The Krispy Kreme Klub

Krispy Kreme KKK PromotionToday I take up the gauntlet of political correctness with a news story coming out of the United Kingdom and a Krispy Kreme story that ran a, shall we say interesting, promotion.

A Krispy Kreme store in Hull, England ran the Krispy Kreme Klub promotion as a way to attract patrons to the store where they would get to decorate their own donuts. Little did the store owner realize that those three letters used as an acronym are often associated with something besides donuts. It is England after all where the KKK (Ku Klux Klan) are not particularly well known. The store is now apologizing for the promotion and everyone seems to be taking it as a simple misunderstanding.

What I’d like to talk about today is the more underlying nature of political correctness. Is it the responsibility of every advertisement to make sure they don’t offend at all times? Should people apologize if they inadvertently make an insulting reference. If the word retarde means behind in French but something else in English should they not use it in advertisements? If a slang word means something different than its literal translation does that mean the pizza advertisement that uses it is in the wrong? If the word naughty has two meanings should we demand it not be used in a child’s Halloween costume?

How thin have our skins become? How little provocation does it take us to start a boycott, demand an apology, fight for what is right? All it takes is a small minority to complain and the business is happy to apologize. The idea is that they have nothing to lose. If they apologize and say it was inadvertent then they gain some goodwill. Refusing to apologize doesn’t get them any sales and I think a lot of times that’s a shame. I think we shouldn’t have to apologize all the time, particularly when the offense is so minor and largely meaningless.

Does anyone think that a doughnut shop in England is having a KKK rally? And even if they did that would be their business. I certainly wouldn’t patronize their store any more but that’s as far as my power goes.

I don’t think this is a huge deal to be honest but I don’t understand all the rage over something so silly. Sometimes I think the business owners should stand up and say there’s nothing wrong with what we did. Get over it.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Illegal to Shovel Snow?

Boy Shoveling SnowThere’s an interesting little story in the news related to the blizzard that sort of wasn’t on the Eastern Seaboard this week. A couple of young men decided to go door-to-door soliciting their snow shoveling services. The problem is that they were doing it in a community that had passed an ordinance banning door-to-door solicitation.

The comment section of the story and apparently Social Media is filled with diatribes about how awful it was that these young entrepreneurs were defeated by the big and cruel government. I have some sympathy for those who are angry in that the ordinance in question wasn’t really designed to prevent young men selling snow-shoveling services but rather con-artist types from peddling their wares. However, I don’t have a lot.

The city in question, Bound Brook, N.J. has elected representatives who are tasked with passing various rules and regulations to make the city run more smoothly. Frankly, I don’t like it when people come pounding on my door here in U. City, MO and I wouldn’t mind at all if the city passed an ordinance banning the practice. The fact that after I refused snow-shoveling services once and the would-be entrepreneurs went into my garage and stole my snow shovel might make me a little bit of an angry old man on this one.

We live in the information age. If I need snow shoveling service then I can find it quickly and easily on the internet. I don’t want or need anyone at my doorstep. If the boys wanted to provide the service they could have emailed locals easily enough or created a quick website. If they had planned long enough they could have had fliers up before the storm hit. They could have told neighbors and friends of their plans. I’m just saying there were plenty of choices besides going door-to-door which was an illegal activity in their town.

The city council might amend the ordinance to allow for leaf raking and snow shoveling solicitation in the future although I’m certain those businesses have long since been taken over by professional services that hire young men like Matt Molinari and Eric Schnepf to do the work.

The days of lemonade stands and young men shoveling snow are all but gone, that’s reality. And stay away from my door!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Stan Kroenke and the St. Louis Rams

Stan-KroenkeAnyone who reads my blog with any regularity knows I’m from St. Louis, a huge sports fan, and holder of Rams season tickets. The big story around here the last few weeks involves the owner of the Rams being part of a group that is building a new football stadium in Los Angeles.

It’s no secret that the NFL would like to have a team in the largest market in the United States. It’s also no secret that Stan Kroenke is unhappy with the stadium here in St. Louis and is in the middle of negotiations to build a new one. He wants the city to provide much of the money while the city would prefer he funded the effort.

The implicit threat is that if Kroenke doesn’t get his way he will move the Rams to Los Angeles. There’s nothing new going on here. Mr. Kroenke has been playing this game with the city of St. Louis and the state of Missouri since he purchased controlling interest in the team back in 2010.

What I want to talk about today is a recent news story that’s been making the rounds. Since the announcement of the stadium plan in L.A. there has been a lot of hand-wringing here in St. Louis. State and city leaders joined the fray when they announced to the press that Mr. Kroenke wasn’t returning their calls and they were taking their case directly to the NFL.

Let me preface my comments by saying I’m a huge Rams fan. I love the team and think they are on their way back to the elite in the NFL. Maybe I’m delusional but I want the team to stay in St. Louis so I can cheer them onto to their next Super Bowl victory. I am rooting for the community leaders and Mr. Kroenke to work out a plan. That being said ….

Boo hoo, Mr. Governor, Mr. House Majority Leader, Mr. Mayor. When you encouraged Mr. Kroenke to purchase majority ownership of the Rams you invited a tough businessman to the table. When you’ve got a man like Mr. Kroenke opposite you it’s time to put on your big-boy pants. I’m of the opinion that Mr. Kroenke would like to keep the team here in Missouri. It’s his home state. His family is from here and many of his friends. Mr. Kroenke doesn’t let that change his game face.

What’s the biggest card in the deck for those who want to pressure Mr. Kroenke to stay? Hey, Stan, there ain’t no stadium in L.A. so your threats to move don’t scare me. Well, boys, Mr. Kroenke comes to play.

He’s not returning your calls? Then stop calling him.

Going behind his back to the NFL to plead with them not only doesn’t make you look strong but I also think it’s a stupid play. The NFL cares a lot more about keeping Mr. Kroenke happy, he’s the second or third wealthiest owner in the league, than it does about any Missouri politicians or a fan like me. I doubt seriously Mr. Kroenke would have gone ahead with this L.A. stadium plan if he didn’t have solid backing from the other owners about bringing a team to L.A. whether it be the Rams or someone else.

What Mr. Kroenke did was take away a chip from his opponents and potentially make a lucrative deal to lease the new stadium to whatever team moves there even if he gets the stadium he wants in St. Louis. Tough, good, business. I’ll tell you this, I wouldn’t want to be on the other side of the negotiation table from Mr. Kroenke. And if I found myself in that position I’d certainly be making my plans with great care. Not whining about how he won’t answer the phone.

You want the team to stay in St. Louis. Hammer something out. Don’t give away the farm, because Mr. Kroenke won’t respect that either. There’s money to be made by everyone when it comes to the NFL. No doubt there’s more money in L.A. than St. Louis but L.A. has failed to support a team before. There are dangers in the move. There is stiff competition from the City by the Bay, Alameda County, and down Route 1.

Don’t whine, don’t run to the press, don’t look to the NFL to save you. Figure out a plan that can work for the city, the state, and for Mr. Kroenke. Give his executive assistant a call and invite him to a dinner next Thursday at Tony’s. Call ahead and make sure Vince is there to make Bananas Foster table-side for dessert. A round of Booker’s bourbon, with a splash of water of course, might not hurt negotiations either.

Go Rams!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

 

Parental Responsibility in Murderous Children – Thomas Gilbert

tommy gilbertThe last few days have brought us a tragic story in that a man named Tommy Gilbert murdered his father. I’ve been keeping up with the sad story somewhat peripherally but I read a new article on the subject this evening and I was particularly struck by the comments sections.

The story is one we’ve seen before. 30 year old Tommy Gilbert largely seemed to live off of his father. Tommy graduated from Princeton with a degree in economics so the fact that he didn’t have a job and relied on an allowance from his father seems to have been more a matter of choice than lack of ability. Reading the comments it seems many people think that just anyone can get such a degree but that’s just not true. Perhaps he was given favored status because of his father’s wealth and alumni status but he still earned the degree. With his father’s name behind him it seems impossible that he could not have made some sort of reasonable living.

What I find interesting are the assumptions largely being bandied about in the comments section. The main assumption is that because Tommy had a weekly allowance and his apartment paid for by his father he was spoiled and the parents are to blame for such an entitled child. This latest article seems to indicate that Tommy’s relationship with his father was anything but good. He wasn’t spoiled by his father but apparently constantly ridiculed. Nothing he did was good enough according to at least what Tommy thought if not reality.

This would indicate a parent who is doing relatively the opposite of those assumptions. Tommy was getting a small allowance, $400 a week, and his apartment paid. While $1,600 a month and rent seems like a lot to many people it’s frankly almost minuscule to what many super-wealthy parents bestow upon their children. I would not call it an amount that allowed Tommy to live whatever party life he desired. This sounds like parents who were trying to force their son to get to work without completely cutting him off. I think it’s easy to judge but what parent out there doesn’t want to help their child?

I think the problems that Tommy had were of his own making. He had many advantages in life and failed to use them properly. That’s on him, not his father.

No big rant here today. I just think those that want to lay blame on Thomas are misjudging the situation. Even if Thomas was giving hundreds of thousands to his son it is still Tommy’s job to make his own way in the world.

Was Tommy spoiled and entitled? Unloved and never supported? Not easy to say for certain but I’ll tell you one thing. He’s a murderer and the only person he needs to blame for that is looking him in the mirror.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Friday after Holiday Law

Should be lawA friend of mine made the following post, in jest, on her Facebook page this morning and it’s got me thinking.

I think it should be a law that if a holiday falls on a Thursday you just get Friday off too. I’m just saying ….

Not surprisingly the comment has accumulated quite a few Likes although it’s still early in the morning. I’d imagine everyone who sees it will grin and agree. I’m certain that my friend isn’t actually calling for government intervention in the Thursday holiday situation but there is truth in humor. What the comment got me thinking about was the role of government and its legal arm in our lives.

We do have legally assigned holidays. If you work for a government agency there are certain days that you must give workers off. There are certainly optional religious holidays and cultural holidays where most employers give their employees the day off; these being Independence Day, Christmas Day, and the like.

I’m taking today off. I took last Friday off as well. I have accumulated enough vacation hours to manage to do so. I am logged in at work in case there is some sort of emergency but basically I’m going to sit at home and work and laze about the house. That’s certainly my right with my vacation days. I was aware of the Thursday holidays this year and planned accordingly. Could not my friend have done the same? Do we need to rely on government intervention to take a day off?

Again, I realize my friend’s comment was largely a joke but I do think there is some misguided mentality to the thought process of someone who would make such a joke. If you want to take the day off then make plans to do so. Talk to your employer. Make sure you can take the day off. Schedule your vacation days so that it is available to you. If your employer refuses to give you the day off then consider looking for a new job. That’s one of the reasons employers give optional paid holidays like Christmas and New Year’s off. If they forced their employees to work those days they would soon have no employees.

I work in the IT world and our technicians don’t get days like today off because there might be a client with an emergency. Normally it’s pretty slow because so many businesses are closed but it is important to have someone available in case of disaster.

I’m not making any big rant or complaint about some injustice today. I’d just like to say take a moment to think about how you can accomplish what you want without having to ask for government intervention. I think when the government gets involved legally in issues, even for the most well-meaning reasons, things often do not end up the way we originally envisioned.

Have a great day and a good luck with the coming year!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Marketing Power – Alex from Target

Alex from TargetAn interesting social media phenomenon swept through twitter when a young employee from Target had his picture posted on Twitter and immediately began to get tens of thousands and now millions of view. #Alexfromtarget is a good-looking young man and these tweets and retweets were largely pushed by a highly desirable marketing demographic called Fangirls. These tween and teen girls tend to be high purchaser and thus attract a great deal of marketing attention.

A Social Media marketing company now claims they were, to some degree, responsible for the explosion of tweets. At this stage there are some doubts about the claim and the company has modified its initial statement. They now say their various employees retweeted the picture of Alex, which was taken and initially posted independently of any marketing ploy, and spread it to likely Fangirl twitter pages. From there the picture gained momentum organically.

The people at Breakr claim it was merely an experiment to see what might be done. I have no way of knowing if what they are saying is accurate but I also have no problem believing that what they claimed happened, could easily happen. We’ve seen the same thing with microcap stocks with what are called Pump and Dump schemes. A social buzz is generated by a company with something to gain and the instantaneous nature of social media takes over from there.

It is clear in this case that Target and Alex knew nothing of the scheme but the implications that stem from this event are intriguing. I’ve known for some time now that a large number of reviews for self-published authors like myself are bought and paid for by the authors themselves. I wrote about this some time ago. It is also well known that companies solicit and repost good reviews for their various products in an attempt to generate sales.

Marketing buzz is highly desirable and can lead to millions of dollars in sales. If a marketing company is adept at generating such buzz then it is clear that businesses will beat a path to their door. How much good publicity has Target received in conjunction with the #AlexFromTarget twitter viral sensation? While it might seem difficult to quantify it is actually a trivial exercise. Target is well aware of their sales from week to week and month to month at various stores. They can now look at the numbers and tell us exactly how much of a boost in revenue that particular store received based on what has happened. It is bound to be significant.

Other companies will look at this increase in revenue and consider generating such viral campaigns. While the Alex from Target event brings such manipulations into the eyes of the mainstream population it is something of which businesses have long since been aware. What makes this story fairly interesting to me is that a third party company picked a tweet not started by the company to publicize. Had Breakr gone to Target with this plan before they implemented it, it is almost certain they could have realized some revenue. In this case it seems to have been an experiment. But what about next time?

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think Breakr did anything wrong. I don’t think if Target had contracted with Breakr to instigate the viral sensation that anything would have been amiss. It is in a company’s best interest to promote sales. It is in the job description of a marketing agency to create buzz. Alex remains a handsome young man who works at Target. The vast majority of those who fed the viral sensation were not on the payroll of Breakr. They did so willingly.

It does make me consider contracting with Breakr to promote my books!

What do you think?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Tricks of the Wine Trade

grove mill pinot noirI like wine. I’m not an expert but I do enjoy drinking a nice glass of wine with friends over a meal or even watching a football game. I don’t drink very much, but wine is always an excellent item for a single guy to bring to a party.

I usually look at the price on the bottle and pick something in the $10 to $25 range figuring that’s probably pretty good. I look at the reviews and the rating number but I hardly know enough to make an informed decision. Why do I mention all of this? In my endless pursuit of news stories about which to blog I happened on a wine story and from there onto an excellent wine site called Snooth.

It offered something I was actually interested in trying. I purchase wine periodically, as I mentioned, but I never really knew what to get and always purchase something different. I generally like a relatively hearty red but I’m fairly flexible. Snooth offers the ability to create a personal wine list. This seemed like a good opportunity for me to start tracking what I like and hopefully get good ideas on purchases in the future. It’s not a big deal but I’m a data guy and the more information you have the better your decisions will be.

I had recently purchased a bottle for a little get together and decided I’d look it up. It was a Pinot Noir and I’ve had mixed success with that grape in the past. I enjoyed this bottle. It was labeled as a $30 bottle on sale for $19.99 which seemed like a good deal. I was certainly happy with my purchase.

So I headed over to Snooth wondering if the price I paid was reasonable for the bottle in question. It was a Grove Mill Marlborough Pinot Noir 2013. I looked up the exact name and year and found nothing. Then I broadened my search to Grove Mill. There it was! The price was $29.09 which indicated that I got the deal I thought I was getting. Then I looked a little more closely. The price was for a 2009 bottle which was given 3.5 glasses as an aggregate review.

That’s when it dawned on me what happened. I don’t know if this is a common practice or not but I’m more than willing to bet it’s pretty standard. The Grove Mill Pinot Noir 2009 is a nice bottle of wine that generally sells for $29.09. The Grove Mill 2013 is not the same quality most likely. It is a newer grape and has not had time to age properly. But the name Grove Mill Pinot Noir has a good reputation. The wine stores are well aware of the difference between the two. The price on the 2013 was probably right in line with what I should have paid for it. I’m not saying I was ripped off. I’m saying that the wine store wanted to move that particular vintage and year. So they put a sale price tag on it that wasn’t really a sale at all.

If I had seen the Grove Mill 2013 as one bottle on the rack next to a hundred others of its ilk I would most likely not have purchased it. But because it was on an endcap with a big sale sign, I made the buy. The distributor paid the retailer, in this case Whole Foods, money to put the endcap out there. I’d say it’s all but certain that I’m not the only one fooled with the endcap and the signage of the sale price.

Let me reiterate that I’m not complaining. I enjoyed the wine and I think the price was reasonable.

I will tell you this. I’m going to be a lot more wary of endcaps with “sale” prices in the future. I’ll probably visit Snooth and try to pick out the wine I want before I leave the house or, if I ever get a smart phone, while I’m doing my shopping.

This should mean that when I show up on your doorstep with the look of dread at having to face an evening of socializing with real people instead of my computer friends, at least I should have a better bottle of wine with me!

Huzzah!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Egg-actly my Point – Judge Throws out Egg Lawsuit

Commerce ClauseI wrote about a lawsuit being spearheaded in my own beloved state of Missouri back in February that involved the regulation of chicken eggs in California.

The basic premise of the lawsuit is because California is such a huge economy; rules they pass for their state effect other states. I wrote at the time that while this is certainly true it in no way forced the egg production facilities in Missouri to change their coops. It simply means that if the people in Missouri, who sell approximately 1.7 billion eggs to California each year, want to enjoy the profit provided by productive people from the Golden State they need to change their practices. They are perfectly free to continue to keep chickens in conditions that can only be described as horrific but they won’t be able to sell eggs from such chickens in California.

The people of California spoke. California is the wealthiest and most populated state in the union. When voters from that state make a decision it carries more impact than when the voters of Missouri decide something. Just as laws in Texas can effect the rest of the nation. This is the nature of our Representative Republic.

I’m pleased to say that a federal judge completely agrees with my interpretation of events. The case has been tossed. U.S District Justice Kimberly Mueller writes that the states lacked legal standing to sue because they failed to show that the California law does genuine harm to their citizenry instead of just possible future damage to some egg producers.

It is patently clear plaintiffs are bringing this action on behalf of a subset of each state’s egg farmers,” Mueller wrote in the decision, “not on behalf of each state’s population generally.

It is quite clear, Justice Mueller. Thank you. And just in case Missouri and the other states want to keep filing and filing; she also ruled they can’t refile or amend the existing case. They can appeal but it appears they have little chance. Not that I would put it past the legislatures in my home state to keep the appeals process going for as long as possible simply to delay the expenditure necessary to improve the coops (estimated at $120 million).

It’s nice to know someone agrees with me now and again. Happy dance ensues.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Forced out of Walmart because of Resume Discrepancy

David-tovarI spotted an interesting story in the news today about a vice president at Walmart who was forced to resign his position because of a discrepancy in his resume. What I’d like to discuss is the forced resignation over something that has nothing to do with his work performance. Certainly there is cause for the resignation as having false information on your resume brings up the possibility that you got the job through subterfuge in the first place.

David Tovar thought he graduated from the University of Delaware but because of a transcript mistake it turned out he was actually a few credits short. By then he already had his first job and didn’t think it was worthwhile to go back and finish his art degree. He went on to work in the communication field at several places eventually arriving at Walmart eight years ago. He was in the final stages of being promoted to the position of senior vice president when a check revealed the resume discrepancy.

Tovar immediately admitted to the error and is apparently leaving Walmart on good terms. He wanted the job and Walmart refused to give it to him because of the lack of a college degree. He didn’t want to stay in his old position and so resigned.

I’m of two minds on this one. I do think it’s fairly important to be relatively accurate with data on your resume. Most people will alter a date or two to accommodate for time between jobs but lying about whether or not you got a degree is a little more serious. In this case it seems pretty clear to me that Tovar could have gotten his degree if he wanted. That his deceit was fairly minor in that he was a few credits away from his degree. He had largely done the work.

It must be assumed that he was good as his job to have reached the potential level of senior vice president at a company like Walmart. That is a position that certainly carries a salary well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars if not more.

So what we have here is a company refusing to promote someone they truly felt could do the job because of a relatively minor transgression. I’m sure Walmart will justify the move by noting that if they let Tovar continue upward with a false resume they would not have a leg to stand on when trying to fire others for a similar offense. I understand this argument as well but I just think it’s a mistake to let go a talented employee over something that is, in my opinion, so minor. It’s not easy to find good people and when you find them you need to do your best to keep them.

I understand Walmart’s fear that they might be handcuffed in future labor disputes. At least I’m guessing that was one reason for the decision to let Tovar go. Still, the idea that a company  cannot keep a talented employee because said employee made a mistake rankles my sensibilities. It seems like someone could have stepped up and taken the responsibility for keeping Tovar although undoubtedly the legal department had their say.

What do you think?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

 

A Tale of Two Jews – Roy Cohn and Sidney Frank

Sidney-Frank-Roy-CohnThe wonder and glory of information that we have at our fingertips thanks to men like Tim Berners-Lee never ceases to amaze me and I experienced yet another magical moment when the simple act of watching an advertisement led me to what I’m going to write about today. My point today is that what is important about a person is not his or her religion (or lack thereof), race, sexuality, or any other superficial factor. What’s important is what he or she does with his or her life. Today I look at the amazing story of how Sidney Frank and Roy Cohn crossed paths.

I’d never heard of either until while watching cricket on ESPN3 I saw a commercial about Grey Goose Vodka. I thought, hmm. Let’s look up this Francois Thibault. He is certainly an interesting fellow but that led me to look up Grey Goose vodka. That led to the remarkable story of a great man named Sidney Frank. Frank was born to a Jewish family of no particular distinction or wealth and managed to save enough money to attend Brown University for one year. After that he had no money left and so went to work as an aircraft mechanic for Pratt and Whitney servicing engines in the South Pacific during World War II.

He married well and rose quickly in the ranks of his wife’s family distillery business. He was eventually forced out of the company in a family dispute and after his wife died started his own company. Through hard work and promotional genius he turned Jagermeister into a huge success and made himself a lot of money. That is when he approached Thibault about producing a fine French vodka made with the best ingredients. Grey Goose. He turned the company into a huge success and eventually sold it to Bacardi for a tidy $2 billion. He became a tremendous philanthropist who gave money to, among many others, Brown University so that no student would ever have to leave because of lack of funds again. He gave all the employees of his company large bonuses.

***** ERRONEOUS INFORMATION******

He had a heart attack at the age of 86 and as he lay dying on his bed a man named Roy Cohn came to visit him.

****** CORRECTION *****

Cohn did not visit Frank’s hospital room but another man named Lewis Rosensteil but the story is otherwise accurate as to Frank’s actions.

***** END CORRECTION *****

Roy Cohn was also born to a Jewish family but the similarities to Frank end there. Cohn gained a law degree and used his family influence to get a good job immediately upon being granted his license. He gained prominence prosecuting accused Soviet spies during the Red Scare years using whatever methods necessary to gain convictions. He helped secure the conviction and execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg apparently having convinced the brother of Julius to lie on stand, this done to prevent his and his wife’s reputations from being destroyed.

This bit of skulduggery got the attention of Eugene McCarthy and Cohn played a rather slimy roll in the McCarthy hearings that ended in disgrace for McCarthy largely because of the tactics used by Cohn against the army.  Later in life Cohn was accused of professional misconduct several times. He engineered a hostile take-over his grand-uncle’s Lionel Model Train company and ran the company into the ground before he was eventually removed.

He was involved in an extremely shady political deal that allowed John B. Anderson to get the New York nomination in the 1980 Presidential race. This was designed to split opposition to Reagan although the results allowed Anderson to become the last Independent Candidate for President to have a solid chance of winning. Still, it involved passing along money in an illegal fashion.

**** CORRECTED SECTION ****

He walked into Lewis Rosenstiel’s hand hospital room. Both Jews. Both white men. In the eyes of many much the same.

Cohn took the hand of the comatose Rosensteil and forced it into signing a will that named Cohn as one of the primary executors of the will. A despicable act by a disgusting man.

*** END OF CORRECTED SECTION ***

Roger Stone, a friend of Cohn, said that the man’s final goal was to die absolutely bankrupt and owing millions of dollars to the IRS. He succeeded.

The next time you think something about someone because of the color of their skin, their religious beliefs, their sexual habits, their sex, their race, or any other superficial features; I’d like you to think about Frank and Cohn.

Tom Liberman

Do you want to be a Millionaire?

MillionaireThat’s the question that I saw posted on Facebook and the vehemence of my reaction surprised me. Fuck no.

I want to earn millions of dollars. I write my books and I want people to love them. I love writing them. I want people to read my books and understand the philosophical ideology behind them. That we make our destiny in this world of ours. That those who work hard and treat others with honor earn their millions. Don’t give me a million dollars because I picked a randoms series of numbers.

I want people to buy my books by the millions. I want movie studios to understand the power of the words I write and offer me millions, tens of millions of dollars because turning my books into movies will entertain countless fans and earn money for other people. I don’t want you to spend your $2.99 on my books to make me a millionaire. I want you to spend that money because you love reading my books. I want you to spend that money because the ideas of decency, fair-play, hard-work, personal responsibility, and independent action resonate with you.

I do not pursue millions of dollars. I pursue doing things I love. I pursue writing books I love. I pursue a fulfilling life. I pursue spending my time with interesting people who enrich my life.

This is what Ayn Rand was writing about and she was right. Howard Rourke did not pursue wealth. He pursued the glory of his craft. John Galt did not pursue millions nor did Dagny Taggert and Francisco d’Anconia. Those who think the point Rand made was that money is the motivator don’t understand her and they won’t understand this post.

No!

No, I do not want to “be” a millionaire. I reject the notion out of hand. I want to earn millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions. I want you to read my books. I want you to love reading my books as much as I love writing them.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

The Message – Buy Gold or Regret it – Beware the Messenger?

Gold PricesWhenever someone tells you something; whether it be in person or through one of the various forms of media available today, it’s a good idea to think about the motivation of the person delivering the message. I just read an article in that most foolish of websites Motley Fool wherein a fellow named Robert Baillieul tells his readers in no uncertain terms that the value of gold will skyrocket in comings months and they should purchase it now!

I wrote about another fellow named Jim Rogers and his advice about gold back in July of 2013. The article by Rogers describes men like Baillieul exactly. They are mystics who believe the price of gold must go up. This is based on the idea that the price of gold has rise from $35 an ounce in 1971 to it’s current price of $1,310 in the last forty-some years.

I wrote an article on the nature of the Gold Standard, our exit from which freed gold to be traded as a commodity instead of having a set price. This has resulted in a mystical outlook on gold from many people.

I’m not saying that gold won’t rise in the coming months. There are many mystics out there who believe that gold has inherent value, that it is a commodity that can be traded for goods when paper money is eschewed. The reality is that paper money has about an equal inherent value to gold. Gold has some value as medium for artists and some conductive value but it is otherwise equivelant to paper in that it cannot be eaten, burned, drunk, or otherwise used in the manner of water or a chicken.

This is not my point here today. My point is that your money, whatever form it takes, has real value. You want to grow that money so that you can retire securely. So that you can purchase the things you desire. When someone from Motley Fool tells you to sink a lot of money into a commodity like gold that has no dividend you should be wary.  Motley Fools makes a lot of their money through sensationalist headlines that people click. These stories are filled with advertisements that make Motley Fool money. The crazier the headline the more clicks and the more money.

So what should you do? If you like researching and learning about the financial markets I encourage you to spend time and effort learning what are good purchases and what are risky purchases. Just be aware that such a job is what many people do for a living. If you do it as a hobby think about how a hobbyist would do at your job. You studied for years and learned a craft and so does a reputable broker.

It’s your money. Do with it as you will. Just be aware that there are those out there who want to take it from you and they often dazzle with tales of profit taking.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

CYNK Technology – $6 Billion of Foolishness

Microcap-stocks

How much does being foolish cost? It’s not easy to count that high and this was demonstrated in a story that recently hit the news.

In this world there are publicly traded stocks and while much of this activity is regulated by the SEC there is another group of stocks often called Microcap, Nanocap, or penny stocks. These stocks have a great deal of appeal to investors with a relatively small amount of money to put into their portfolio.

Low Buy In

The idea is that for a few thousand dollars you can purchase millions of shares of such a stock. Generally these companies promise they are working on some technology that will become mainstream. Thus the stock will increase in value dramatically. This means for a minimal risk you hope to reap a reward of millions of dollars. My father has invested in such companies. By coincidence just hours before I read this story I found out a friend is investing in such a way. The general attitude seems to be, what the heck, it’s a few thousand and I can afford it.

Nanocap Stock

Now to the story in question. CYNK Technology is a Nanocap stock. According to their filing they have one employee and no revenue. That’s zero dollars in declared revenue. As recently as June the stock traded for about $.10, a dime. As of this afternoon, although this is extremely volatile information, it was trading at over $20 giving it a market cap of over $6 billion because of the hundreds of millions of share available.

What does all this mean? We call this a Pump and Dump scheme. Generally the people involved in running the company, who own the vast majority of the shares, engage in practices designed to make the stock seem attractive. This brings in people like my father and my friend. They purchase the stock in huge amounts, although with a minimal outlay of cash, on the hopes the stock will rise.

This sends the stock to a high value but the problem is that unless you time things perfectly you can’t really sell it. There aren’t that many buyers out there willing to purchase such an inflated stock, only those, like you, who are looking to sell it quick as soon as it rises to a certain point. This happens so quickly that most people are left holding millions of shares of worthless stock when it immediately plummets back down to its real value.

In the end a lot of people are out money and the scam artists who own the company abscond with the profits. There is an entire industry that preys on those who spend a few thousand on such investments. They are wolves in the forest watching you. Waiting for you.

My Point

Don’t be foolish even if it’s just a fraction of your net worth. When you make foolish decisions you set a pattern for yourself. I understand the temptation but it’s far easier to fall into patterns than we realize and we’re also setting an example for those around us. If I purchase these things on a flyer and lose a few thousand it’s not going to change my financial situation but perhaps someone who admires me, if such a person can be found, might emulate my actions. Perhaps I might even convince myself that I was going to hit it lucky eventually. That’s the compulsive gambler’s story. Just one more spin they say and eventually they have lost everything.

I’m certainly not saying that one Microcap investment is going to ruin my father, my buddy, or you. I’m just asking a simple question, why be foolish, even once? Making good decisions can be just as habit forming as making bad ones.

Tom Liberman

Amazon v. Google and the Non-compete Clause

Non-compete agreement

I just read an interesting story about Amazon trying to enforce a Non-Compete clause for a former employee who went to work for Google. State rather than federal laws regulate Non-compete contracts and enforcement varies widely from state to state.

Libertarian Ideology

The reason I find this interesting is because the very nature of a non-compete contract goes against my Libertarian ideology. It undermines the capitalistic system by preventing people from selling their services to the higher bidder. The courts largely agree with me and generally refuse to enforce non-competes unless they involve the movement of trade-secrets or the poaching of clients. When a person simply moves from one job to another, and doesn’t approach clients from the first job, the courts have shown great reluctance to enforce the non-compete.

Purpose of a Non-Compete

The entire purpose of a non-compete in anyone’s contract is to prevent other companies from coming in and paying that employee more money. I ask you, why shouldn’t anyone be able to sell his or her services to the highest bidder?  Would any employee sign such a document if they didn’t think their hiring depended upon such a concession? I don’t think so. No one would willingly sign away the right to go somewhere else if offered a better salary or a better situation. It’s essentially extortion. If you don’t sign this non-compete, we’ll hire someone else.

Right now, California is the only state to explicitly forbid such contracts although, as I mentioned earlier, judges have proven extremely reluctant to enforce the contracts except in specific situations.

When I read stories about enterprise corporations trying to enforce 18 month non-compete contracts it infuriates me and reminds me of why unions came into existence in the first place. If companies let individuals seek those who will compensate them properly for their skills it is better for corporations and it is better for employees. Capitalism in its unfettered state is an excellent system but those who would chain it come in many different uniforms.

There are unions who forget their original purpose and spend more time counting their dues then trying to help their members. There are corporate leaders who believe accumulating more money is of greater importance than treating employees as partners. There are employees who forget that they owe it to their employers to always do their best job. There are politicians who pass laws so that unscrupulous business owners can bankrupt their rivals. There is no single enemy to capitalism and those who seek to pervert it will likely always be with us.

What works best for people is the freedom to sell their services to whoever is willing to pay the most or offers the most rewarding work environment. What works best for companies is providing an excellent place to work for their highly skilled workers. What works best for society is businesses with hard-working employees and owners who treat them as family. This produces innovation, advancement, wealth, friendships, and success. This is objectively good. This is what we should strive to achieve.

Conclusion

Non-competes work against this idea. They should be illegal and happily the courts largely agree. It’s a shame states like California have to pass such laws, it should be completely unnecessary.

What do you think?

Tom Liberman

The Largely Unregulated Supplement Industry

supplement regulationThere’s a rather humorous John Oliver video making the rounds on Facebook discussing the largely unregulated supplement industry in conjunction with the appearance of Dr. Oz before the Senate. I wrote about that appearance a week ago and I thought I should revisit the entire subject of the supplement industry from a Libertarian point of view.

It’s a nuanced issue for a Libertarian because as such I think government intrusion into our lives should be kept to a minimum but the government certainly has some duty when it comes to criminal activity. So where do I stand? Should supplements be regulated by the Food and Drug Administration or should the buyer beware?

I’m of the opinion that the FDA should not be involved in deciding if a supplement is ready for the market or not. I do however think they have a role in making sure a particular supplement is not toxic and I absolutely think they have a right to make sure they do what they are reported to do. Barring that I think their regulatory powers are very limited.

I’ll try to explain what this entails from an enforcement point of view. The FDA has the right to test new and ongoing supplements to ensure they are not toxic. I have no problem with the agency testing supplements to ensure that they will not kill people and they certainly have the right to remove toxic supplements from the market. However, there is the much murkier ground of whether a supplement is actually effective or not. I don’t think the FDA has the right to ban a supplement that has no health value.

People can choose what supplements they take and anyone who ingests a supplement without doing a little background check on its medical value deserves what they get. The vast majority of supplements have no health value. I think the scientific community should be running tests to determine if a supplement works. It’s not the job of the government to protect people from themselves. If some people want to believe the outlandish words of Dr. Oz then that’s their fault, not the government.

What completely baffles me is that according to testing at least 33% of supplements have no trace of the items that they are purported to have in them. That’s just fraud. Plain and simple. It’s fraud on a vast scale because every bottle of those supplements that crosses the state line between Illinois and Missouri is a federal crime. Everyone from the owner of the company to the driver who took it across the state line is guilty of millions of counts of fraud and could be sent to prison for the rest of their lives.

Every bottle of supplement that cannot be scientifically shown to do what the advertisement claims it can do is a criminal act. It doesn’t matter if Dr. Oz sells the supplement or not. If he claims it does something while fully aware that scientific evidence says it does not, he’s guilty of a crime. It’s illegal to sell someone a coin claiming it is gold when it is iron. It’s illegal to have a booth where other people sell iron coins as gold when you know they are iron. It’s even illegal to tell people to go to the booth to buy gold when you know it’s iron if doing so benefits you financially. That’s all fraud. You are engaged in defrauding people of their money.

This is a huge point of Libertarians who are often accused of having no compassion. I think the FDA has no business telling a company not to sell a product. If a company says Green Coffee Beans might cause weight loss and people buy them, tough luck. But if a company says Green Coffee Beans will help reduce weight knowing full well there is no scientific evidence they do so, well, forget the FDA, let’s talk about the FBI. You are engaged in interstate commerce fraud. If such laws were enforced we wouldn’t need the FDA to regulate our supplement industry. Put some truck drivers in jail for transporting fraudulent material across state lines and watch how quickly the supplement industry immediately cleans out the bad apples. Why this is not happening mystifies me.

I do think your state legislature or even your municipality has a right to say, hey this supplement is useless, let’s ban it. That is a right reserved for the states and the people just as they can ban alcohol.

We Libertarians are compassionate. We do care about people and this country. We just think that asking the federal government to get involved in areas over which the Constitution gives them no jurisdiction makes things worse, despite the good-intentions of the laws so passed.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

 

Monsanto an Inconvenient Truth – GMF Feeding the World

Monsanto GMFThe crazed anti-science wackos are at it again and I’m not talking about Climate Change this time. I’m talking about the opposite end of the political spectrum. When it comes to Genetically Modified Foods and Genetically Modified Organisms there is a lot of controversy but no scientific evidence they cause harm. All scientific studies to date show that such crops provide equal or better nutritional value while being resistant to disease and insects.

To date no scientifically approved study has shown that eating GMFs causes any ill effects.

And yet not a day goes by that I don’t see a science-ignoring liberal posting scary headlines and linking to discredited studies about the horrors and dangers of GMF. The hate towards Monsanto is palpable and the comments sections filled with outrage and indignation.

I repeat: To date no scientifically approved study has shown that eating GMFs causes any ill effects.

Monsanto itself is trying to make a profit, of this there is no doubt, but they have another goal. Feeding the world. Ending starvation. That’s a pretty noble goal and if they earn some money doing it, then as a Randian Objectivist and a Capitalist I have no problems.

What I find rather ironic about the situation is the science denying liberals are generally the ones most up-in-arms about how Republicans deny the science of Climate Change. The science is there. The Earth’s climate is growing warmer and there is substantial evidence to suggest that increased CO2 and Methane in the atmosphere is contributing to it. The science is there, GMFs do not cause any harm.

I’m not opposed to rigorous testing of GMFs but when the results of such testing prove them to be benign then I will support their distribution and use. Food has never been more abundant and cheap than it is right now. You spend a smaller percentage of your income on food than any generation in the recorded history of the world. You spend less time making sure there is food on the table than at any time history. This coupled with the fact that there are more people in the world than their have ever been is a remarkable accomplishment made in part with GMFs.

It’s an inconvenient truth, just as is human-driven climate change.

I know this post is going to generate some hate but I’d ask you to find a scientifically accredited study that shows GMFs are dangerous to consume. There are a lot of links out there filled with discredited studies so do your homework and then prove I’m wrong.

I believe the evidence of human-driven climate change and I believe the evidence of GMF safety. I don’t think scientists are out there lying in study after study to promote some agenda. I think they are educated men and women of good character who are out there trying to make the world a better place. My hat’s off to the scientist, not the naysayers and doom-predictors.

Monsanto is based here in St. Louis and I know a number of employees. They love their children and if they thought GMFs were dangerous they wouldn’t be working there. Monsanto isn’t some faceless corporation. It’s a company made up of people just like you and me. My friends work for a company that, through its product, has saved literally millions of people from starving to death. I’m proud to have the company headquartered in my hometown.

So to all you haters of Monsanto and GMFs, bring it on!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Fallacy Saturday – Confirmation Bias

confirmation biasI just read what appears to be a well thought out article from the Huffington Post about the decline of Olive Garden restaurants and the meaning this has for our overall economy. At first read it appears completely reasonable but it’s not. Happily it gives me the opportunity to talk about an incredibly important logical fallacy called Confirmation Bias.

The article itself looks into the declining market for Olive Garden and Red Lobster which are owned by Darden Restaurants. It then compares them to their high-end Capital Grill restaurants that saw growth in the most recent quarter. It then concludes that because the middle-class catering restaurants are seeing declining sales and the high-end restaurants are increasing this clearly means that the middle-class is suffering while the upper-class is thriving.

I’m not going to say the argument is completely false but it’s a classic example of Confirmation Bias. Yes, Olive Garden and Red Lobster have seen dramatic losses in the last few years but at the same time Fast Casual restaurants like Chipotle, Qdoba, and Panera (or St. Louis Bread Company as we call it here in St. Louis) are growing by leaps and bounds. These are clearly not high-end restaurants.

So what is Confirmation Bias? It’s the willingness to look only at facts that support your preconceived notion and either ignore or simple refuse to look at other factors that might not support your hypothesis.

It’s a very easy fallacy to fall into. When you see a post on Facebook that confirms what you believe there is the instant urge to Share and Like that post without even reading the article that is behind. This almost happened to me in regards to an article about Hospice Care that a friend posted on Facebook. When I went and actually read the article I saw that it was heavily biased.

We so badly want to believe that certain things are true that we are willing to accept any evidence that supports this point of view while ignoring those facts that seem to contradict our hoped for conclusion. This is an extremely dangerous fallacy. Just ask the brave men and women who served our country in Iraq ostensibly because they were going to stamp out the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

This fallacy is pervasive in today’s political culture where ideology trump facts. When we make important political decisions based on what we want to be true then we are doomed to making horrific mistakes.

What I’m saying is that the reason Olive Garden and Red Lobster are struggling might be because of the changes in economics for the Middle Class but there are likely other reasons as well. Certainly other Middle Class aimed restaurants are doing quite well. I’m sure there are a number of fine-dining establishments that aren’t doing very well. Can we assume the rich have less money?

The next time you hear someone make a claim that seems to support your position pause for a moment. Examine the facts from a Critical Thinking perspective. Do your homework. Think twice before Sharing that Facebook post.

The bottom line is that when we make better decisions we experience more favorable outcomes. Better decisions are driven by complete information. When we fall into the trap of fallacies we make worse decisions. When the people of a nation make bad decision after bad decision there are bound to be serious repercussions.

Tom Liberman

The Science Gap – United States and Asia

earning comparison us chinaI just read yet another article about how China is churning out huge numbers of science graduates. This article went into some of the reasons for this changing face of education. In recent years China, India, Germany, and even Russia have taken the idea of producing a generation of technically savvy young scientists extremely seriously while the United States has not.

This has resulted in the explosion of engineers and other scientists in Asia and Europe while the numbers in the United States have remained relatively stagnant. I wrote about a fantastic space exploration mission accomplished by Indian scientists recently and this is only the beginning.

Many of my friends and people who comment on the articles are under the impression that young graduates in China and India are incapable of independent scientific thoughts. That they just steal the innovative technology from the United States and reproduce it. This was certainly true at one point but we’ve left those days far behind. This transition of scientific knowledge is coming at the dawn of what I call the Automation Age. We are quickly leaving behind the sorts of jobs that an unskilled laborer did. These jobs were the backbone of the Industrial Revolution. If you weren’t all that smart it wasn’t a huge impediment. If you had a willingness to work hard and do a less than glamorous job you could do quite well all the way until right about now.

The problem we see today is that we face an increasingly technical world. The workplace is filled with computers and just wanting to work hard, while a wonderful quality, is often not enough. If you don’t have the education and technical skills necessary to do your job, you won’t have a job. I’m not just talking about engineers and scientists but a mechanic, an electrician, an HVAC specialist, they must all be able to understand and work with computers. We’re still in the transition phase to the Automation Age but things are moving rapidly. Robots are becoming increasingly sophisticated and will only get more so.

I can speak from personal experience as a technical trainer. I used to teach every day. Now I teach maybe 25% of the time and do web development and other work most days. I’m learning a lot from the young graduates of the local technical schools my company has hired and I hope that I make myself useful enough to keep around. I certainly can’t keep up with them but I’m learning more all the time.

What I see happening is that science and innovation, as important as they were in driving wealth and creating a higher standard of living in the past, are going to become even more important in this era. The countries with the brightest minds will not only create wealth but business leaders will, by necessity, move their increasingly sophisticated factories to nations where people with the proper skills reside.

I’m not all gloom and doom. The fact that China, India, Germany, Russia and others are producing scores of technically savvy college graduates is not a bad thing in itself. It’s good for the world to have more and more intelligent and driven people in it. I’m just concerned that the United States is losing the battle. I’m not the only one who sees this, industrialists understand and new methods of education are being tried all over the United States. We are still producing many of the top minds in the world and our education system is churning out fine scientists, just at a lesser rate than our economic foes.

The one thing that really struck me in one of the charts in the article I read was that doctors and lawyers earn far more than the scientists in the United States while in China they earn less. In the United States engineers are still well compensated but much less so than in China. Engineers are in huge demand in China but apparently not as much in the United States. What does this tell you?

This higher rate of pay naturally encourages young students to pursue degrees in engineering.

This is Randian capitalism at its finest. What society needs it pays for and thus encourages more people to pursue the money. So why are we paying doctors and lawyers so much and engineers so relatively little? That’s the question. As time passes and we need more engineers and technically savvy people; so too will salaries rise to hire such qualified people. Nothing is forever and the gains China is making now may evaporate fifty years from now or a hundred. I don’t know.

I do know that the trend is cause for concern. If future breakthroughs come from China, India, and Europe then wealth will follow. We’ve been the richest country in the world since the conclusion of World War II, some seventy years. When we’re not anymore I don’t think the nation will crumble. Maybe we’ll be better off as the second biggest economy in the world, as the third. It’s impossible to say.

What I think seems inevitable is that we face a new age with new problems. I’m confident we’ll survive and thrive but change is coming and it’s best to recognize it, plan for it, and understand the ramifications before it happens. Putting your head in the sand and pretending it’s not happening is a bad idea. I see too much of that from our politicians and from ordinary people in comment sections and personal conversations.

Just because you want the United States to stay scientifically ahead of our foes doesn’t mean we will.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Dr. Mehmet Oz Testifies about Weight Loss Scams

Dr OzI’ve long known that most diets are merely money-making scams designed to fleece desperate people from their money and I don’t really follow the industry with much interest. Today I spotted a blog post about a fellow named Dr. Mehmet Oz who has been invited by Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill to testify to the Senate about weight-loss scams.

I’m a bit jaded when it comes to irony, hypocrisy, and outright lying from our elected officials but when a senator from my home state invites possibly the biggest purveyor of fake diet scams to the rather less than hallowed halls of Congress to testify about the dangers of weight-loss scams, well, how can I not write a post about it?

The original post from Orac at Science Blogs does a great job of providing all the links you need to determine for yourself the nature of Dr. Oz and his various business operations. Oz is a recipient of the Randi Pigasus Award for Refusing to Face Reality and his various forms of weight-loss and medical advice are cited as doing more harm than good.

All that is well and good. It’s clear to me that Oz is a charlatan preying on people’s desire to lose weight quickly and easily so as to fleece them of money. As far as I’m concerned he’s allowed to do that as long as his actions don’t cross over into criminality. Apparently he has not yet crossed that line so he continues to sell goods on his television show without interference.

We live in a free country and if people are gullible enough to believe his obvious fabrications and exaggerations and want to hand him their money then that’s their right. Those who see through his lies don’t give him money. That’s the way freedom works. You’re free to do what you wish even if it’s foolish.

What really bothers me is this invitation to appear before the Senate. It’s not even that he is going to be railing against that which he is himself guilty of that bothers me. It’s not that I think the Senate still has the gravitas of the old days and that anyone who testifies there must be of good character. Those days are long gone. Still, why should he be a given legitimacy by our government that he clearly does not deserve? Are my tax-dollars going to house him, feed him, and transport him to these sessions?

Why does the United States government need to be involved at all? There are laws on the books about false advertising both from the Federal government and from various states. If Oz is breaking the law, arrest him. If he is skirting the law then it is up to people like Orac and the Randi Foundation to spread the word. It is up to people who want to lose weight to do due-diligence when looking for solutions.

The government can’t protect us from ourselves. If you’re foolish enough to purchase Green Coffee Bean extract in order to lose weight you deserve what you get. If Oz lied about the studies which showed its value in weight-loss he should be charged with a crime. Our politicians should focus on the real problems that this nation faces and not on inviting likely snake-oil sales representatives to speak to them about weight-loss scams.

The entire visit is a classic example of our politicians doing things that appear to be good in order to gain political capital. Look, we’re here to help you, they say. Vote for me.

I’ve got news for Congress. They are not here to help me. They are here to run the country properly.

I’ve got news for all my readers out there trying to lose weight. It’s hard. You have to cut your caloric intake not just today, not just this month, but long-term, day after day after day. You have to exercise regularly. Eat more fruits and vegetables. Go to the gym at least four days a week. I’m not saying it’s easy, I’m saying it’s hard. You can listen to me or you can listen to Oz. Your choice.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

 

Belmont Stakes – Whining or Complaining?

No WhiningI’ve been a hose racing fan since that magical summer of 1973 when Secretariat raced to the Triple Crown. I was nine years old and my mother took us on a vacation to a wonderful resort in French Lick, Indiana. We happened to be there when Secretariat won the Belmont Stakes in what many people consider the greatest single athletic performance ever. Five years later I watched Affirmed battle Alydar in what might have been the greatest head-to-head competition in the history of horse racing.

Why do I mention this? Yesterday afternoon a horse named California Chrome raced in the Belmont Stakes hoping to duplicate what Secretariat and Affirmed accomplished by winning the Triple Crown. No horse has won the Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes, and Belmont since Affirmed did it in 1978. California Chrome came up short finishing in fourth place. After the race the owner made some comments that are being fairly roundly criticized and it got me to thinking about the difference between complaining and whining.

In this case the owner of California Chrome was upset the horses that defeated his horse did not race in either the Kentucky Derby or Preakness Stakes and thus were rested and fresh for the grueling Belmont which is the longest of the three races. That such tactics make it all but impossible for a horse to win the Triple Crown and this accounts for the fact that it’s been thirty-six years since the feat has been accomplished. I think that Steve Coburn has a legitimate point but his tone was very bitter and he used words like “cheaters” to describe his competition.

He has a legitimate complaint but he clearly came across as a whiner and few people have been, so far, sympathetic to his cause.

I don’t want to get into an in-depth analysis of whether Coburn was right although a quick perusal of Wikipedia indicates that some of the horses that Secretariat, Seattle Slew, and Affirmed faced in the Belmont Stakes had not run in the earlier races.

My real question is when does legitimate complaining become whining? It’s a question that speaks fairly clearly to my Libertarianism. As a Libertarian I strongly believe in both personal responsibility and accomplishment. I don’t like it when people complain about the state of their lives when they could improve things simply by taking a more proactive look at how they behave. But there are certainly times when a person is blocked from doing something. When they are cheated. When is it right to complain and when it is better to simply put your head down and fix the problem yourself?

Let’s say a two children are playing and one takes a toy from the other. Should the first child take the toy back or complain to adults about the situation? Let’s imagine someone at works gets ahead of you through subterfuge or devious behavior. Should you complain to the bosses or should you take measures to make sure you get ahead in the future?

I think for the most part people respect someone who handles the situation themselves. Someone who chalks up a defeat as a life-lesson and goes about their business with their chin out and their eyes firm. We don’t like a whiner. We like someone who attacks a problem and defeats it.

Let’s take it a step further. The children get into a physical confrontation over the toy. Your rival at work refuses to give you information needed to accomplish a task despite repeated requests. When does complaining become legitimate?

My feeling is that complaining is largely only legitimate after you’ve give a strong, good-faith effort to solve the problem yourself. Even then it’s dangerous territory. No one likes a tattle-tale.

I think it’s a very difficult and tricky aspect of being an adult. It’s a complex issue that I can’t solve in a single blog or probably ever.

My advice is that when you face adversity take it head on yourself. Don’t accept defeat and say oh well. Don’t go crying to the boss. Deal with it. If that fails then you can consider taking it up the chain of  command.

I think we’ve all encountered situations like this and the first thing your foe is going to to do is make you out to be a complaining whiner. If you can honestly show that you attempted to resolve the problem without interference from a superior you will be better off when the confrontation finally happens. Heck, a lot of times attacking the problem personally results in a solution without involving higher-ups.

Does anyone have any stories to share? Do you agree with me? Disagree? Let me know!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books