By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Frugality/Frugal Fun, Social and Economic Justice

Some random thoughts about the economy and ethics today.

1. President Obama took a small but welcome step toward curtailing corporate abuses yesterday, restricting CEO pay for those companies taking government bailouts to a “measly” half a million dollars. Tom Peters, author of In Search of Excellence, endorsed the idea but said it didn’t go far enough, noting that the myth of the irreplaceable CEO was just that, a myth. He’d like to max out CEO pay at the same level a top general or admiral receives. Not a bad idea!

2. For those CEOs who can’t imagine living on that amount, I assure you that it’s possible to live comfortably, even luxuriously, on far less. I remember when $10,000 per year felt like an enormous sum of money to me. I actually had a job in New York City as recently as 1980 that paid $82 per week of hard work–that was part of the “research phase” for my e-book on having fun cheaply, The Penny-Pinching Hedonist: How to Live Like Royalty with a Peasant’s Pocketbook. In fact, if you’re a CEO who finds this new “limited” income a hardship, contact me. I’ll give you a free copy of the e-book, and the $8.50 you save will be your first step toward frugality. ;-). It’ll save the typical reader between $500-$2000 per year. In your case, it might save you a million or so.

3. Talk about sleeping at the switch! Whistleblower Harry Markopolos not only claims (and, I understand, documented during his recent testimony) that he gave the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enough info to break up Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme as far back as 2000, but also laid it out for a Wall Street Journal reporter who was interested, but couldn’t get the go-ahead from brass, back in 2005. Markopolos had some pretty harsh words for the SEC:

I gift wrapped and delivered the largest Ponzi scheme in history to them and some how they couldn’t be bothered to conduct a thorough and proper investigation because they were too busy on matters of higher priority.

4. The left-of-center political action group MoveOn is jumping into the fray with a petition opposing the use of bailout dollars for executive bonuses. This is from the message you can send to friends after signing, which you can do at https://pol.moveon.org/bonus/?r_by=15503-5426570-ynLMRyx&rc=comment_paste:

Did you hear that Wall Street gave out $18.4 billion in bonuses in 2008? $18.4 billion to the people who crippled our economy with their recklessness and greed and then took $700 billion of our money. Outrageous, right?

Not only did I sign, but I feel any company that took our tax money and then paid even a dollar in bonuses should be made to pay it back. Just because the Bush administration was too incompetent to specify how this money was spent does not mean we have to tolerate this outrage. And forgive me for being out of touch, but I always thought bonuses were something you earn through stellar performance–not for running your company, and the economy, into the ground.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government

President Obama came into office following a long and thorough process of checking people out, and with a particular (and very welcome) screen for ethics issues. Yet here it is, just two weeks into this new presidency, and there have been at least five nominees who’ve either raised ethics eyebrows or withdrawn entirely: Bill Richardson, Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, Timothy Geithner, and William J. Lynn III among them. And there are several others whose close ties to the industries they’re supposed to regulate could make people more than a little nervous.

What is refreshing, at least, is Obama’s willingness to stand up and say that he “screwed up.” After eight years of a president who refused to take responsibility for his actions, who could not come up with a single action when asked point-blank what his mistakes were–even while he was digging the country into several concurrent very deep holes–that is a good thing indeed.

This is not the rampant and blatant corruption and favoritism of the Bush presidency, or even the somewhat shady dealings under Clinton. But still, it does raise questions–lots of questions. And the biggest question in my mind is whether the flaws are inherent in the system. Do we need such wide restructuring that the revolving door is bolted shut? And if we do, how do we find people with the competencies needed to run these huge agencies?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Web 2.0/Social Media

Apparently, paying $2,715 a month rent for a two-bedroom apartment doesn’t even come with the slightest bitching privileges.

That’s what Katy and David Griffiths paid to live in a luxury apartment owned by Rockrose Development Corporation. But they were asked to leave, the lease not renewed–apparently because they tried to ask some pretty basic questions in a public forum, like why they were being assessed $600 per year to pay for a gym that wasn’t yet open. When David Griffiths’ post on that topic was refused by the building’s Internet forum administrator, he started a Google group for tenants; he suspects the company was monitoring.

The company claims he was one of only about 10 problem tenants out of 6000 units it controls around the city–but the action created a climate of fear. One tenant is quoted as saying,

Another tenant has circulated a petition asking Rockrose to keep the gym open later. It closes at 10 p.m., too early for some tenants, who pay a mandatory $600 annual amenities fee.

But she is unsure whether to deliver the petition. “I’m scared,” she said. “What if I need to renew?”

Ironically, the building was supposedly set up to encourage community. But this heavy-handed action makes you wonder.

Hmmm, almost sounds like Facebook.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Social and Economic Justice

Can’t say I’m surprised that the Bush bailout program lacked safeguards for ordinary people. It’s only the people’s money, after all. But I am a bit surprised at how blatantly the recipients are ripping us off. After the serious public relations fallout and public outrage around AIG’s lavish parties and the CEOs of the Big Three car companies begging from the cockpits of their individual private jets, you’d think they wouldn’t be so quick to rub it in We the People’s collective face.

Yet a big chunk of our money, supposedly designed to free up ultra-tight lending, found its way into huge executive bonuses–$18 billion worth–and to rolling up acquisitions of other banks. Credit doesn’t seem to be any looser. So when an institution is “too big to fail,” you let it swell even bigger so if it does collapse, it pulls down even more bricks of the economy? Dumb!

If I were Obama, I’d be issuing an executive order that demanded some accountability. Bailout money needs to be earmarked to bail out ordinary people trying to make it on 10 or 20 or 50K a year, not the fat cats with eight- and nine-figure compensation packages that got us into this mess in the first place through their bad management.

Surely there must be a way he can say, “look, the purpose of this bailout was clearly not executive bonuses and acquisitions. Money used for those purposes will be considered a temporary interest-free loan, and no payment will be forthcoming until that money has been repaid.” It doesn’t take any more chutzpah than it did to award those bonuses in the first place. (And whatever happened to the idea that bonuses are earned by high performance–and digging a ditch and pouring your company’s assets into it doesn’t qualify IMHO.)

Let’s see the bailout go to fund green jobs, antipoverty programs, and other ways to jumpstart the economy that bypass the greeditarians entirely, and put money in the hands of the people who’ve been hurt.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in General Commentary, Web 2.0/Social Media Tagged with , , , , , ,

If you’re under 35 and you watch the video of Steve Jobs introducing the first Macintosh, in January 1984, you might wonder: what’s with all the cheering, it doesn’t do much. But it was revolutionary for its time.

Before that, you talked to computers by typing arcane commands. Text was displayed all in one font, and if you were lucky, the font had descenders (the stalks on the g, p, and q actually went below the bottom of the other letters)–so you could even read it. If you weren’t lucky, it was a squiggly mess. My first laptop was like that (a Radio Shack Model 100, which I bought in 1986). Graphics? You want graphics? They were sooo primitive, and not easy for the casual user to generate. To do that detailed MacPaint picture of a Japanese woman that Jobs shows on an early IBM PC or an Apple II would have been pretty much impossible.

The Mac, from day 1, allowed multiple fonts, bold and italic (and other less useful effects) with a simple click, included a graphics program that anyone could use, and even had sound.

I had one of those early Macs: my first computer, which I bought in April, 1984. It had 124K (not meg, and certainly not gig) of RAM, 64K of ROM, and a single 400K floppy drive. The startup disk included the operating system, a word processor, paint program, and a bit of room for data files. There was no hard drive, and backing up those data files was a major PITA involving multiple disk swaps. Oh yes, and a 9-inch monochrome monitor; color Macs didn’t come along for quite a while. I bought a second floppy drive for $400, and about a year later, a 20 MB hard drive for $700. Now you can get several gigabytes on a thumb drive and pay $40.

And before personal computers, computing was reserved for the specially trained, who talked to their machines by laboriously keypunching a line of code at a time, starting over if they made an error. Processors were in a central location, and you used a terminal to talk to them–a terminal with almost no computing power of its own.

So first, PCs swung the culture away from those centralized computers, to having power on your own desk. But then the Internet reversed the trend. Once again, a lot of our processing is done someplace else. Which means everyone’s personal comptuers have access to enormous resources: the world’s knowledge available in seconds.

And the Internet as a commerce platform means we can shop, pay bills, raise and contribute funds for causes, manage databases far away from the comfort of our own home, or from any far-flung corner of the world

And among the many other things the Internet changed is our definition of community. We’ve completely separated community from geography.

For social change and environmental justice activists, the possibilities are enormous. Especially considering we’re probably at the Model T stage. The Internet as a commercial venture is only 13 years old; the Mac, 25 years old; personal computing, about 30 years old. The practical gas-powered automobile was created in 1886; Ford introduced the Model T (not his first car, by the way; he had at least three earlier models, starting in 1903) 22 years later. Just as no one could have predicted the enormous impact the automobile has had on society, so, no one can predict just how far the Internet will stretch.

Building on the Howard Dean campaign of 2004 (the first to make a serious attempt at harnessing the Internet), Obama’s presidential campaign was greatly helped by his use not only of e-mail and the Web, but of social networks like Facebook and Twitter. And by groups like MoveOn and True Majority, that were able to organize their members to support and fund the campaign, while focusing attention on a progressive agenda.

And of course, the countless blogs, e-zines, websites, and radio programs on the Net, from around the world, are an easy alternative to mainstream corporate-owned media that can no longer tightly control the news–at least not for those willing to be a bit adventurous with their web searches. That, too, is revolutionary.

The future promises to be quite exciting.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government Tagged with ,

Not since Clarence Thomas called Anita Hill’s harassment allegations “a legal lynching” have I heard such disgusting self-aggrandizement as came out of the mouth of Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He actually has the chutzpah to compare himself to Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi.

These three heroes of mine have only one thing in common with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi: They all understood how to get attention in the media; they were marketers. Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi is taking his roadshow to major media when he ought to be in Springfield, Illinois, at his impeachment trial.

Those three giants of social justice went to jail for the rightness of their cause. If Blagojevich goes to jail, it will be because he got greedy, and got caught. I cannot imagine King, Gandhi, or Mandela selling a senate seat to the highest bidder.

Oh, and if you want a relatively recent recap of the Thomas confirmation circus, look no further than this splendid diatribe by Frank Rich in the New York Times, October 7, 2007. It would be a violation of copyright for me to quote the whole thing, but I’ll give you a little taste–and the link:

Pity Clarence Thomas. Done in by what he calls “left-wing zealots draped in flowing sanctimony” — as he describes anyone who challenged his elevation to the court — he still claims to have suffered as much as African-Americans once victimized by “bigots in white robes.” Since kicking off his book tour on “60 Minutes” last Sunday, he has been whining all the way to the bank

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Politics, Transparency vs. Secrecy

President Barack Obama is off to a great start. Some of these stories you may have heard about–others were quieter.

  • Began his foreign policy by calling several Middle East leaders (Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel and Jordan’s King Abdullah–but not, unfortunately, any representative of Hamas) to talk about peace–and by appointing former Senator George Mitchell, a man who had much to do with the negotiated peace in Northern Ireland, his Middle East peace envoy
  • Also took the first steps toward drawing down forces in Iraq and closing Guantanamo
  • Overturned the secretive policies of the Bush administration in favor of much greater openness, including much better responses to Freedom Of Information Act requests:

    The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears… All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure, in order to renew their commitment to the principles embodied in FOIA, and to usher in a new era of open government. The presumption of disclosure should be applied to all decisions involving FOIA.

  • Got his Blackberry back, after the National Security Administration made it supposedly unhackable
  • Discovered, along with many of his staff, that the White House computer systems are years obsolete
  • Had a substantive discussion with his economic advisors

    • Let’s keep the momentum up! There’s a whole lot of damage to undo, and even more, a whole lot ofnew progress to be made.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability Tagged with , , , ,

    President Barack Obama’s inaugural address was deeply moving to me on many levels. And one of the most promising was his statements on energy.

    First, he recognized both the environmental and national security disaster of our present policy:

    Each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

    And second, the clean solution:

    We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.

    Not since Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House and wore sweaters instead of overheating the building have we had a U.S. President with this consciousness.

    Not Reagan, who promptly took the solar system OFF the roof. Not George H.W. Bush. Not even Clinton. And even though George W. Bush’s Crawford ranch is one of the Greenest houses in the country, his presidency has been a disaster for the environment, and an eight-year lost opportunity to address climate change while it’s still possible.

    Hooray!

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, General Commentary, Shel's Personal Life, travel

    Just back from a week aboard a cruise ship, with almost no Internet access (Yeah, I could have bought access at 75 cents a minute, but I saw no reason to grab my email at highway robbery prices. I did manage to use an Internet cafe on shore, twice, just to check if my Virtual Assistant forwarded anything urgent. But it wouldn’t be a vacation if I were still dealing with 300 incoming messages a day.

    Anyway, some totally random thoughts from the trip:

    Transportation Safety Administration has spiffy new bright blue uniforms (my last flight was several months ago). They look gorgeous–but aren’t we supposed to be in a budget crisis? There was nothing wrong with the old white ones.

    Cruise ships completely distort not only the local economy but also visitors’ perceptions. The feel we got for Guatemala in our three-week trip last summer was almost completely different from the artificial world of a cruise port that waits only for boats to dock. It’s even different from the land-based tourist towns and attractions that deal with a continuous (but much smaller) flow of tourists but also have a vibrant non-tourist life, integrated into the fabric of the nation.

    The cooperative movement and indigenous self-help organizations have even penetrated the restricted corridors of cruise terminals–Good!

    If you turn off email and Internet, it’s not that hard to completely ignore the outside world.

    Our flight to the boat was canceled, so we arranged with the boat to meet it at the next stop, arranged with the airlines to reroute us to the closest point, arranged for a one-way car rental, and drove four very scenic hours to meet the boat. This astounded many of our fellow passengers–but we’re used to making our own travel arrangements and it didn’t faze us at all. It didn’t even seem like one of our more difficult travel adventures, compared with some of what we’ve done over the last 30 years together, but cruises for the most part don’t attract intrepid travelers. Of course, it helped that we followed the Principled Profit philosophy and were so nice as we explained our situation that people went out of their way to bend the rules for us. And it also helped that we had access to a cell phone and a laptop.

    Environmental consciousness has penetrated even to the cruise industry. I went to a lecture from the ship’s environmental officer and was pleasantly amazed at the sophistication of waste treatment, etc. Still a ways to go. But they’re even considering having one nonsmoking ship as an experiment.

    Rainforests are very special places, and some of the landowners know this. In Belize, we visited a 3rd or 4th generation landholder, a young man in his mid-20s, who has organized his neighbors to provide many acres of unbroken habitat for howler monkeys, and has done quite a bit of research on them.

    Weather can always impact a trip. In addition to having our flight canceled, we had to skip our call in Mexico, because it was too windy to dock the boat. Bummer!

    It’s always better to have a reservation for car rentals. We didn’t when we docked in Tampa, and the cruise terminals had no cars. So we had to buy tickets to an airport shuttle, hunt around the airport for a car to rent, and then go off to see Tampa.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Transparency vs. Secrecy Tagged with ,

    For years, I’ve been calling for openness and transparency (in business and in government–in this blog, in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit, in the Business Ethics Pledge, and elsewhere. Yet most businesses AND most government entities shroud themselves in secrecy, bury attempts at discourse, and give the impression of pulling the wool over the public eye.

    This makes the Obama team’s high degree of transparency and active solicitation of public input (at the change.org website, through the in-person strategy sessions it organized, etc.) even more remarkable.

    Consider this widely reported quote yesterday from an Associated Press story on Obama’s proposed tax cut by Steven R. Hurst:

    At his meeting with bipartisan leaders of Congress, Obama said he would make his stimulus proposal available on the Internet, with a Google-like search function to show each proposed project or program, by congressional district, according to three people who attended.

    Wow!

    I find this especially interesting coming not from some kind of radical but from a mainline, centrist politician, many of whose policy platforms (especially in foreign affairs) are far more conservative than mine.

    Change is about both form and substance. Obama is doing really well on the form so far; let’s hope he follows through into the substance.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail