The Wonder of Transparency – Missing in Banking and Politics

 

As we progress (?) from one political party’s convention (Republican) to the next convention (Democratic), I saw a comment about the Republican Convention that got me to thinking about transparency. These conventions were designed to delineate policy for each of the party’s candidates, regardless of the political level. Candidates from the vaunted dog catcher of a local municipality to the presidential and congressional candidates, are defined by their adherence to these policies, called platforms, if they take on the “R” or “D” label.

So what does this have to do with transparency? First, I will present some background.

One area which has become very opaque is the financial sector. There is much deception, fraud and corruption, just like in politics.

The business relationship between commercial and investment banking and insurance, known as the financial industries, is a complex one. Early in another depression (yes we are currently also in a depression), the American leadership tried to clarify the relationship between and legislate these financial industries in 1933. A major piece of legislation, the Banking Act of 1933, became known as the Glass-Steagall Act. It is explained as follows:

“Congress saw the need for substantial reform of the banking system, which eventually came in the Banking Act of 1933, or the Glass-Steagall Act. The bill was designed “to provide for the safer and more effective use of the assets of banks, to regulate interbank control, to prevent the undue diversion of funds into speculative operations, and for other purposes.” The measure was sponsored by Sen. Carter Glass (D-VA) and Rep. Henry Steagall (D-AL). Glass, a former Treasury secretary, was the primary force behind the act. Steagall, then chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, agreed to support the act with Glass after an amendment was added to permit bank deposit insurance.¹ On June 16, 1933, President Roosevelt signed the bill into law.” - Glass Steagall Act - http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1504.html, http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/25,

It seems that during that previous financial crisis our country’s leadership were also “under extreme pressure” by their “constituency” to “do something.” Based on the nature of this Banking Act, increased public and regulatory transparency was deemed to be needed. It was manifested as a separation between traditional banking and more speculative commercial and investment banking.

I recently watched a documentary on YouTube about the use of technology in investing entitled Wall Street Code – https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GEAGdwHXfLQ. The introduction to this video shows the “sleepy” very passive nature of mortgage banking prior to the leveraging of technology in investing. At that time, mortgages were thought to be the basis of our financial society and security. As such, they were “rock solid,” highly rated and very low risk. After all, people never defaulted on their homes because they were checked financially and could not get a mortgage if they didn’t “qualify.” Mortgage banking was presented as extremely boring, as nothing ever changed since the implementation of the 1933 legislation.

However, in the early years of the 21^st century, these rock solid investments were modified to make them more “sexy” due to changes in this 1933 legislation. Yields increased and the investment community started making “big” bucks with very low risk. To fuel this massive “cash cow”, more and more people had to be able to get mortgages, regardless of financial qualifications. While the financial ratings of the mortgages stayed the same, increased risk was introduced via non-qualified buyers.

Part of this change was brought about by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1999. The following history is noted by Dave Manuel on his website, dated July 23, 2016.

“On November 12th, 1999, Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed SOME of the provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act. … So, as a result of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a commercial bank would be able to buy an insurance company, or a commercial bank would be able to buy an investment bank, etc.

The three co-sponsors of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act were:

Sen. Phil Gramm - R
Rep. Jim Leach - R
Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. – R

In 1999, the Republicans held a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The final version of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed the House by a vote of 362-57 and the Senate by a vote of 90-8. This made the bill "veto proof", meaning that if Clinton had decided to veto, the bill would have been passed anyways. Having said that, if Clinton truly didn't want the bill to become law, he could have vetoed the bill in a symbolic gesture, but this did not happen.

Many people point to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act as a major reason why the financial sector imploded in 2008.

When it comes to pointing fingers, both parties get the blame. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was co-sponsored by three Republicans, signed into law by a Democratic president and had the overwhelming support of both parties when it was eventually passed.” - http://www.davemanuel.com/fact-check-did-bill-clinton-repeal-the-glass-steagall-act-120/

Both Republicans and Democrats in positons of leadership and power benefitted greatly from these changes in the financial system. Massive transfers of wealth from the bottom 99% to the top 1% took place due to this change in legislation. Anyone in management of a bank such as Goldman Sachs, or the financial system, such as Ted Cruz’s wife, obviously benefited immensely.

Two distinct positions have been taking form since the financial crisis of 2008. The pro-Republican position is that one of the main causes of the financial meltdown of 2008/2009 is reported to be the repeal that separated commercial banking from investment banking. A USA Today article by James Rickards entitled Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis, dated August 27, 2012 notes:

“The big bank boosters and analysts who should know better are repeating the falsehood that repeal of Glass-Steagall had nothing to do with the Panic of 2008.

In fact, the financial crisis might not have happened at all but for the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall law that separated commercial and investment banking for seven decades. If there is any hope of avoiding another meltdown, it's critical to understand why Glass-Steagall repeal helped to cause the crisis. Without a return to something like Glass-Steagall, another greater catastrophe is just a matter of time.” - http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/08/27/repeal-of-glass-steagall-caused-the-financial-crisis

Mr. Rickards states the cause of the financial meltdown in simple terms:

“It was Glass-Steagall that prevented the banks from using insured depositories to underwrite private securities and dump them on their own customers. This ability along with financing provided to all the other players was what kept the bubble-machine going for so long.”

A more liberal and moderate position is as follows. Aaron Klein of the Brookings Institute writes in his July 19, 2016 article entitled Why is Glass-Steagall so politically popular and what does it really mean?

“Glass-Steagall separated the commercial and investment banking and the business of insurance from each other. Firms had to specialize in one of those areas and could not cross business lines. Separating business lines was a response to the factors that caused the Great Depression.

The surprise last-minute addition of a plank in the Republican platform embracing Glass-Steagall Act mirrors a call in the Democratic platform inserted by Bernie Sanders’ supporters to do the same, in spite of the fact that Hillary Clinton has explicitly rejected it.

Including it in the GOP platform is surprising and is a major about-face for Republicans. It contradicts House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), who just weeks ago proposed an alternative financial regulatory system of increasing minimum bank capital in return for less regulation. Repealing Glass-Steagall in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 was a signature victory of the conservative movement’s deregulatory agenda, which was also supported by President Bill Clinton. Why is Glass-Steagall now so politically popular and what does it really mean?

Bringing back Glass-Steagall is good politics and bad public policy, as is often the case. It is good politics because it taps into the belief by the American public that the Depression Era generation, faced with their financial crisis, made smart reforms that worked. Those changes did work and many of them still do, such as federal deposit insurance, the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission to police Wall Street, and a series of investment laws designed to protect investors. At some point, the thinking goes, we strayed from the wisdom of our grandparents, and in our zest to harness the powers of markets we made critical mistakes, unleashing a tide of forces that created our own financial crisis. Almost a decade later after the Great Recession, the American public is still extremely angry at Wall Street and wants change.” - http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2016/07/19-why-is-glass-steagall-so-politically-popular-what-does-it-really-mean-klein

However, along came the election cycle of 2016. With an increasingly “ingrown” political elite, distinctions between the candidates and political parties are required, whether they exist or not. As such, the financial system became one of those distinctions. Needless to say, the repeal of Glass-Steagall is a very politically charged issue in today’s political climate. Both political parties are jockeying for position on this economic issue in the election of 2016. The following quotations make this very apparent.

While I am not taking a position on the reinstitution of the Glass-Steagall Act issue, it is important to note the Republican “plank.” The following was noted about Donald Trump’s speech to the convention on July 22, 2016. It is as follows:

“No mention of efforts to cut financial regulation. Nothing about the Republican Party platform's new aim to break up the big banks. And not a word about Hillary Clinton's long-standing ties to Wall Street kingpins and the tens of millions she's accepted in donations from them.

Trump's failure to mention banks was all the more surprising considering that one of the few tidbits of actual policy news to come out of the Republican gathering in Cleveland was a plank in the party platform to reinstitute the Glass-Steagall Act. Since the Great Depression, that regulation had installed a firewall between commercial and investment banking, but its repeal in 1998 is often cited as helping cause the financial crisis.”

Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-one-key-word-that-trump-left-out-of-his-rnc-speech/ar-BBuFKK5?li=BBnb4R7

My perspective on this issue, as we go into the Democratic Convention is similar to that of my previous blog, entitled American Infrastructure – One of the Things Which Defies Logic, http://hcourtyoung.blogspot.com/2016/07/american-infrastructure-one-of-things.html. Regardless of the statements to the contrary made by the long standing politicians such as Hillary, Cruz, McCain, Romney, Christy and others, they have benefitted by keeping the status quo. They clearly are the problem, not the solution.

How and why is this so?

It is fairly simple, maybe even transparent. There have been very few “new” faces in leadership in Washington D.C. for a long time. Those that say they are new, typically come from the “political” or “economic” elite. Many, such as the Bush family, are from “political dynasties” formed from years in power and are accustomed to wealth. They, and their colleagues, Republican and Democrat, have had years to resolve the economic and political problems. However, the same problems remain with very little happening except those same people amassing immense wealth for themselves and their heirs. How can we continue to think about electing people like Hillary, Jeb, Ted or Chris, as well as, many of our candidates who currently reside as fixtures in Congress in Washington, D.C., when we truly need both fresh ideas and a different view of the world?

Candidates like Donald Trump, the current Republican nominee, and the deposed Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders, are truly fresh faces on the political scene. While you may not like their ideas, policy positions or personalities, either of these men would bring a different perspective to the office of President. Mr. Sanders was truly marginalized by the Democratic party, and they tried the same with Mr. Trump. These are not the only people this has happened to. One great example from previous elections was Ron Paul. He had the support of many of our youth in his campaign but was totally marginalized by the Republican party in favor of the candidate of the Bush dynasty.

As you watch the upcoming Democratic convention, take heed of the candidate’s statements and party positions. Ask yourself several questions. Where have you heard these statements before? How many times? For how many years? What has changed? If you are truly honest with yourself, you can’t escape the fact that the vast majority of politicians are saying the same things in 2016 that they were saying in past election cycles. For example, Hilary Clinton’s positions are very similar to that of her husband President Bill Clinton. You might counter that this is only “party politics” which she must adhere. But still, what really do you think will change with her in office?

You have a unique opportunity to change this political structure. Donald Trump, truly, is a new face in American politics. Is he the ideal solution? Probably not. I definitely don’t think he will accomplish anywhere as much as many people would like to see. However, the real opportunity is twofold and probably longer term.

First, he will bring new ideas and a new business perspective to the Washington beltway, and to the political and economic elite, which has been in power for these many years. While the changes may be slight, it doesn’t take much of a directional change in thinking to alter the course of leadership over a generation. Hopefully, he will bring a measure of transparency to our current political and economic (banking) systems.

Secondly, and maybe more importantly, his children, who are in business with him, seem to be very bright and well educated. With a Trump presidency, may come a completely new, more business oriented (as opposed to crony capitalistic) dynasty to the American political scene. American politics, just like the politics of Russia, China and all the other first world countries of the world, seem to require the development of dynasties in order to continue in leadership positions for more than a few years [note President Jimmy Carter]. I suggest it is time to introduce a new political dynasty to the American political scene. Who knows, it might be much more transparent than those we currently have.

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self-publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320
Email: tmcco@msn.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/hcourtyoung
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung
Blog: http://hcourtyoung.blogspot.com

Sent by Windows 10

Tribute to a War Hero

With the passing of my late Dad’s 99^th birthday, I want to pay tribute to warrior’s past and present. They all gave much and got very little in return. Dad was a true war hero, but he decried World War II as “Roosevelt’s war.”

It is to this topic which Mark Twain wrote one of his more dramatic and moving essays, entitled “The War Prayer.” He was one of America’s most notable authors of the 19^th century. He was, in my opinion, very politically astute, as well as being “in tune” with the changing culture (industrialization and globalization) of his day.

The following is a section from that essay (published sometime after Twain’s death in April 1910):

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle -- be Thou near them! With them -- in spirit -- we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it -- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.”

The above section, (and the entire essay which is a satire by Twain),  describes the psychology of “continual war,” and became increasingly important in America’s foreign policy starting with World War I and continuing to this day. It certainly marks the latter part of my life in a country, and world, which is so different from the one that I grew up in. Both Dad’s life and my life have been changed radically by these increasing policies of “continual war”.

Many of the proponents (typically right wing, conservative neocons) of “continuous war” seem to take their ideas from the World War I concept of “making the world safe for democracy.” It’s as if “American democracy” is a form of government so “enlightened” that we (America and its allies) need to force it on other countries even if we have to destroy those countries and kill their citizens to make it happen. Witness, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine and Vietnam as examples. During my lifetime, I watched as it took Vietnam 30 years to recover from “America’s war of liberation.” I am delighted to see that country finally flourishing and prospering in the global economy despite the destruction inflicted during 15+ years of war.

However, there is, in my opinion, a more sinister motive (if not several) to all of this. Once destroyed, a country can be rebuilt, which can be highly profitable, if you have the resources and money to do so. America learned this lesson very well after World War II. It is what propelled this country into a global economic powerhouse.

It can be argued that the rise of America as a leading industrial and economic power was indeed a blessing. However, the following Mark Twain quote seems to be very applicable to America’s foreign policy since the end of World War II, and in particular, since “9/11.”

“If you beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time.”
- "The War Prayer" - http://www.twainquotes.com/Prayer.html

As to the group perpetuating this policy of “continuous war,” I blame the current controllers of more than 50% of the wealth, power and resources in our global society, which I term “the 1%.” While this term may not actually reflect all of that class of people (it may be more like the top .1% of people globally), it is, in my opinion, a reasonable descriptive term to use.

It is no wonder that the political and private elite (1%) are at wits end during this 2016 political season. They clearly want to continue and expand this state of “continual war.” Clearly, “continual war” profits a few, in particular the top 1% as well as the largest global mega-corporations.

A general officer by the name of Smedley Butler knew in the 1930’s what Dad learned a few years later. A quote from Major General Smedley Butler’s essay (War is a Racket) comes to mind.

“A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small ‘inside’ group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.”

As a tribute to my Dad, the war hero, I hope and pray that during the lifetime of my son and daughter, and my two granddaughters that a global reign of “continual peace” breaks out. We have been fighting “Roosevelt’s War” far too long.

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self-publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320
Email: tmcco@msn.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/hcourtyoung
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung
Blog: http://hcourtyoung.blogspot.com

Technology vs. Jobs – A Free Agent Society

 

As I watched the Microsoft Ignite conference in Chicago, Illinois recently, I was fascinated by the new technology being presented. However it was also sobering because of future implications for the generations of my children and granddaughter’s.

One of the comments made during a presentation at Microsoft Ignite was that businesses would be able to have both employees and outside contractors sign into a business infrastructure together. This is a significant change because previously server systems and networks, because of security, tended to be closed to outside contractors or “free- agents. “It was noted that business models are changing and more and more people are going to become “outside contractors” [free agents] as opposed to employees.

This concept is discussed in Talent Management magazine (April 2015) in an article entitled “The New Free Agent Nation” by Max Mhelliah. The author notes:

“At an increasing rate, companies are collecting the names of talented freelancers who make up the ever-growing population of the workforce.”

Further he presents a historical perspective:

“In 1997, there were roughly 25 million free agents in the United States, which represented about 16 percent of the country’s workforce, according to U.S. government data. Since, that number has more than doubled to 53 million Americans, according to a 2014 study by research firm Edelman Berland.”

As was noted at the Microsoft Ignite conference, the article discusses this change in our society. The following is from Lauren Schulte, director of enterprise marketing, Elance-odesk Inc.

“For generations, our culture has valued long-term, full-time employment,” Schulte said. “There was a time when it was a point of pride to work for a single company for a lifetime. These days are behind us. The average tenure of a job in the U.S. is 4.6 years. Pensions and retirement plans are a thing of the past.”

The statistics presented in this article are telling.

“Tenure times, while decreasing, vary depending on age. Median employee tenure is generally higher among older workers. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median tenure of workers aged 55 to 64 is about 10 1/2 [ten and one-half] years – more than three times that of workers aged 25 to 34 years, who tend to stick around for an average of three years.

Those born between 1980 and 2000, the Millennials, is predicted to make up more than half the workforce by 2020 according to the article. They took their first job, “when the job market was at a notable low”.

Generation Y is the generation born between 1982 and 2004 (http://www.ask.com/world-view/generation-y-age-range-4974e5c1fa43793d). The article notes:

“Given Generation Y’s desire for flexibility at work, it’s easy to imagine a workforce increasingly made up of freelancers. Elance-odesk predicts the workforce could be half freelance by 2020.”

Another article entitled Robots increase manufacturing productivity by Andrew Wilson, Vision Systems Design Magazine, [April 2015] shows the way robotics are advancing.

“Robotic systems are now commonplace in many automated manufacturing processes. In the automotive industry, for example, such systems are used for the assembly of engines, transmissions and axles, as well as car body painting and welding.”

”When deployed, these systems both relieve human operators of such hazardous, highly repetitive and manually taxing tasks while increasing the productivity of manufacturing production lines.”

“Traditionally, such robotic-based systems have been separated form human workers by safety guards to prevent injuries caused by fast-moving robotic operations.”

However, that is changing rapidly.

“… manufacturers are now introducing a new generation of robots that employ torque sensors and vision systems to allow such robotic systems to work more closely with human beings. By combining the cognitive abilities of human operators and the potential of robotic automation, these so-called force-limited robots sometimes incorrectly called collaborative robots (or cobots) will thus increase the productivity of automated manufacturing processes.”

Just like in the computer industry, manufacturing is becoming increasingly automated. People with be called in when they have a specific skill or talent needed for the job at hand. There will be less and less people needed on a full time basis to operate our high tech, as well as, our basic industries.

Another article entitled It’s Time to Investigate the H-1B Mess by William NG, Design News Magazine [May, 2015] notes:

“Clearly some companies are gaming the system. The recent Southern California Edison case, in which 500 employees lost their jobs to overseas workers and foreigners holding H-1B visas, served as a clear example of that. According to Senate testimony of Ronil Hira, a public policy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, the offshore outsourcing firms that hired the California Edison employees paid them about 40% less than the American workers they replaced.”

Clearly this is another way to cut costs, but to what end? If the majority of our global businesses are able to use “free-agents,” either to cut costs or due to increases in technology and robotics, then what? Where are the customers who are able to afford the goods and services made by these more productive, and more efficient, leaner corporations?

So why aren’t we as a nation talking about this transformation? While I enjoy technology and am certainly not a “Luddite,” I decry the fact that both our national leaders and our global leaders continue to talk and develop policy as if we were still in the mid-1800s industrial revolution. They pass legislation based on the 1950s model of General Motors and subsidize mega-international corporations with federal (government) dollars just to create the illusion of normalcy, wealth and economic growth.

As I have noted in several recent blogs, our leaders both globally and in the United States (both the “R’s” and “D’s” as I term them) are either clueless about the issues or don’t care about maintaining anything but their own lifestyle and portfolio. In my opinion, they are too smart/educated to be clueless. Which leads me to believe, that with the exception of a very few, they (the elite) will do and say anything which will serve to protect, preserve and enhance their lifestyle and position.

On this Memorial Day [May 25, 2015] in the United States, we honor the men and women who have served and those who paid the ultimate price for “our freedom.” However, I know that what we have today is not the country my Dad and Granddad envisioned when they served.

To me, true leadership is being of service to those subordinate to you. This clearly is not a definition the majority of political/business leaders either in the United States or globally adhere to. Sadly, these leaders, which typically are part of the top 1% (elites) in wealth and resources, apparently don’t realize that the stronger the global “middle class” the more secure their leadership position. It seems, at least in the United States, we have one party, “the Party of Me.”

If this is not so, where are the substantive discussions of the impact of technology on jobs and a vision of an increasingly automated global society? Why are our leaders not discussing how our global economy needs to change to incorporate this new technology in the form of computers, medical technology, transportation design and robotics, while creating a sustainable lifestyle for the general population? Clearly, we cannot even discuss global climate on a rational basis without introducing generalities and political platitudes.

How do we continue to develop and maintain a high standard of living as more and more people are replaced by robotics or become “free-lance” workers? What does this mean to our increasingly expensive health care and insurance systems? How do people enjoy the “fruits” of this increased productivity when they have no way to “earn a living” because they don’t fit into the select few job skills which are in demand?

Technology has tremendous promise in many fields such as medicine, computers, agriculture, manufacturing and transportation. Some of this promise can be seen in recent space missions. One of the first of these missions is presented in my downloadable EPub entitled EROS Adventure, Journey to an Asteroid. The 300 plus high resolution photographs included in this publication are stunning to say the least. It is a tribute to the beginning of our advancing technology.

Our lives will be revolutionized, on one hand. However, the downside may be dire as well. How will we cope with the transformation from a human driven society to a machine driven [automated] society? If the majority of our goods and services are produced or performed by robots and automation, how will we respond? What will that model look like? As noted previously, where does the money come from for most of the population to buy these new goods and services, as well as the more common day items such as food, clothing, electricity and housing? In a word, how do we feed and provide for our families under these conditions?

I talk about this issue in my EPub entitled World Collapse or New Eden, which follows over 100 predictions made in the 2008-2011 time-frame through 2015. It makes a fascinating read with many links to the topics presented. A number of the predictions are relevant to this technology verses jobs discussion.

For the sake of the next generation, that of my son and daughter, and the next generation after them, that of my granddaughters, we need to be educating ourselves and really discussing these issues. We need to demand that our leaders discuss these issues in a meaningful way. To go into a major election (in the U.S.) with candidates named Hilary, Jeb, Christy, Cruz, Huckabee, Perry, Santorum, Walker and others talking about “lost emails” or “where and who to go to war with next” is utter stupidity and a total distraction. One of the only candidates in the presidential field discussing a significantly different agenda is Rand Paul, and I suspect he will be marginalized as his father was.

Should we continue down this path and allow our “leaders” and “future leaders” to continue this deception with the aid of the corporate owned (elite) mainstream media, then we deserve what we get. However, our children and grandchildren do not deserve the future we are handing to them.

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self-publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320
Email: tmcco@msn.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/hcourtyoung
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung
Blog: http://hcourtyoung.blogspot.com

A Tribute to My Mother and her Generation of Small Business

 

In memory of my Mother’s birthday which was in April, I am presenting a tribute to her generation and the small businesses which made America the global power it is. I remember the small town in southern Illinois which she was born and grew up. The photograph is of her parent’s family business which started as a small garage and grew into a local hotel located on the main street of this southern Illinois town.

During her lifetime and her parent’s lifetime, which spanned the entirety of the 20^th century, the world changed exponentially. At the turn of the century between 1899 and 1900, the mode of transportation was the horse. Large loads and multitudes of people were transported via rail. In fact, I remember one story which my grandmother told about arriving in San Francisco via train with her mother one day before the 1909 earthquake.

By the time my mother was born, cars were the main mode of transportation, but rail was still very prominent. Her family had one of the first automobiles in this small Illinois town. She would describe trips taken across the United States via automobile. They had quite an impact on her. The entire family would travel together, including my grandfather’s parents. One trip, when she was seven years old, was to Colorado (where she ended up living for most of her life). They went to the top of Pike’s Peak near Colorado Springs. Another family trip was to New York City.

Her family and millions of others like it worked in or owned small businesses in small towns across America. Many more were farmers and ranchers on small acreages producing the food and livestock to feed an expanding population. Because this area of southern Illinois had an abundance of oil and natural gas, coupled with a lot of agriculture, the great depression of the 1930’s was not as severe as it was in other parts of the country. Businesses bartered with each other, much as they had done prior to the depression. They traded goods and services to the benefit of the community and its members. By today’s standards, they lived a relatively modest life style, but they seemed much happier and contented than today’s first world societies.

World War II changed society in the United States. Many of the men went off to foreign lands to fight, while the women took jobs previously reserved for men. “Rosie the Riveter” was the name used for the women who took these factory and shipyard construction jobs, building the material to wage war.

When Dad came home from the Pacific Theater, he and Mom moved to Colorado. Dad started mining for silver, lead, zinc and uranium in the central Colorado Rocky Mountains. Many of the men who had been off to war, came home and started businesses, or went to college on the G.I. Bill. Often, they were the first in their families to be able to do so, thanks to the financial help from the government. This help enabled a generation of men and women to become engineers, doctors, lawyers and accountants. They applied what they learned and with a lot of hard work and dedication, built a nation, the likes of which the world had never seen.

This economy was still fueled economically primarily by small business and family owned farms. However, as money flowed, standards of living rose and profits made small businesses and farms larger. Large companies began to dominate the American and global economy. Things began to change. Because our society was more mobile, children began to leave the small towns of their parents and move to the large cities. Family ties were being broken by an increasingly mobile expanding society.

One of the first trips I remember taking on an airplane was to Hawaii. It was in 1962 and the trip was amazing. Mom, Dad and I felt extremely “pampered” by today’s standards. Air travel gradually became the “norm” and it morphed into the “dollar-hungry” ordeal of today.

As my generation came of age, many of us went to college, as our parents had done. However, the rise of the military – industrial complex (MIC), which President Eisenhower warned us about, was becoming increasingly dominant. Wars, such as Vietnam which was one of the first, became “profit centers” for these large corporations and their huge government contracts. As the money flowed into the mega-defense/government contracting corporations, they bought lobbyists, politicians and other “influence” peddlers to slant legislation in their favor. The political influence and impact of small business (as well as that of the individual) declined rapidly.

Throughout my youth, technology was advancing at a rapid pace. Computers, developed during WWII, were becoming part of everyday life. Companies such as Microsoft and Apple were started by the same entrepreneurial spirit and quest for knowledge shown by the generation of my Mother. This technological revolution is still one of the bright spots in our world today, in my opinion.

That being said, where will it take us? For example, there are an increasing number of articles and blogs concerning the development and use of robotics. As the use of robotics increases, what will happen to the workers who previously filled those positions? What is our educational system doing to offset the impact of this new technology? Are the young people of today going to be able to find meaningful employment? If not, what skills do they need to learn to be competitive?

Why aren’t our “leaders’, both in government and the private sector having this discussion publically in a meaningful way? As the United States enters into yet another “election cycle” why are we hearing about “lost emails” and “the necessity of starting/continuing yet another war” against people that can’t harm us? This lack of meaningful dialog makes almost anyone who attaches an “R” or “D” behind their name essentially a “sad joke on the American public”, in my opinion. With perhaps one exception (Rand Paul), I won’t be voting for any of these “R” or “D” candidates who claim to be “aspiring public servants.”

I included over 100 major predictions about these and other issues in my EPub entitled World Collapse or New Eden. These predictions, starting in 2008, have been carried forward to 2015. They show trends which are unmistakable and more than slightly discouraging.

Contrast the predictions in World Collapse or New Eden with the marvelous technology shown in my EPub entitled EROS Adventure, Journey to an Asteroid. It contains over three hundred high resolution photographs of this amazing billion mile space mission to a small near-Earth asteroid. This NASA/JPL mission, completed in 2001, is a testimony to the triumph of technology. Why do we continue to reduce our government and private space and science expenditures in relationship to that of the MIC? Clearly the benefit of the few out weigh improvement for the many.

So what about the promise shown by my Mother’s generation? Have we (the sons and daughters of her generation) really “frittered” their accomplishments away in such a short time? I have a very high regard for the generation coming up, i.e. that of my Mother’s grandchildren. They seem to be operating on a different “wavelength” than my generation (their parents). While I probably won’t see the outcome, I see the same promise in them that was in my Mother’s generation. I can only thank my Mother and her generation for their wonderful accomplishments and hope for a swift transition in power from my generation to that of her grandchildren.

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self-publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320
Email: tmcco@msn.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/hcourtyoung
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung
Blog: http://hcourtyoung.blogspot.com

The Greatest Generations – A Tribute to My Dad and My Children

 

Two generations stand out in my mind. The first is that of my Dad, which has been termed the “Greatest Generation.” The other is that of my son and daughter. While this may be natural for a Dad, I am in a unique position to note some similarities.

I had a life-long, incredible relationship with my Dad. The following is a quote from my book, The Orphan Boy, A Love Affair with Mining.

“One September afternoon I sat on the dump of a small mine in Colorado with a unique man, my dad, Herbert T. Young. Even at 12,000 feet, the sun was bright and warm, and the sky was so very blue. Below, the aspen leaves were just starting to turn gold, and there was a hint of fall in the air.

We had talked on the way up the rocky, steep road about the mines and the history of the area, as we often did. I never got tired of the many stories Dad told about his experiences and information he gathered in researching the mining district.

Arriving at the Orphan Boy mine, we sat down and had a cup of coffee from Dad’s ever present thermos. Even though I had previously heard many of his stories about this mine that started his love affair with mining, they seemed much more real as I sat with him in that remote and peaceful basin.

My eyes were drawn to the rugged splendor of the high peaks; Brittle Silver Mountain, Grizzly Peak, Revenue Mountain... Along the horizon were Gray’s and Torrey’s, two of Colorado’s fourteeners. The air was so clean I felt like I could almost reach out and touch the peaks across the Warden Gulch basin. Morgan Peak, behind me, and Santa Fe Peak to the south looked so close it seemed like I could hike to them in just a few minutes.

Everywhere I looked were evidences of the mining and prospecting that went on in a different time. I noticed the reddish brown and yellow gossans that streaked the mountain slopes in several places. All the while, this remote valley was very quiet, almost as if our thoughts themselves interrupted the solitude. This scene stirred something in my soul that words cannot begin to explain.

I thought of Dad and the many experiences he related to me. I noticed he was also scanning the mountains, deep in thought. He turned and smiled at me, with his brown eyes shining. I knew we were thinking, feeling and experiencing the same closeness to God in that moment.

The feeling of kinship I experienced while sitting on that mine dump were similar to the feelings I had during the times Dad and I worked underground together. Working underground brings a special sense of closeness where everyone looks after one another. Even with 30 years difference in our ages, we were kindred souls.

I worked with Dad during the summers and after college graduation until his death and had the fortune to experience firsthand why his generation was named the ‘greatest generation’.

He was typical of the World War II generation whose lives were interrupted by that war. When they came back home, they changed both America and the world in a special way.”

As I get older, I watch my generation at the height of their power and prestige. I can’t help but compare them to that of my Dad.

A recent blog on ZeroHedge entitled “25 statist propaganda phrases and how to rebut them” [source - http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-14/25-statist-propaganda-phrases-and-how-rebut-them ] reveals much about my generation. The original source of the blog is as follows - http://reece.liberty.me/2015/03/09/25-statist-propaganda-phrases-and-how-to-rebut-them/ . The phrases listed are generally applicable in regard to today’s society. However, three seem to be especially relevant in demonstrating the difference between my generation (the Baby Boomer generation) and that of my Dad.

The first on my list is the concept of the “free world.’ This has been sold to my generation as a consequence of fighting the Russians and the “iron curtain all through the “cold war.” We needed “rulers” to protect us from the Russian “bear.” We were incapable of making our own decisions, despite advocating “freedom for all” in our youth.

5. “The leader of the free world”

“The free world” does not exist; each individual person exists. Again, we are speaking of rulers rather than all types of leaders. Free people do not have rulers; they rule themselves.

However, as my Dad’s generation knew, “free people do not have rulers, they rule themselves”. Dad’s generation understood the idea of ruling themselves. They kept themselves far less ruled than my generation has. President Eisenhower was correct when he warned of the “military-industrial” complex, for which a requirement is a ruling class..

Dad was a decorated war hero in World War II. However, he had very little choice when he entered the service in 1942. The compulsory draft was instituted late in 1940.

“Congress passed the Selective Training and Service Act (September 16, 1940), creating the country's first peacetime military conscription program. Conscription in America is commonly referred to as the draft. The initial act authorized the conscription of men, but placed a limit of 0.9 million on the number to be trained. The period of service was set at 12 months.” – Source: http://histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/cou/us/aod/draft/aod-draft.html

Dad was caught by this legislation and before his conscription term was up, the attack on Pearl Harbor occurred and war was declared. His and millions of other Americans had their lives interrupted and changed. He had a job lined up at a tin mine in Chile and was preparing to embark on a career in mining.

The next phrase in the statists list of 25 (number 8) is applicable to Dad’s generation as well as mine. It applies to World War II and all “wars” afterward.

8. “Our military”

If the military is “ours,” then “we” should be able to exercise exclusive control over it. But “we” neither command the military nor have the freedom to destroy it. Thus it is not “ours”; it is a tool of the ruling classes used to make it very difficult for citizens to violently overthrow the government, provide a last line of defense for the state in the form of martial law should the citizens succeed in violently overthrowing the government, and present a deterrent to other rulers elsewhere in the world who might seek to take over the state and capture the tax base for themselves.

Despite his valiant and decorated service, Dad always maintained that he had nothing against the Japanese people that he fought against. In his opinion, World War II was “Roosevelt’s war.”

When they returned from the War, Dad’s generation started where they left off. Many were able to go to college, which was a “government financed” program. Prior to the war, “higher education” was expensive. Dad got his degree prior to the war, primarily because of his sports prowess.

Anyway, after the war generation received access to college and higher education, they “got to work” and built a country like none the world has seen. They were both innovative and industrious, and realized education was a tool to be used to benefit themselves and others. They wanted to create a better world for all people.

In contrast to Dad’s generation, my generation started its youth with unprecedented wealth. We became very politically and socially active. “Drugs, Sex and Rock and Roll” was the governing phrase. We wanted “freedom.”

Our activism stemmed in large part from the Vietnam War, which like World War II and the Korean War, reflects phrase #8 of the statist list above. Because of the “draft,” many young men ended up fighting an “enemy” which they neither knew nor had any animosity against. Certainly, the country of Vietnam was not a military threat against the United States or its “national security” in any way.

While some actions may require a government, those actions first require the voluntary consent of the majority of the people in a “free” society. Dad and my Granddad’s generation were aware of this and held their “rulers” far more accountable than rulers are today. In addition, the rulers themselves, being of that generation, took their responsibility and trust much more seriously than they do today.

19 “Government is necessary”

This is a positive claim which carries a burden of proof. By itself, this is a claim asserted without logic or evidence and may therefore be dismissed without logic or evidence.

However, after the war in Vietnam winded down, my generation settled in to a life of comfort and excess, and it shows. Technology was advancing rapidly and we were taking advantage of it.

The political activism and desire to “change the world” embraced by my generation in their youth morphed into almost complete chaos politically because we did not have the will to follow through or the character to effect the changes. My generation lost their will and desire to do the things necessary to create the change we professed to believe in because of the lure of excess. Instead of taking responsibility and ruling, we allowed ourselves to be ruled.

As a result, absolute greed has essentially taken over most of our global societies and political structures. We continue to follow and embrace that same pattern. If you doubt it, just look at our political parties (those with an “R” or “D” behind their names). Those people don’t represent me, and if you really analyze it, they don’t represent 99% of Americans, either morally, financially or ethically. Sadly, they represent the highest level of a society in a life of extreme power, comfort and excess.

So what about the generation to come; that of my son William and my daughter Laura? They seem to be very practical and much more grounded than my own generation. I see in them many of the traits of my Dad’s generation.

While it is true, many of them are interested in using the current technology and seem to be immersed in it. That is to be expected because they have grown up with it and it comes very natural to them.

For example, I watched my son and daughter-in-law research the real estate market while buying a home recently. The following MSN quote describes their approach to the complexities of this business.

“Younger buyers want to know what to expect and when. “I see them wanting to understand what’s going on at any time in the process more than any other generation,” says Paul Reid, a Redfin agent in Southern California’s Inland Empire region.” - http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/moneyinyour20s/10-ways-millennials-are-changing-homebuying/ss-AA9yDra#image=4

“Millennials expect to be partners in the home search, and they want quick answers to questions. “They want information, and they want valid information, and they want it right now,” Reid says. “They’re the generation of Google at your fingertips.””

“Many millennial homebuyers get recommendations on agents from their parents, but they also do some research online before they ever call an agent. They want to see testimonials on an agent’s website, as well as read online reviews.”

They make use of the technology developed by my generation. But they also have a natural curiosity about the world around them which my generation, in general, didn’t seem to have.

They tend to value real education, not necessarily that which is taught at today’s universities. Many are more interested in vocational training than “higher education,” (which today comes at an extreme cost).

They also seem to be naturally curious about the world around them, and as noted above don’t take many of the “statist propaganda phrases” as truth, like my generation has. In fact, my generation seems to have fostered, if not invented, many of those phrases as they sank into excess. They do not take the utterances of someone with an “R” or “D” behind their name as truth just because their parents belong to the “R” or “D” party.

After watching my children, their spouses and some of their friends, I am positive about the future. In many ways, they remind me of Dad and his generation. I am hopeful that they will follow in the footsteps of their grandparents and reinvent the phrase “greatest generation.”

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320
Email: tmcco@msn.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung

American Exceptionalism, Reflections of the Past or Today’s Reality?

 

As we enter what would have been Dad's 98th year, and I continue to write about our lives together, I wonder about the concept of American Exceptionalism. This term is “bantered about” by all of those with an ‘R’ or ‘D’ behind their name, especially in election years.

In this age of exceptional greed, is it still possible to have an exceptional culture? What does that really mean or look like?

First, we must define the term. Wikipedia notes the following:

“American exceptionalism is the theory that the United States is qualitatively different from other nations.^[2] In this view, U.S. exceptionalism stems from its emergence from the American Revolution, thereby becoming what political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset called "the first new nation"^[3] and developing a uniquely American ideology, "Americanism", based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, republicanism, democracy and laissez-faire. This ideology itself is often referred to as "American exceptionalism."^[4]”

“Although the term does not necessarily imply superiority, many neoconservative and other American conservative writers have promoted its use in that sense.^[4][5] To them, the U.S. is like the biblical "City upon a Hill"—a phrase evoked by British colonists to North America as early as 1630—and exempt from historical forces that have affected other countries.^[6]”

I believe most in America today would, if not explicitly, then implicitly use the “neoconservative” approach of superiority of the American culture and race. However, to Dad’s generation it meant something far different. While they may have expressed it in “neoconservative” terms, that is not what it meant to them.

In my book entitled, The Orphan Boy, A Love Affair with Mining, I note the following about a man who demonstrated true American Exceptionalism:

“One September afternoon I sat on the dump of a small mine in Colorado with a unique man, my dad, Herbert T. Young. Even at 12,000 feet, the sun was bright and warm, and the sky was so very blue. Below, the aspen leaves were just starting to turn gold, and there was a hint of fall in the air.

We had talked on the way up the rocky, steep road about the mines and the history of the area, as we often did. I never got tired of the many stories Dad told about his experiences and information he gathered in researching the mining district.

Arriving at the Orphan Boy mine, we sat down and had a cup of coffee from Dad’s ever present thermos. Even though I had previously heard many of his stories about this mine that started his love affair with mining, they seemed much more real as I sat with him in that remote and peaceful basin.

My eyes were drawn to the rugged splendor of the high peaks; Brittle Silver Mountain, Grizzly Peak, Revenue Mountain... Along the horizon were Gray’s and Torrey’s, two of Colorado’s fourteeners. The air was so clean I felt like I could almost reach out and touch the peaks across the Warden Gulch basin. Morgan Peak, behind me, and Santa Fe Peak to the south looked so close it seemed like I could hike to them in just a few minutes.

Everywhere I looked were evidences of the mining and prospecting that went on in a different time. I noticed the reddish brown and yellow gossans that streaked the mountain slopes in several places. All the while, this remote valley was very quiet, almost as if our thoughts themselves interrupted the solitude. This scene stirred something in my soul that words cannot begin to explain.

I thought of Dad and the many experiences he related to me. I noticed he was also scanning the mountains, deep in thought. He turned and smiled at me, with his brown eyes shining. I knew we were thinking, feeling and experiencing the same closeness to God in that moment.”

The feeling of kinship I experienced while sitting on that mine dump were similar to the feelings I had during the times Dad and I worked underground together. Working underground brings a special sense of closeness where everyone looks after one another. Even with 30 years difference in our ages, we were kindred souls.

A good example honoring others as you would yourself is as follows. This is a passage in my upcoming book, Light at the End of the Tunnel, about my Dad and our relationship:

“When mining at the Orphan Boy Mine, a story told in my book entitled Orphan Boy, A Love Affair with Mining, Dad offered his partners a ‘buy-sell’ agreement. He fully intended to buy them out and continue mining the Orphan Boy Mine.

Had Dad not offered his partners a ‘buy-sell’ agreement, not realizing they had the funds to buy him out, which he honored and was subsequently was bought out, things might have been different. This [Defense Minerals Exploration Administration (DMEA)] grant would have given the money to do the exploration at the Orphan Boy which Dad planned and always wanted to do and probably would have found the mineral that Dad always thought was there.”

Unknown to Dad, during the summer of 1952, his elderly partner, Fred Brooks, stated to the DMEA office staff that because the DMEA grant had been approved, his nephew had bought out Mr. Young’s interest and was attempting to buy out Mr. Schoonover (the third partner in the Orphan Boy Mine).

This grant was awarded before Dad was aware of it, and it was these funds that was used to pay back Mr. Brook’s nephew. Dad could have fought the buy-sell agreement, which could have been financially beneficial. This would have been the “neocon” approach. But Dad had given his word and made an agreement (which he signed), which he honored regardless of cost to him.

There are many other instances of this sacrificial type behavior throughout Dad’s life. He truly believed in “doing unto others as you would like them to do to you.” He loved people and it showed. He got a lot of joy in helping others and gave much of himself. He got a lot out of life and friendships.

I worked with Dad during the summers and after college graduation until his death and had the fortune to experience firsthand why his generation was named the “greatest generation.” He was typical of the World War II generation whose lives were interrupted by that war. When they came back home, they changed both America and the world in a special way.

Two other people in my life show this quality of “American Exceptionalism,” my son, William and my daughter Laura. They both are very talented, but deeper than that, they have the same gentile, quiet spirit that my Dad had. They both care about others and give much, but they get much from life as well.

As I note in Light at the End of the Tunnel:

“Years later, eating lunch as I sit on the dump [of the Orphan Boy mine] with my son, William, and my daughter, Laura, the memory that comes back most often is a sunny afternoon with Dad. I think of Dad and the many experiences he related to me. As I watch and listen to my children, I see in them the same fascination with life my Dad had. They look from one high peak to another with shining eyes and a sense of wonder that I saw so many years before in my Dad. These are gifts passed from one generation to another.”

I have met some of that generation (the 30 something’s) through William and Laura. I like what I see. They seem to be very practical and much more like the generation of their grandparents than my generation is.

My generation, from whom the current crop of “leaders,” corporate and political, come from, in general, doesn’t reflect the exceptionalism they are so fond of talking about. Our society is clearly a reflection of their views and qualities. In my opinion, very few show the same measure of exceptionalism of their parents.

It is for this reason I am writing about Dad, and our relationship. I want to touch the lives of others through writing which is why I attempt to “promote awareness through the written word.” It is also why I wrote my EPub, “The Art of Writing an EBook, How to Enrich Yourself and Others”.

All people have stories to tell. You have no idea the number of people who tell me that writing is “too hard” or “I don’t know where to start.” My EPub entitled “The Art of Writing an EBook, How to Enrich Yourself and Others,” can help with the “I don’t know where to start” challenge. I encourage you, my reader, to take a look at this EPub. If you have any desire to put your story into print, it is a resource which will help with many common writing challenges.

I had a mentor, best friend and Dad who demonstrated true “American Exceptionalism.” I see the same qualities in those of the generation of my children.

So, it seems that American Exceptionalism is alive and well in today’s world. It is not what those with an ‘R’ or ‘D’ behind their name term it or understand it to be. It is especially not what the “neocons,” corporate leaders or mainstream media (MSM) tell you it is. It is also not just an “American” trait, but is universal among people who truly love and value others as themselves.

American Exceptionalism is the quality of self-sacrifice and love of the other person that was demonstrated so well by my Dad’s generation and that is budding in the generation of their grandchildren. It is both a reflection of the past and a reality in today’s younger generation.

Sincerely,

H. Court Young
Author, publisher, speaker and geologist
Promoting awareness through the written word
Research, freelance writing & self-publishing services
Facebook: HCourtYoung
Phone: 303-726-8320

Email: tmcco@msn.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/hcourtyoung

As a tribute to my Dad’s 98^th year, I am offering a promotional discount of about 17% off on the EPub version of my book The Orphan Boy, A Love Affair with Mining. Visit Amazon.com by clicking of the link and check for this discount.