Sunday, February 12, 2012

Outside One's Comfort Zone

The Sunday paper today is rich with topics that revolve around the title of this blog.  I could probably write 10 pages today if I were to cover all the thoughts that were stimulated reading the paper, but I will try to contain myself to a reasonable length.

1st, the personal.  It is not easy to reinvent one's self.  I have been deluding myself that I could find a job at age 58 just by being my normal easy going self, relying on what was good for me when I was job searching 10 years ago.  However, my career coach took me out of my comfort zone and I understand why she did that.  The skills I need to present to people are the skills that make me both a good person and a good employee.  They are the strengths I bring to daily life at home and at work.  The skills that I do not need to present are the achievements that I made in risk management and in portfolio management.  Although they are a record of my achievement, they are only supportive facts that my target audience may not even understand.  I have not finished this work yet, but today's news discussions have stimulated my brain.  This will not be easy, but I will persevere.

I went down this path because much of today's discussion revolved around Charles Murray's book on the breakdown of traditions in America's white working class.  I was raised in this world so I like to think I know it well despite my achieving upper upper middle class status.  To some that might mean rich, but when you know that if you do not work again, you will be moving to a lower cost housing situation before you die, or you will run out of money; you do not think of yourself as rich.

The opening article was about how many people in this economic strata take government benefits but vote for the tea party because they know the government cannot run a deficit like it is forever and prefer to cut these benefits rather than pay more in taxes.  The interesting thing to me was that they do not even consider the fact that a middle path might be the appropriate one.  All or nothing.  But the core thought I had related to my need to leave my comfort zone to find my next gig. I am trained for the global economy and it will not be easy for me.  What are people who are not trained for the global economy to do?  It is no wonder that they are angry and do not have a clear idea about what policies are needed.

This ties into Thomas Friedman's thoughts that the GOP is locked into conflicting ideologies that are inflexible and inherently are aimed at somehow returning the country to what it was in the 1950's.  This is not going to happen.  Globalization created the forces that have left undereducated people at the margins of the economy.  Construction helped them survive as middle class people until the housing bubble burst.  Now they are angry.  If you look at where unemployment is the highest, government payments are the highest and the housing crisis is the worst; it is where the Republicans are strongest.

Friedman goes on to advocate things I have talking about for the last year.  Recognize that the U.S. can thrive in the global economy (and in any case you cannot go back) and deal with our entitlement problems in a responsible way.  It is politically feasible.  Another NYT article today discussed a poll they took.  "85% agreed that increasing taxes on the wealthy should play a role in reducing the overall federal deficit, and 3 in 5 said it should play a major role. 70% also favored raising taxes on all American, although only 32% said this should play a major role.  And 56% favored cuts in Medicare and Social Security; only 20% said this should play a major role."

To get there involves meeting in the middle which I is why I started this blog.

Ross Douthat also commented on Murray's book and I summarize his policy recommendations because figuring out how the U.S. should respond to improve our position in the global economy is where the political debate should be focused.  I really like Douthat's following comment:  "We are not going to address these problems by gut-renovating our welfare state to fit a libertarian ideal, or by drastically expanding the same state in pursuit of an unattainable social democratic dream"

He recommends:  (i) incentivize the poor to be industrious (address current tax policy); (ii) take family policy seriously by looking to Europe for ways to help work-life balance because there are both liberal and conservative models there (note Douthat is a conservative and he doesn't hate Europe); (iii) increase the jobs for lower educated people by enforcing employment laws on undocumented workers (this may be easier said than done) and (iv) reduce incarceration rates.  These will only help around the margins, but you can only start to address social issues at the margin.  Nationwide change is hard to develop in a country as large and varied as the United States except through the use of big policies that then filter down over a period of time by working at the margin.

Some issues where I think efforts on the margin have helped in the past or could help:  Cap and Trade reducing Acid rain in the 80's.  Health care exchanges to give the private insurance industry one last chance to prove they can control costs and provide health insurance for individuals at the same cost as they would in a group insurance pool.  As President Obama is doing, enforcing employment policies to see if domestic workers will fill the jobs that the undocumented have been filling.  I could go on, but you see where I am going.

The country has serious challenges and the election debates have yet to address the real issues that are very difficult for individuals to grasp because they are very complicated.  How can we make an educated vote if we don't know where the candidates stand?

No comments:

Post a Comment