationalist. While I don’t think many of my friends consider me boring, I do know they consider me patient and supportive. To me, the security of knowing that my daughter actively seeks my advice, my teenage sons enjoy spending time together even when it doesn’t involve me spending money or my wife says “I love you” in the middle of a Saturday afternoon in our kitchen is worth so much more than the best joke I ever heard in a bar. Knowing that my friends feel good about confiding some tough stuff about their lives is so much more invigorating than discussing the latest starlet’s sexcapades over too many beers.
Suze Orman’s quote may be simplistic investment advice but it’s right on the money when it is applied to our most important interpersonal relationships. Bad debt is simply that… bad debt. It happens when we can’t apply a sense of perspective to the present situation. Many analysts believe that lack of perspective created the present housing and foreclosure crisis. I believe, for me at least, that a far more damaging home foreclosure crisis would occur under my roof if I lose the perspective that it makes no sense to pile up bad debts chasing after momentary satisfaction. I’m in this for long-term appreciation and I hope you are too.
Labels: bad debt, CNBC, financial analyst, Merrill Lynch, Suze Orman, The Road to Wealth, Time Magazine, Women and Money: Owning the Power to Control Your Destiny
