What a difference a year makes!

Our little girl is one year old today!  What an amazing year it's been.  We love you, Eliza.

The International

No, I'm not talking about the movie; I'm talking about my job.  I was laughing to myself today at how amazing the world we live in is.  In an instant we can be in touch with people thousands and thousands of miles away.  Today illustrated for me how flat the world has become...

Work started at 6:30 this morning with a revenue recognition training call where I discussed various topics with one of our teams from what we call the "Emerging Markets."  On the phone we had people based in Switzerland, Russia, Israel, South Africa, United Arab Emirates and Greece.  Remarkable.  Several individuals participated in the conversation, and I was likely the only person who could only speak English.  My colleagues' abilities with English are amazing, and I am grateful for those abilities that make it possible for us to communicate. 

Around lunchtime I received a call from my colleague in Argentina.  She had just returned from vacation and needed to catch up on some things she had missed while being out.  We discussed deals being worked by the teams in Brazil and Mexico.  Again, remarkable.  

Later in the afternoon my boss called to discuss a few items of import.  He is in Australia, and had a need to talk about two deals--one in Japan and one in Australia.  So we spent some time talking about those items and the revenue recognition impacts for the company.  GAAP is nothing if not an effort to keep accountants employed!

Finally, at 8:30 tonight I got on the phone to have a conversation with a couple of folks in Singapore and my boss in Australia.  Sadly, that call was canceled at the last minute.  Never fear though, it's been rescheduled for tomorrow afternoon.  By the time it rolls around I will have already met with individuals in England, California and (gasp) here in Colorado!

What a cool job.  I love interacting with these people from all over the world.  It keeps me on notice that there is a lot going on around the globe, and it's good to be aware of it.

On a different note...

While typing the below entry I had the pleasure of chatting via Facebook with two friends--one from high school days and another whom I've only known for about a year.  What a cool world we live in where we can simply im each other because we're both online.  I love being in touch with friends new and old.  Thanks for keeping me on my toes and creating so many fabulous memories!

More Atlas Shrugged

I recognize my last post was pretty haphazard.  So many things going on in that book that I was just trying to get a general overview of where I am with it.  A few days after I last posted my niece asked what the book was about, and I gave her the following answer, "Probably a very simplistic description of Atlas Shrugged is to call it Animal Farm on steroids and approached from an entirely different perspective.  Socialism vs capitalism.  Sadly, the author seems to believe that where one exists there is no room for any aspect of the other."

I'll stick with that description for the overall theme of the book.  But there are so many sub-themes and fascinating aspects that I try not to get too bogged down with frustration in the overall either/or premise on which Rand operates.

In my last post I briefly alluded to one aspect I found very fascinating--because it elicited from me a comparison with Thomas Friedman's book The World is Flat.  Before delving into the specific topic I must confess I have not spent much time in reviewing TWIF to find specific quotes to back up my point here, so you'll have to forgive me for that.  However, one of the fundamental ideas I took away from my reading of TWIF was that Friedman believes we should stop all the hand-wringing about offshoring.  Instead of talking about the evils of offshoring we should embrace the opportunities it creates.  The basic way of doing so would be to invest more in education and encourage those whose jobs are at risk from offshoring to enhance their skill set so they will be better equipped to work in the new, flat world.  In short, the types of jobs that are being offshored are frequently the kind we would want offshored to allow people at home to turn their minds to something higher and more challenging.  Obviously, this is very difficult to manage in the short run for those who have just been laid off, but in the long run if we embrace the change, both individuals and our country will be far better off!

The comparison with Atlas Shrugged comes when Dagny and Hank discover the "super motor" that would have changed the world.  Dagny says to Hank, "Do you know what that motor would have meant, if built?"

Hank's response, in part, "Consider how many things it would have made easier and cheaper to produce, how many hours of human labor it would have released for other work, and how much more anyone's work would have brought him."

My mind fixated on how many hours of human labor it would have released for other work. Expected, coming from Hank, but there is no hand-wringing over potentially lost jobs due to this new development--only immediate thought for what else could be done given such improvements.  People would be freed to move on to bigger and better.  Let's challenge ourselves and be grateful for external events that force us to do so rather than whinging about changes to the world that was.  I enjoy the quote by Eric Hoffer:

"In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future.  The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists."

We must be prepared for, and be willing to embrace, change.  Changing what is happening around us can often be difficult, but changing our response to it is well within our grasp and should be something we practice.

That's it for today's thoughts on Atlas Shrugged.  I'm about 2/3 through now, and still enjoying it but recognizing more and more that Rand has put together a framework that could only exist based on the premises she has created.  In my mind she does not take into account the realities of existence and clearly no recognition of a higher power.  I found particularly distasteful her refutation of Paul's counsel to the Corinthians about the importance of faith, hope and charity--to be replaced by facts, proof and profit (Mulligan's speech while Dagny is visiting "Atlantis").  Obviously these things are important and should be pursued.  But, and this is my predominant issue with Rand's philosophy, they are not the only things that matter.  There is so much more to life, and concern for our fellow man must be one of those things.  

Will that result in us being taken advantage of?  Yes, at some point and in some way, absolutely.  Is that a price I'm willing to pay given our current societal construct?  You bet it is.  When facts, proof and profit become the sole aim of humanity you can count me out.  Middle ground does, and must, exist.  And this seems to be where we're locked in the constant struggle as a nation.  How do we determine the best middle ground for everyone.  No one's figured it out perfectly yet, and I'm convinced Rand's approach is not the panacea she would have us believe.

I hope to post more soon.  This book is so thoroughly enjoyable!  

Early Thoughts on Atlas Shrugged

My brother-in-law, Mike, and I don't see each other or converse frequently, but when we do it is always a rewarding experience for me.  Mike often challenges my thinking and makes me dig a little deeper into understanding why I believe what I believe--politically, socially, religiously--you name it.  One of our favorite topics is books.  Several years ago I mentioned to him I had recently purchased Atlas Shrugged, and he indicated his excitement to discuss it once I had finished.  Sadly, as of this past Christmas I hadn't even cracked the cover.  Mike and I spent some time together at Christmas, and I briefly mentioned that I was now seriously considering reading Atlas Shrugged.  Mike, in turn, raved about Walter Isaacson's biography of Einstein.  I got so excited about Einstein that I went out and picked up a copy in early January.  I'd been reading it for only a day or two when the following article showed up in my inbox with commentary from Mike included:

Jesse -

As you contemplate digging into Atlas Shrugged, I thought you would enjoy this piece tucked into the very last page of the very last section of today's Wall Street Journal.

As I suggested to you recently, the book has taken on a rather striking, and unfortunate, relevance as of late. 

Enjoy!

Michael

 

'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

By STEPHEN MOORE

Some years ago when I worked at the libertarian Cato Institute, we used to label any new hire who had not yet read "Atlas Shrugged" a "virgin." Being conversant in Ayn Rand's classic novel about the economic carnage caused by big government run amok was practically a job requirement. If only "Atlas" were required reading for every member of Congress and political appointee in the Obama administration. I'm confident that we'd get out of the current financial mess a lot faster.

Many of us who know Rand's work have noticed that with each passing week, and with each successive bailout plan and economic-stimulus scheme out of Washington, our current politicians are committing the very acts of economic lunacy that "Atlas Shrugged" parodied in 1957, when this 1,000-page novel was first published and became an instant hit.

Rand, who had come to America from Soviet Russia with striking insights into totalitarianism and the destructiveness of socialism, was already a celebrity. The left, naturally, hated her. But as recently as 1991, a survey by the Library of Congress and the Book of the Month Club found that readers rated "Atlas" as the second-most influential book in their lives, behind only the Bible.

For the uninitiated, the moral of the story is simply this: Politicians invariably respond to crises -- that in most cases they themselves created -- by spawning new government programs, laws and regulations. These, in turn, generate more havoc and poverty, which inspires the politicians to create more programs . . . and the downward spiral repeats itself until the productive sectors of the economy collapse under the collective weight of taxes and other burdens imposed in the name of fairness, equality and do-goodism.

In the book, these relentless wealth redistributionists and their programs are disparaged as "the looters and their laws." Every new act of government futility and stupidity carries with it a benevolent-sounding title. These include the "Anti-Greed Act" to redistribute income (sounds like Charlie Rangel's promises soak-the-rich tax bill) and the "Equalization of Opportunity Act" to prevent people from starting more than one business (to give other people a chance). My personal favorite, the "Anti Dog-Eat-Dog Act," aims to restrict cut-throat competition between firms and thus slow the wave of business bankruptcies. Why didn't Hank Paulson think of that?

These acts and edicts sound farcical, yes, but no more so than the actual events in Washington, circa 2008. We already have been served up the $700 billion "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act" and the "Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act." Now that Barack Obama is in town, he will soon sign into law with great urgency the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan." This latest Hail Mary pass will increase the federal budget (which has already expanded by $1.5 trillion in eight years under George Bush) by an additional $1 trillion -- in roughly his first 100 days in office.

The current economic strategy is right out of "Atlas Shrugged": The more incompetent you are in business, the more handouts the politicians will bestow on you. That's the justification for the $2 trillion of subsidies doled out already to keep afloat distressed insurance companies, banks, Wall Street investment houses, and auto companies -- while standing next in line for their share of the booty are real-estate developers, the steel industry, chemical companies, airlines, ethanol producers, construction firms and even catfish farmers. With each successive bailout to "calm the markets," another trillion of national wealth is subsequently lost. Yet, as "Atlas" grimly foretold, we now treat the incompetent who wreck their companies as victims, while those resourceful business owners who manage to make a profit are portrayed as recipients of illegitimate "windfalls."

When Rand was writing in the 1950s, one of the pillars of American industrial might was the railroads. In her novel the railroad owner, Dagny Taggart, an enterprising industrialist, has a FedEx-like vision for expansion and first-rate service by rail. But she is continuously badgered, cajoled, taxed, ruled and regulated -- always in the public interest -- into bankruptcy. Sound far-fetched? On the day I sat down to write this ode to "Atlas," a Wall Street Journal headline blared: "Rail Shippers Ask Congress to Regulate Freight Prices."

In one chapter of the book, an entrepreneur invents a new miracle metal -- stronger but lighter than steel. The government immediately appropriates the invention in "the public good." The politicians demand that the metal inventor come to Washington and sign over ownership of his invention or lose everything.

The scene is eerily similar to an event late last year when six bank presidents were summoned by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to Washington, and then shuttled into a conference room and told, in effect, that they could not leave until they collectively signed a document handing over percentages of their future profits to the government. The Treasury folks insisted that this shakedown, too, was all in "the public interest."

Ultimately, "Atlas Shrugged" is a celebration of the entrepreneur, the risk taker and the cultivator of wealth through human intellect. Critics dismissed the novel as simple-minded, and even some of Rand's political admirers complained that she lacked compassion. Yet one pertinent warning resounds throughout the book: When profits and wealth and creativity are denigrated in society, they start to disappear -- leaving everyone the poorer.

One memorable moment in "Atlas" occurs near the very end, when the economy has been rendered comatose by all the great economic minds in Washington. Finally, and out of desperation, the politicians come to the heroic businessman John Galt (who has resisted their assault on capitalism) and beg him to help them get the economy back on track. The discussion sounds much like what would happen today:

Galt: "You want me to be Economic Dictator?"

Mr. Thompson: "Yes!"

"And you'll obey any order I give?"

"Implicitly!"

"Then start by abolishing all income taxes."

"Oh no!" screamed Mr. Thompson, leaping to his feet. "We couldn't do that . . . How would we pay government employees?"

"Fire your government employees."

"Oh, no!"

Abolishing the income tax. Now that really would be a genuine economic stimulus. But Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Washington want to do the opposite: to raise the income tax "for purposes of fairness" as Barack Obama puts it.

David Kelley, the president of the Atlas Society, which is dedicated to promoting Rand's ideas, explains that "the older the book gets, the more timely its message." He tells me that there are plans to make "Atlas Shrugged" into a major motion picture -- it is the only classic novel of recent decades that was never made into a movie. "We don't need to make a movie out of the book," Mr. Kelley jokes. "We are living it right now."

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

The article grabbed my attention, and I have been whole-heartedly plowing through novel since.  For those unfamiliar with the novel let me start by saying it is over 1,000 pages long.  So when I say plowing through, I mean it.  I'm just over a third of the way there, and I must say I'm enjoying it immensely.  The characters are so extreme--in every way and in every direction--as to be completely unbelievable.  However, the overstatement of personality serves to drive home the point.  Ayn Rand is the author of the book, and through her usage of character development she seems to be stressing that only black and white exist--gray areas are for the weak who like to hide behind excuses.  At any rate, this approach makes for outrageous and wildly entertaining, if often frustrating, reading.  

Once I got used to the approach Rand took to character development I began to seriously think about the myriad messages she is sending.  I'm not going to take the time to delve into specific messages at this point (I hope to do a few, perhaps several, more posts on this book), but I want to point out that the book has made me think, and think hard.  Truly, this book is making me live up to the title and intent of my blog.  My mind is meandering all over the place--socialism, capitalism, consecration, greed, weakness, sacrifice, charity, money, power, motivation, effort, morality--it's all in there.  

Ultimately, I'm completely captivated by the main thrust (so far) of the novel--which I believe is to expose economic parasites while extolling the virtues of the intellect who applies his/her talent to production.  What happens when economic parasites completely overrun society and productive intellect is forced to carry ever more of the nation's fiscal burden?  An interesting email story on this topic landed in my inbox a few years ago.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner.

The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men-the poorest-would pay nothing;

The fifth would pay $1:

The sixth would pay $3;

The seventh $7;

The eighth $12;

The ninth $18.

The tenth man-the richest-would pay $59.

That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement-until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six-the paying customers?

How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal.

So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth. "But he got $7!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man.

"Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They were $52 short!

And that is the ride Ms. Rand is taking me on.  I'll have to leave it at that for tonight.  I recognize that I haven't included much meat of my own analysis.  But my mind is still rushing in several directions about the contents of the book, and I need to let things percolate a bit more.  Let me note, though, that I have noticed that Atlas Shrugged and Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat share a few similar themes.  Better education is a key to so much.  I must remember to return to that thought in a future post.  

Suffice to say I am enjoying it because it is engaging and provocative, if frequently outlandish.  I look forward to discussing the book with others who have read it.  I'm clearly not a great literary or philosophical critic, but I think we're all entitled to share our thoughts.  After all, I've long enjoyed Edmund Wilson's quote:  "No two persons ever read the same book."