On Tuesday, Some Reasons You Should Vote Against Bush
Oct 30, 2004 in Ye Olde Politicks
I've been way too busy to write as much as I'd have liked about politics over the last few months. This bothers me deeply, because I believe this is one of the most important elections we've seen since, well, we kicked out the elder Bush. If there's any undecided voters among the dozen or so people who seem to actually read this thing, I hope I give you some guidance here. The plan is simple: both of our candidates are controversial. There's a lot to hate, and little to love, about both. Makes you reminisce about the days of Clinton and Reagan, who both had much to hate but also much to love, huh? Because this election is so much about hating and demonizing the other side, I'm not going to try to talk you into loving my guy. You probably already hate him. Maybe I can make you hate the other guy more. So far I know, everything I say here is true -- I realize that's not trendy these days, but it's all I've got. I'm going to cover a few specific points here: How Bush is not a conservative That Bush is all about tax-and-spend That Bush is against taking responsibility for, and suffering the consequences of, one's actions How Bush isn't really serious about national security Why you shouldn't care about cultural issues, like gay marriage Why things under Bush can't get better How Bush Is Not A Conservative Barry Goldwater. Ronald Reagan. Dwight D. Eisenhower. These men were conservatives. They did three things: Keep government out of business Keep government small Loves the free market Bush's record is clear. He: Believes government should decide what business's business is Has massively expanded the Federal government's size and reach Is against the free market and prefers selective government control of the economy Bush Believes Government Should Decide What Business's Business Is Bush gave business some great tax breaks, it's true, but he gave these tax breaks to manufacturing, not to service, not to consultants, not to car washes or McDonalds' franchisees or graphic designers. Sure, we've had targeted tax cuts for years, but isn't that unconservative? Shouldn't the market decide where businesses should do business? Should one business pay less in taxes than others just because we feel like it, or should all businesses start on the same level playing field and the market decide where to allocate capital? Remember, manufacturing businesses profit disproportionately from infrastructure like roads and water and power when compared with, say, a hair salon. Why should the manufacturer pay less for the construction and maintenance of this infractructure than another business who uses it less does? This government interventionist focus goes beyond tax breaks. For years, the Bush administration has given subsidies to select industries (the steel industry, for instance). These subsidies protect these industries from foreign competition. While, in some cases, the foreign industries are supported by their own governments, in other cases (steel, again), many American companies are just less efficient. Why not let the market tell us what businesses America should be in? Why inefficiently allocate capital to industries in which America cannot compete? And if you're going to, how about you at least have a guy in charge who'll have a free and open discussion about it, rather... Read on...
It's The Students Who Make It Happen
Oct 28, 2004 in B-School
Just time for a quick note about two really great experiences I've had in the past two days: GMA Marketing Wine & Cheese Roundtable Night Entrepreneur's Happy Hour GMA Marketing Wine & Cheese Roundtable Night The student-organized Wine & Cheese Roundtable Night brought some great companies to Marshall, and gave us all the opportunity to speak one-on-one with marketing executives from those companies. I, hopefully, made some great contacts that will help me in my internship search, and learned a lot of great information about CPG and technology marketing. All thanks to my great mentor, Sandin Wang, one of the organizers of the event. Entrepreneur's Happy Hour This is a little casual event that I suggested to my Core Rep at the Entrepreneur and Venture Management Association. The EVMA has some more serious and focused events for committed Entrepreneurs, but I'm not nearly that dedicated; I don't want to fall short on some committment and make Marshall look bad. Our Core Rep, Carlie Yapp, got a bunch of us together at the end of the day and we got drinks at the Raddison across the street. We bounced ideas around some and moved in great directions. Will great businesses come out of this down the road? I wouldn't bet against it with that set of folks. It's times like this that I feel lucky to be at Marshall. It's nice to be in a good school, but it's best to be around good people. Good people get stuff done, and I know I'll have tons of opportunities over the next two years because of that.... Read on...
Unexpected Value Added
Oct 20, 2004 in B-School
Yesterday's Leadership class was actually pretty good. Great, even. That's a shocker -- Posner really added some value! I did benefit disproportionately from the class, it's true, because I was up there for 30 minutes getting my presenting style critiqued. I actually learned a lot! I wish that I had been prepared in some way (one of the main complaints was that I read directly from my notes, which happened, of course, because I wasn't prepared), but, honestly, since none of the previous classes had been of any value, I didn't think there was any justification for me putting the time in to get ready for class. Practicing a speech two or three times can take, well, minutes, and Posner hadn't even justified that so far. But he did yesterday. Class was fun, a lot of people got to speak and get critiqued, and Posner was even relatively brief when he talked. Now, I'm saying relatively, here -- he still droned on at a few points and lost my attention completely, but the point is that, later, I started paying attention again, because I thought it might be worth it. This, folks, may be a breakthrough. We'll see if he keeps it up!... Read on... (plus 2 Comments)
Leadership Training With The Marines At Camp Pendleton
Oct 16, 2004 in B-School
Unlike other members of my family, I've never been particularly inclined to pursue a career in the military. That wasn't enough to stop me, however, from a fun idea like traveling to the desert and running around to learn about one approach (the Marines', obviously) to being a leader. After Finals, on Wednesday, we took a bus down to Camp Pendleton in north San Diego county. On the way down, we stopped for food. Once we got to Pendleton, three Marines pursuing their MBAs at Marshall spent over an hour helping us to understand Marine history and just how things work when you're a jarhead. After the presentations, I made a rookie mistake: I volunteered. The Marines have this little trick they play -- first they ask for volunteers, then, after you've volunteered, they tell you what you volunteered for. I volunteered and ended up being made head of a "fire team," a group of five pople who would work together on the next day's challenges. Then they marched us down to a barracks and bunked all of us men in a "squad bay," one of those long, open rooms that everybody bunks in: Everybody chose themselves a bunk bed, or "rack" as the technical term goes: Every student was issued a sleeping bag, to go with said rack, and in which said student would then spend the hours from 11:30pm lights out to 5:30am reveille. That's right, 5:30am; that's the lifestyle that doesn't attract me. But there was one part of the kit that was attractive, the helmet. Everyone dug the helmet! Of course, issuing all this "kit" leaves a mess. I volunteered again -- this time, to have my fire team count all of the unissued kit and make sure that nobody got charged for any unissued "lost" equipment. I called my fire team around and broke the news soft; I said, "I've got good news and bad news. The good news is, I got us out of cleaning out the head in the morning. The bad news is, we have to police up the unissued kit." I think anything sounded good after hearing about "cleaning out the head" (bathroom, including showers, toilets, etc.) and my team tackled the task with enthusiasm and efficiency. Sleep was harder to get than I'd expected; I was amped up after a whole day of anticipation and, frankly, when you get a few dozen guys in one room you're guaranteed some snorers. I woke myself up with the start of a snore once and I ended up spending the whole night sleeping on my side to make sure that I didn't wake anybody. Morning came too soon; 5:30 is early! They marched us down the the mess hall where we had eggs and a starch and exactly one meat option, not two. Then they marched us to a classroom for a few hours of instruction on Marine leadership and maneuver warfare. The morning's instruction, given by two of our three class Marines and one of the base's Colonels, was quite instructive. One interesting nugget is that tiredness is frowned upon in the business and education world. You cannot admit you're tired or fall asleep (not that tons of people don't sleep in class). For Marines, however, it's different: a tired Marine gets... Read on... (plus 3 Comments)
And The Last Shall Be First
Oct 6, 2004 in B-School
Isn't it's amazing how something truly bad can make the mediocre seem wonderful? Unfortunately, I've managed to run into the truly awful in my truly expensive business school education. Yes, incompetence is thou, Steve Posner. For many a week my least favorite class was Microeconomics, taught by Rich Eastin. Eastin's clearly a smart guy, and he communicates pretty well, but he was stuck delivering way too much information in way too little time (one of my classmates, an undergrad Econ major, said that a 1 hour 20 minute class covered three weeks of an undergrad class), and he's a little resistant to prioritizing said information. But Eastin's lectures were filled with (curmudgeonly) effort, and, at the end of the quarter, it's all starting to come together. Or at least I think it is; we'll know after next week's final. Steve Posner, however, is either both incompetent and lazy or else trying to set a powerful anti-example for all of us. Posner teaches management communications, and, thus far, he's not managing to communicate in any way at all. He talks a long time, he talks quietly, he lulls you to sleep, and he doesn't have concrete points. He gives us speaking rules and then breaks them. He gives us nonspecific assignments and then rebukes us for not achieving specific goals. I'm being too hard on Posner here, really. I think his strategies work well with freshmen -- those young, skinny, attractive people who haven't ever really worked hard before, are as yet unmoulded, and have tons of free time. But us b-school students are busy and set in our ways. We need concrete answers now, not philosophical change over a period of time. Posner doesn't offer that. And he's apparently lost buy-in from the class; nobody that I've run into did any substantial amount of work for our last presentation -- not because they were too busy (although they were plenty busy, b-school students are good at making time for things they care about), but because they didn't care. So here's the upshot. I like Micro better because it's all starting to come together, sure, but the real reason is: Eastin's way better than Posner. Most everyone is way better than Posner. He's setting the bottom of the curve, and he's setting it low.... Read on... (plus 7 Comments)
Cordial Debatery
Oct 1, 2004 in Ye Olde Politicks
I think I'm required, by statute, to comment upon the seminal political event of our times: the most cordial debate in Florida last night. And what a debate! It was filled with bon mots, with snappy comebacks, with deft verbal takedowns. Oh wait, it wasn't. No Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. No Who am I? What am I doing here?. No, these were the boring debates. Bush stuck to his script, mostly, and Kerry stuck to his. It was like paralell speeches; in four years, I suggest the candidates debate at remote locations, by telephone, without hearing each others' positions at all. In fact, all of the responses could be pre-recorded, except that would remove all of the fun of hearing Bush go "um, uh..." and, most classically, "... ... ... ..." Now, I may have a different view of what went on, becuase I listened to the debate on that great innovation of the early 20th century, the radio. History fans out there may remember that, in the 1960 debate, people who listened on the radio thought Nixon kicked Kennedy's butt while those who watched the debates on TV felt that Nixon was a sweaty, bearded monkey, and too stinky to vote for. What I heard on the radio was a lot of dead air, all of it coming from the President. He's always been good at being brief and to-the-point when speaking about complicated issues (yes, they do teach you that in b-school), but he took briefness to new levels; I can't remember hearing any other debate in which the participants didn't need every single second they had to expound on their various points and messages. Now, Bush's responses weren't all bad, and they were always on-message, but the silence did not help him look smart and prepared. When the President was not being quiet, he was being stubborn. He continued to not take responsibility for, or even acknowledge, that he might have made any errors at any time. I've always been surprised that he's taken that approach, because Republicans have been all about personal responsibilty in the last two decades and, frankly, I believe that the Commander in Chief has the leeway to say "I made the best decision I could at the time for the safety of the American people and, while later events have shown us that we might have taken a different approach, I certainly don't regret having prioritized this country's security and moved quickly and decisively to confront a threat." But Bush doesn't, which I don't think helps him appeal to swing voters. Bush was certainly most fixed in his dismissal of negotiations with North Korea, an issue on which I believe Sen. Kerry is entirely correct. So I was pretty shocked when the NPR analysts started telling me that George won. I was prepared to believe it was a tie, but, from my perspective, Kerry came off brief, cogent, smart, and consistent. It wasn't until I saw the Daily Show later that night and watched Rudy Giuliani talk about how Bush had kicked Kerry's butt that I realized the GOP was in full-on spin mode. The President lost! The question: will Kerry's bump in the... Read on... (plus 1 Comments)