I’m sure something similar has happened to you: You are sitting in the break room at work, when one of your co-workers—-someone with whom you normallyI’m sure something similar has happened to you: You are sitting in the break room at work, when one of your co-workers—-someone with whom you normally get along but also happen to know that their political leanings are diametrically opposed to yours—-says something along the lines of “Universal health care will never work in this country” or “White privilege is a myth” or “Abortion is murder” or “The truth is: all lives matter” or (my personal fave) “God, I love my AR-15”.
You just want to eat your sandwich. You only have 15 minutes. What do you do?
In normal rational times, one would pretend not to hear it and not take the bait. Unfortunately, we are not living in normal rational times anymore. Nowadays, a break room argument can often turn ugly. In extreme cases, they can turn violent, and, before you know it, you have become a tragic story on the 6 o’clock news.
Nathan J. Robinson has the answer. Actually, he has 25 answers, to 25 arguments that conservatives love to make, ad nauseam, about subjects ranging from abortion to gun control to immigration to white privilege, in his book “Responding to the Right”.
Before he gets into his responses (which are incredibly rational, with evidentiary support), Robinson first offers a tutorial on how not to respond.
One of his most important pieces of advice is also, sometimes, the most difficult to follow: Never assume that the person you are arguing with is stupid.
This is actually quite integral in shaping an argument that won’t quickly devolve into anger and frustration. Because it is often way too easy for liberals to write off conservatives as stupid partly because, in many cases, conservatives have automatically written off liberals as idiots as well. (See anything written by Ann Coulter.) The truth is, many conservative arguments are simply more emotion-based rather than logic-based, and even extremely intelligent people (on the right and the left) can succumb to their emotions. The trick is to defuse the situation from the start by penetrating through the emotional part of the argument to the real issue underlying it.
In many cases, it’s not enough to just relay facts and statistics. In fact, in many cases, having data on your side may actually make things worse. Not that making factual statements is a bad thing, but one must be very careful when using facts and statistics with conservatives, because more often than not, they double down with their own facts and statistics, many of which they pull out of their own ass on the spot.
Here’s the important point to make: Have legitimate and trusted sources. And lots of them. Sources are the bane of a conservative’s existence. Seriously, read any book by Ann Coulter or listen to anything Rush Limbaugh says. They will often make up statistics out of whole cloth and/or quote sources that don’t exist. In Coulter’s case, she often likes to source herself. (Not making that up, actually.)
One of the biggest examples is global climate change. Conservatives (actually, fewer and fewer, thankfully) will still insist that a majority of scientists still don’t have a consensus that it exists (the truth: virtually all reputable climatologists will agree that it is certainly real) or that it is being caused by deleterious effects of human overpopulation (again, a vast majority of scientists will agree on this point as well.) Many conservatives will cite studies or research that is either 10-15 years out-of-date and/or proven to be false. Or they will use as a source a scientist that has been discredited by a jury of his peers. It’s not that conservatives don’t like science, necessarily. It’s simply that many conservatives don’t want to take the time to learn it and are much happier quoting studies and data that are taken out of context, outdated, or just plain wrong.
Moral arguments, such as abortion, are a bit tougher to argue. Robinson acknowledges that the argument is often predicated on two sides—-those that believe that abortion is murder and those that don’t. Neither side has ever offered a successful way to convince the other side, mainly because it is an inherently emotional argument. In cases like this, Robinson argues, it’s often better to simply “agree to disagree”.
In a nutshell, Robinson simply makes the point that the best defense against a faulty argument is knowledge. Do your own research. Ask questions.
Sure, compassion is important, too. Robinson makes that point, as well. Part of the problem with the world we live in today is that people on both sides of the political spectrum have stopped trying to listen to each other because they just don’t care anymore. People are mean. They’re angry and frustrated and short-tempered, which is what makes some of those break-room confrontations so fraught with tension and danger. Sometimes, the best response is no response at all....more
I’ll preface this review by saying that I received Brian Page’s book “Don’t Start a Side Hustle” as a giveaway from Goodreads and Harper Collins. ThanI’ll preface this review by saying that I received Brian Page’s book “Don’t Start a Side Hustle” as a giveaway from Goodreads and Harper Collins. Thanks to both for the free copy.
There are two genres that I don’t like to read—-business and self-help—-and Page’s book could basically fit into both categories. I read it, though, because it’s always good to tackle something outside of your wheelhouse.
Here’s what I liked: Page seems like a basically good guy who is sharing his business expertise for the right reasons: to help others succeed. I also like his views on working smarter, not harder and his views on the importance of making and spending time with the people who are most important to you: your family and friends. He repeatedly makes the valuable point that, unlike money or other assets, time is something that one can never get back. I wholeheartedly agree with this.
All that said, I wasn’t completely sold on Page’s main thesis, which is about passive income vehicles (PIVs). Page defines this as “an asset you own, create, or control that generates semi-passive or fully passive income.” Pared down to its essentials, a PIV is a way to make money without actually doing work.
Don’t get me wrong: I would love to make a shit-ton of money without actually doing anything to earn it. Who wouldn’t?
Here’s a couple problems I have with Page’s suggestions on how to go about doing it: He is coming from a world of real estate and hotel management. Page has made millions on the Airbnb circuit, and he’s cashing in on his trademarked BNB Formula, a coaching program for people going into the Airbnb market. I have nothing against what he is doing, and I have certainly nothing against real estate as a business or as a PIV. My main gripe is that real estate is a very different PIV wheelhouse than, say, making music as a career or writing that best-selling novel—-both potential PIVs. The music and publishing industries are vastly different from the real estate industry. They require different mindsets, different talents, different tools.
I’m also not the right demographic for this book. Page clearly is writing this to people who want to be trillionaires. This isn’t a supposition, either; he admits to it a couple times in the book. He believes that, within the next decade, the first of many future trillionaires will appear. Of course, the implication is that he will hopefully be one.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t want to be a trillionaire. What the fuck would anybody do with all that money? I don’t want to buy a small Asian country or build a fleet of space cruisers for a potential intergalactic war. I don’t plan on buying the pockets of everyone in Congress.
I’d be perfectly happy just being a thousandaire who can continuously provide food, shelter, and clothing for my family, leaving enough disposable income for that addition my wife and I want to build on the house or maybe adding Hulu to our list of streaming services or, I don’t know, saving enough for at least the first two years of college tuition for my daughter. My wants and needs are simple.
Also, I’ve given this idea of PIVs some serious thought. Realistically, if you are making money—-a shit-ton of money, according to Page—-off these endeavors in which you don’t have to lift a finger to make, it logically implies that somebody or a group of somebodies are actually having to lift fingers to help you make it, most likely people who are willing to do the work for considerably less income than you. And those somebodies are probably doling out and delegating other jobs to people making even less money.
This begins to sound a little like the money-making efforts that were started by Charles Ponzi in the 1920s and ‘30s. You know, the ones that are better known as Ponzi schemes, a.k.a. pyramid schemes.
This book had some interesting ideas, but it’s ultimately not for me....more
If you are a political junkie like myself, the name Stacey Abrams may sound familiar. Serving in the Georgia House of Representatives from 2007 to 201If you are a political junkie like myself, the name Stacey Abrams may sound familiar. Serving in the Georgia House of Representatives from 2007 to 2017, Abrams ran for governor of that state in 2018, losing to Republican Brian Kemp, who has since been accused of blatant voter suppression in that election. She would have been the first African-American female governor, ever.
She’s not hurting, though. Abrams has made a name for herself as a vocal advocate of voting rights, having published two nonfiction books about voting and life in politics in general. Under a pseudonym, Abrams is also a well-known author of eight historical romances. Her latest novel “While Justice Sleeps” is her first novel published under her own name.
“WJS” is a taut, fast-paced legal thriller in the same vein as the works of John Grisham or Brad Meltzer. She touches on some hot-button political issues throughout: genetic engineering, corruption within the pharmaceutical industry, presidential abuse of power.
Her protagonist is Avery Keene, a feisty young law clerk who works for Supreme Court Justice Howard Wynn, a man known as much for his grumpiness as he is for his legal brilliance. He is the swing vote on a recent case involving a merger between an American biotech company and an Indian genetics company. While the merger could mean jobs and wealth for both countries, as well as promising leaps in the medical field, U.S. President Brandon Stokes is dead-set against it, ostensibly on moral grounds. Before he is able to make any ruling, however, Wynn inexplicably goes into a coma.
Keene, like everyone in her office, is shocked. On top of the tragic news, Keene is immediately notified that Wynn, at the last minute, made Keene his power of attorney, to the chagrin of Wynn’s current trophy wife and his son from his first marriage. The news quickly attracts the attention of President Stokes, Homeland Security, the FBI, and the worldwide media. Keene—-a workaholic with no social life, a crackhead mother, and bills to pay—-is suddenly put in the national spotlight in the middle of one of the most important political issues of the day. It is, apparently, the Cuban Missile Crisis of business mergers.
Thankfully, Keene is blessed with an indomitable spirit and an eidetic memory, two things that Justice Wynn saw in her that led to his decision making her his POA. When a toxicology report suggests that Wynn was purposefully put into a coma, Keene is forced to play detective. It’s a race against time as someone way above her pay grade is killing anyone who might know something, and it’s only a matter of time before they go after her.
Abrams’s experience in politics and the law definitely elevates this book from what could have been a mere dime store potboiler. It is an edge-of-the-seat thriller that takes the reader on an exciting, and terrifying, journey through the deepest, darkest levels of government and the dark money backers that runs it....more
April 2022 is, unofficially, National Rich White Asshole Appreciation Month. (Don't Google it: I just made it up.) I've read more than a few books aboApril 2022 is, unofficially, National Rich White Asshole Appreciation Month. (Don't Google it: I just made it up.) I've read more than a few books about stupid rich white men (yes, OTHER than Trump) and the damage that they have done throughout history. I read this one back in December 2020. It's the epitome of Rich White Assholes.
Once upon a time, there were three brothers who were doctors, and, like most doctors, they probably went into their profession with the best intentions, which was to help people. Early on in their careers, they were helping people, and they were being recognized as extremely innovative in their particular fields of medicine.
Then, something happened. Maybe it was the money. Maybe it was the power that they gradually began to accrue. Maybe they just succumbed to basic human greed. Whatever the reason, their empire became corrupt. And even though it is an overused word, some people began to see their empire as “evil”. Their empire was hurting people—-millions of people. Even killing them. And the three brothers, along with their family, knew it, but they didn’t seem to care. Their legacy had become the very opposite of what they set out to do. Their empire had become an “Empire of Pain”.
This is the title of Patrick Radden Keefe’s book about the Sackler family. If you’re like me, you probably had never heard the name “Sackler” before reading this book. There’s a very simple reason for this: the Sacklers don’t want people to know their names or what they have done.
The Sackler family—-a very large family comprised of the children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of the original three brothers: Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond—-is, by all accounts, one of the top ten wealthiest families in the country. They have accumulated this wealth over many decades via advancements they have made within the medical field and the pharmaceutical industry. The Sackler Bros., in 1952, bought a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue-Frederick. Today, it is called Purdue Pharma, and it has made billions on the sale of its most famous and best-selling drugs, OxyContin.
By the way, Arthur is credited for inventing and perfecting the pharmaceutical advertising industry, a multi-billion dollar industry wholly separate from the pharmaceutical industry, but both industries are forever beholden to one another.
OxyContin, a pain-killing drug derived from an opioid called oxycodone, has been determined to be extremely addictive and even deadly if abused. OxyContin abuse has risen dramatically in the past several decades, so much so that government groups such as Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have dubbed it an “opioid epidemic”.
Doctors are still prescribing the drug. One may wonder why, if it is as bad as many experts claim. The answer is because it is an FDA-approved, thoroughly-tested drug. The problem is that, as some investigations have revealed, there were some major improprieties between the Sacklers and the FDA (The Food and Drug Administration, which is the government agency tasked with approving or disapproving prescription drugs). It has also been revealed that some of the original findings of early drug testing were fabricated. Numbers were “fudged”. Basically, the Sacklers lied to the public and duped the entire pharmaceutical industry into thinking that OxyContin was a safe drug. It’s not.
Today, nearly every state has filed numerous lawsuits against Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers personally. Some cases have come out on the side of the many victims, but just as many have come out in favor of the Sacklers. The family, it is widely believed, has extremely deep pockets and many politicians and judges are being bought by the Sacklers.
The legal battles against the Sacklers are ongoing, but very little sticks to the family. They are made of teflon. Even worse, they continually demonstrate very little remorse or compassion to the millions of victims. Most family members don’t even think that they have done anything wrong and that the public disdain against Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers is misplaced. All of this, some family members say, is simply due to weak-willed junkies who are misusing and abusing a wonderful drug.
Keefe’s epic-length reportage is thorough and engaging. It is one of those rare nonfiction accounts that is difficult to put down. It also makes one realize why the general public has some serious trust issues with the 1 percent. I detest rich people, and it’s books like this that cement that feeling....more
After perusing some of the reviews of Carl Hiaasen’s “Team Rodent” here on Goodreads, I have to say: some people need to learn how to take a joke.
Not After perusing some of the reviews of Carl Hiaasen’s “Team Rodent” here on Goodreads, I have to say: some people need to learn how to take a joke.
Not that Hiaasen was, in any way, joking when he wrote the book. No, it’s quite clear he meant every word.
My gripe is with those who don’t seem to understand exactly what Hiaasen was doing, which is what Hiaasen does in all of his books. Namely, he’s being a smart-ass. Emphasis on the “smart”. And, frankly, if you haven’t figured out Hiaasen by now, you should really just stop reading his books entirely.
“Team Rodent” is Hiaasen’s caustic-but-humorous, tongue-in-cheek castigation of the Walt Disney Corporation.
Take note that it’s the corporation that he is attacking here, not the Imagineers, or the park employees, or the people who make those wonderful movies that we (at least those of us with kids) have had to watch 4,372 times.
Also take note that this book was written in 1998. A lot has changed within Disney Corp. since then, most importantly the changing of the guard from Michael Eisner to Bob Iger as CEO. (Iger recently handed off the reins to Bob Chapek.)
Indeed, Hiaasen spends a lot of the book ripping on and viciously dissecting Eisner, and to anybody familiar with Disney-as-a-business, this vicious dissection is perfectly welcome and appreciated, as Eisner nearly sunk Disney.
That Eisner made some serious mistakes and bad decisions in his latter years as CEO is old history. He’s the guy that nearly ruined the marriage between Disney and Pixar. He’s the guy who dumped billions into an American history-themed amusement park that went nowhere. He’s also the guy responsible for the pile of shit film “Man of the House”. (Okay, to be fair, I doubt he had any input—-creative or otherwise—-in the movie, but it happened under his watch, so shame on him.)
But even given how dated this book is, it’s still a fair assessment of a super-powerful mega corporation that is bent on world domination. Disney is an Empire. Period. And Corporate Empires should be mocked, castigated, criticized, and heavily monitored constantly.
Even ones responsible for wonderful films like “Frozen 2” and TV shows like “The Mandalorian”.
So, don’t be so religiously zealous and pro-Disney that one fails to see what Hiaasen is brilliantly trying to do in this book. Take a chill pill, for God’s sake. Or watch “The Mandalorian”. Seriously, Baby Yoda is adorable and will make you forget all your problems…...more
While you can’t, rightfully, attribute any company’s success to the work of one person, the right type of person---a leader, versus just a manager or While you can’t, rightfully, attribute any company’s success to the work of one person, the right type of person---a leader, versus just a manager or a chief executive---at the head of a company can make a huge difference.
The history of the 20th century is the history of business ascendant and the history of powerful businessmen and women: Coco Chanel, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Martha Stewart, Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey. These are just a few names at the top of a long list of people who have made an impact in the world---for good or ill---through business.
There’s one name that, I’m sure, almost everyone will agree has made a positive impact in the lives of people throughout the world, and, regardless how one feels about business and the corporate world, it is highly unlikely that one has not been entertained or found pleasure in something that was created by this person.
I’m talking, of course, about Walt Disney, who went from creating a short black-and-white cartoon in 1928 that starred, for the first time, a mouse named Mickey to building a legacy that has become his posthumous empire of entertainment.
The Disney brand has become the brand of high-quality entertainment that all members of the family can enjoy, and it has branched out into not just amusement parks but resort hotels and cruise lines. And, like the classic “Steamboat Willie” cartoon, Disney is still making great, memorable films, only now the Disney umbrella has grown to include the story-making juggernauts of Marvel and Lucasfilm. It is, literally, unstoppable.
The success of Disney can’t, of course, be credited to one person. It’s a team effort, and Disney has an amazing team of talent in its animation departments, park and resort managers, and Imagineers, the men and women who churn out idea after wonderful idea.
But the history of Disney, as a corporation, is a history of the importance of finding the right person to steer the ship. Without a captain---a good captain, especially---no ship can maneuver well in any waters.
In 2005, Robert Iger was named the CEO of Disney during a turbulent time for the company. Michael Eisner, the previous CEO, who inherited the position in 1984 during another rough time, had turned the company around and had successfully more than doubled Disney’s global footprint, but it was, unfortunately, during the last ten years of his tenure that Eisner’s reputation became tarnished by some very public mistakes, failures, and decisions that the Board of Directors deemed ultimately disastrous for the company. They had lost faith in Eisner, and, as former Board member Roy E. Disney once said, “Eisner had lost his focus”.
Iger, who had worked closely with Eisner as the company’s President and COO, was seen as a natural successor to Eisner. He immediately went to work repairing some of the damage, including rebuilding the failing Animation Studios (the last ten years had seen a string of box-office failures for a studio that once made three films---”The Little Mermaid”, “Beauty and the Beast”, and “The Lion King” back to back---that had won multiple Academy Awards and broke box-office records at the time for animated films) and acquiring Pixar, a move that Eisner fought for years and nearly destroyed a very lucrative relationship with Steve Jobs. (According to Iger, years later, Eisner told him that he had been so wrong about Pixar.)
Iger also went on to make a historic deal with China with the opening of Shanghai Disney, a multi-billion dollar project that could have been a multi-billion dollar disaster. It wasn’t.
He also oversaw the acquisition of Marvel Studios and Lucasfilm, both of which have flourished under the Disney umbrella without destroying their integrity or their originality.
“The Ride of a Lifetime” is Iger’s memoir/blueprint for being a successful business leader, and he comes across as being a somewhat humble, intelligent, and likable businessman. Those are three words, by the way, that I would almost never have attached to anyone in business, as anyone who knows me knows that I detest the business world. I despise corporate mentality and what I call the “MBA”-ification of the world, so it is definitely a big deal that I actually read, and enjoyed, Iger’s book.
Iger proves that one can actually have a soul and a penchant for empathy and compassion in business. One doesn’t need to be the soul-sucking, avaricious, greed-monster that I so often (and, admittedly, probably unfairly) imagine most CEOs to be.
Disney’s success isn’t solely attributable to Iger, but they probably couldn’t have picked a better person to steer their ship....more
I’ve worked at The Home Depot as a sales associate for almost 10 years now. It’s the longest I have ever stayed at one job, ever. My normal m.o. priorI’ve worked at The Home Depot as a sales associate for almost 10 years now. It’s the longest I have ever stayed at one job, ever. My normal m.o. prior to HD is, after about three years, I get bored in a job and I go looking elsewhere. So, what broke the cycle?
To be honest, I like working for the Depot. I never thought I’d like retail, and while some days it’s torture, I honestly like being able to help people find what they’re looking for and finish home projects. I think I’m pretty good at it, too.
Of course, a major factor is simply the fact that I have a wife and kid now, and I basically need the stability that having a full-time gig provides, such as a weekly paycheck and benefits. And, since I made the decision not to be a teacher (both a tough and not-so-tough decision, emotionally and spiritually), I’m certainly not going to begrudge a career in retail, especially at one of the largest and most successful home improvement retail chains in the world.
But sticking around almost 10 years at the same workplace, with no thoughts of leaving, doesn’t come about simply due to a steady paycheck. I wouldn’t have stayed that long at a job that I thought of in terms of “meh, it’s an okay job.”
There’s something about working at the Depot that makes me want to stay, and, not only stay, but eventually work my way up the ladder of the company.
It’s what co-owners Bernie Marcus and Arthur Blank refer to as the “culture” of the Home Depot. Somewhat hard to describe but nevertheless present and tangible to anyone who works there for a long enough period of time, this “culture” embodies both a sense of familial belonging and a sincere living of hard-core values.
There’s nothing schmaltzy or cheesy about it. It’s not a touchy-feely love-fest. There are, of course, some days that I want to strangle some of my managers and co-workers. There are some days that I want to say “fuck you” to a customer so badly that I salivate at the thought. Some days, I would love to call in sick... while I’m working the floor.
Then again, maybe that’s exactly why the Home Depot feels like a family. I love my family, but they drive me crazy, and I sometimes dread having to spend time with them.
“Built From Scratch”, written in 1999, is Marcus/Blank’s business memoir/credo.
They fashion themselves two “regular guys” who took an idea and built a home improvement retail empire that is worth billions today out of nothing. This is slightly disingenuous, because it makes them sound like two poor schlemiels who, by sheer luck, “fell into” the home improvement business.
In truth, both guys were fairly successful businessmen prior to teaming up to open the first Home Depot. They built up a lot of equity of knowledge, experience, and business acumen in several successful (and some not-so-successful) companies prior to the Depot. They probably failed more times than they succeeded, but what made them outliers was that “x-factor” of never getting down or giving up.
Still, the story of the Home Depot’s origin is a pretty fascinating one. From a business perspective, it is probably a gold standard by which many new retail stores try to reach. Much like Sam Walton’s “Walmart” (the comparison is intentional, as Marcus/Blank both knew and respected Walton as a businessman), the Home Depot has continually shaped and altered the face of the retail industry and the “big box store” model.
“Built From Scratch” isn’t a book that I can recommend to just anybody. It’s not exactly pleasure reading, unless you have an MBA or actually read magazines like “Forbes” or “Money”, neither of which I have ever read.
To people like me, parts of the book will be boring and uninteresting. Anytime numbers are brought up, or phrases such as “stock options”, “IPOs”, and “leveraged buyouts” are used, my mind glazes over. It’s as exciting as watching grass grow or paint dry, in my opinion.
That said, “Built From Scratch” touches on the tangible (and some intangible) things that make the Depot unique in the business world.
Firstly, it’s the values: Marcus and Blank built their company on a few key concepts---taking care of customers, each other, and the community---that some companies may emulate and spout as dogma, but at the Depot, it never feels like the company is simply paying lip service to these ideas.
From day one, as an associate, it is pounded into you: take care of the customer. Treat them the way you would want to be treated if you were a customer. Sure, it’s the Golden Rule, corporate version, but it’s something that they actually believe. After a while, when you hear it enough, you are going to believe it, too.
Marcus/Blank were insane about making sure customers left the store happy. They recount several stories in which one or both of them would travel miles to another store (sometimes a competitor’s) to buy a product that a customer couldn’t find at their store. Some of their experiences were, in truth, nutso. But the point was made clear: give the customers what they want or, at least, let them know that you are working to get them what they want. From a practical business sense, a happy customer is a repeat customer.
Within the culture of the store, taking care of each other is just as important as taking care of customers. Happy employees are productive employees. Logical. But it’s more than logic, sometimes. It cultivates an atmosphere of mutual respect, compassion, and honest charity that, occasionally, seems lacking in the rest of the world.
Finally, community outreach: It sometimes sounds like a church, with the Depot’s “mission” to “give back” to the community and “build relationships”. Again, though, it never seems like lip service, as the results of the Depot’s good deeds are evident, whether it’s helping local Boy Scout troops build garden boxes and playground sets at local parks or sending supplies and manpower to places hit hard by natural disasters.
I hope I don’t sound like a cult member talking up its cult leaders because that’s far from the truth.
I don’t agree with everything the Home Depot does. As with most of corporate America, I have problems with the fundamental capitalistic infatuation with the bottom line. I know that, in most cases, profit is really the underlying motive behind everything that is done.
But somedays, when I don’t come to work grumpy, when I don’t have to deal with annoying customers, and when I actually get along with my managers (these are extremely rare days, mind you), I actually enjoy walking the aisles, laughing with co-workers over coffee, and helping customers out. And sometimes that actually feels like enough. ...more
“They live, and always have, in a rarefied bubble... They move in a world with people like them, or who want to be. They know no poor people at all. T“They live, and always have, in a rarefied bubble... They move in a world with people like them, or who want to be. They know no poor people at all. They’re not the kind of people who feel obligated to get to know the help.” ---anonymous long-time family associate of the Kochs, speaking about the Koch family
“It is beyond spectacular. It’s just gigantically successful. It is in everything.” ---Roger Altman, Wall Street investment banker, referring to Koch Industries
“I just want my fair share---which is all of it.” ---Charles Koch
It is easy to demonize brothers Charles and David Koch as power-crazed, money-hungry, greedy, selfish, monstrous, uncaring, soulless, cruel, vicious, etc., but to what purpose? Insults only go so far in convincing people---especially those that either don’t know much about the Kochs or those that seem to think that the Kochs’ free-market success is perfectly normal and indicative of a healthy capitalist state---that the Koch Bros. are assholes, but some may not even be convinced of that. Besides, being an asshole isn’t a crime, and many things that the Koch Bros. have done in their life to get where they are are crimes, both legally and morally. You can’t convince anyone of that either.
All one can do is lay out the bare facts and let the reader decide for themselves what kind of people the Koch Bros. are, which is what Jane Mayer has done in her excellently researched book, “Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right”. Part biography, part horror story, “Dark Money” tells the story of how the Koch Bros. have almost single-handedly pulled off one of the largest political coups in American history. Through a ridiculously large amount of money funneled through “charitable” foundations, think tanks, and Super PACs, the Koch Bros. have essentially bought Washington, D.C.
They did it brilliantly, with philanthropy and back-door deals and without armed soldiers and tanks storming down Pennsylvania Avenue, and they did it almost without human costs. Almost.
I could write a rather long-winded review, summarizing Mayer’s main points and throwing in my own self-serving bit of vitriol about how I think the Koch Bros. are devils in human guise, but I won’t do it. Mayer has done a brilliant enough job telling the story of the Kochs’ rise to power. And calling them devils won’t do anything but satiate my own disgust and hatred for the two men.
Instead, I will simply recount a story about the Koch Bros, one that Mayer tells early in the book as one of many examples of the Koch Industries’ misdeeds and crimes.
Danielle Dawn Smalley, 17, was a typical teenager growing up in a rural town called Lively, Texas. She played volleyball, liked the theater, and played bass guitar in a band with friends. Recently graduated from high school, she and a friend, Jason Stone, were packing things for college on August 24, 1996 when they noticed a strong odor, like gas, lingering in the house, the source of which was undetermined.
Danny Smalley, the town mechanic, recognized the smell as liquid butane and told his daughter and Jason to drive to their neighbor’s house to report a gas leak, since they did not have a landline phone from which to call. A few hundred yards from the house, the truck that they were driving stalled. Danielle, at the wheel, tried to restart the engine. The spark of ignition lit a gas cloud of butane. The resulting explosion incinerated Danielle and Jason and destroyed one home. It was 3:30 in the afternoon.
A raging fire continued until well into the evening, even long after the fuel to the line had been shut off. Over fifty nearby homes were evacuated. The pipeline that was the cause of the explosion started in Medford, Oklahoma and stretched to Mont Belvieu, Texas. It was owned and operated by Koch Industries, headquartered in Wichita, Kansas.
Hoping to ameliorate any bad feelings and possibly prevent negative publicity, Charles and David Koch offered Danny Smalley money to drop his inevitable wrongful death lawsuit against the company. Smalley refused.
During the trial, Smalley’s lead lawyer, Ted Lyon, suspected that his law offices were being bugged. A subsequent investigation of the offices confirmed it. While it was never confirmed that the Kochs had anything to do with it, Lyon felt that the timing was awfully coincidental.
A National Transportation Safety Board investigation concluded that the company had been aware of the corroded pipeline for some time. It was deemed negligent in that it had done nothing to correct the problem nor had it informed the forty-plus families that lived in the area of the pipeline about the potential dangers.
During trial, certified oil industry safety expert, Edward Ziegler, described the pipeline as “Swiss cheese.” He added that the explosion resulted from “a total failure of a company to follow the regulations, keep their pipeline safe and operate it as the regulations require.”
Kenoth Whitstine, a former Koch employee, testified that he had told his employers of the incredible dangers that the corroded pipeline posed but was told that it would be cheaper to pay damages from a lawsuit than to repair it.
On October 21, 1999, the jury found Koch Industries guilty of both negligence and malice. Smalley had asked for $100 million in damages. The jury instead awarded him $296 million, the largest wrongful death award ever.
This is just one, albeit dramatic, example of who Charles and David Koch are. You be the judge.
The following link is to the Danielle Smalley Foundation, set up by Danny Smalley in honor of his daughter: http://smalleyfnd.org...more
I’m quite proud to call myself a feminist, thanks in large part to my mother---who taught my sister and I that no doors should be closed to either of I’m quite proud to call myself a feminist, thanks in large part to my mother---who taught my sister and I that no doors should be closed to either of us because of our gender---and in no small part to my father---who despite being raised in a very patriarchal and misogynistic society learned to appreciate what “equality of the sexes” actually means.
I’m not sure when “feminist” became a four-letter word. Probably around the same time that the “L”-word (“liberal”, in case you were wondering) also became a four-letter word. (A term for which I am also quite proud to call myself.)
I’m not sure why “feminist” is a word that generates so much fear, loathing, and disgust from both males AND females.
I’m sure, as with most socially revolutionary movements, it is because once some systemic changes were made, critics argued, “Well, you got your way finally, so can we cool it on this stuff?”
I’m sure that perhaps even many feminists who fought hard for equal rights and respect had succumbed to a kind of apathetic disgruntlement with the term. They managed to check a lot of the boxes on their wish list, so life was good. For the most part.
Perhaps they just wanted to distance themselves from a term that created an enormous amount of controversy and upset, despite the fact that the term embodied positive social change.
Perhaps many of those feminists simply forgot that the feminist movement actually succeeded in getting them to where they were: in board rooms, on Capitol Hill, in executive suites, in positions of power.
Unfortunately, the feminist movement is not over. Women (and men) still have a long way to go, and they still have a lot to learn.
Sheryl Sandberg is concerned that while the feminist movement got women so far, the post-feminist backlash has prevented women from going further.
Here’s some interesting statistics she quotes:
***“Of the 195 independent countries in the world, only 17 are led by women.” (U.S. State Department, www.state.gov)
***“Women hold just 20% of seats in parliaments globally.” (Inter-Parliamentary Union, www.ipu.org)
***“[T]wenty-one of the Fortune 500 CEOs are women.”
***“Women hold about 14 percent of executive officer positions, 17 percent of board seats, and constitute 18 percent of our elected congressional officials.”
***“In 1970, American women were paid 59 cents for every dollar their male counterparts made. By 2010, women had protested, fought, and worked their butts off to raise that compensation to 77 cents for every dollar men made.”
Sandberg, COO at Facebook, has seen and studied a trend within the corporate workplace among women. While women seem to work twice as hard as men to climb the corporate ladder, they are often stymied by a lack of assertiveness once they reach a certain level. Women, she notices, more often than not step back from the table when they should be leaning in, raising their voice, offering their opinion and knowledge.
Her book, “Lean In”, is a feminist manifesto for the corporate world. It’s part business manual and part memoir.
Some have unfairly criticized her book for being out of tune with the average woman, citing the fact that she blithely mentions having a nanny for her kids and being able to simply fly to Europe for a three-day vacation with her husband.
Did these critics not catch the fact that she is Facebook’s COO? She and Mark Zuckerberg drink coffee together, for God’s sake.
Yeah, she’s out of touch with the average American woman. That doesn’t make her points any less important or give her message any less validity.
I’m not surprised by the anti-feminist backlash against this book. There is an entire generation of young women today who have felt let down by the feminists of their parent’s generation.
There is an entire generation of young men (I jokingly referred to them as “post-feminist shock victims” in college, but I don’t think of it as a joke today) who have become so de-masculinized from a young age that they have become either the man-children who collect action figures, still live at home with the parents, and can’t hold down a job (Picture Will Farrell and John C. Reilly in “Stepbrothers” or Seth Rogan in any movie) or misogynistic assholes who treat objects like women and women like furniture (Picture Tom Cruise in “Magnolia”).
Feminism has become a bad word today because women and men have forgotten---or never knew---how awful times were for women and men before the 1960s, NOT because the ideals behind feminism were bad.
Unfortunately, the anti-feminist backlash is stronger than ever today. The Republican party has practically become overrun with misogynists who long to see again the days of back-alley abortions, spousal rape, and no more women in the workplace. Think I’m exaggerating? Have you actually heard anything GOP Vice-Presidential nominee Mike Pence has ever said?
Feminists like Sandberg are vital to the movement. She acknowledges the past failures of the feminist movement while encouraging women and men to carry on the fight, because she also knows that it is a fight upon which both men and women must work together.
Part of the problem, she thinks, may be simple semantics: “Now I proudly call myself a feminist... I hope more women, and men, will join me in accepting this distinguished label. Currently, only 24 percent of women in the United States say that they consider themselves feminists. Yet when offered a more specific definition of feminism---”A feminist is someone who believes in social, political, and economic equality of the sexes”---the percentage of women who agree rises to 65 percent. That’s a big move in the right direction.(p. 158)”...more
I don’t typically read business books, but Lawrence Levy’s book, “To Pixar and Beyond” isn’t a typical business book. There’s a warm, lovable fuzzinesI don’t typically read business books, but Lawrence Levy’s book, “To Pixar and Beyond” isn’t a typical business book. There’s a warm, lovable fuzziness to it that is, in my mind, antithetical to the typical business ethos. It's a jarring cognitive dissonance, for me, at least.
It may help to explain my hatred of the business world.
I believe that the MBAification of the world started about fifty years ago when colleges and universities across the country started downplaying humanities and started emphasizing pro-capitalist pro-big business agendas and curriculum. The Arts were quickly being replaced with the Art of the Deal.
Subsequently, a business model began being applied to fields to which such models had previously never been applied nor should have been applied---education, health care, church administration. Arguably, this has destroyed the very foundation of these fields and has created many more problems than it has solved.
It has created an education system that is floundering miserably in this country, as a strong anti-public education campaign led by conservative politicians has led to entire school systems failing kids in droves while diverting federal funds from public schools to private and charter schools, which have repeatedly been proven by study after study to be completely ineffectual and/or detrimental to student learning.
It has created a health care system run not by doctors and health care workers but by insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies; a system that only the wealthy or those willing and able to pay enormous premiums can afford to use while those with no insurance or limited insurance are literally dying because of their lack of access.
It has created megachurches who feed off the weak-minded, allowing some pastors to bring in incomes rivalling CEOs of small companies, while cutting ministries and programs that have historically helped the community by offering food aid, clothing, and shelter to the homeless and the poor.
Business has created a country ruled by politicians ruled by money, who worship at the feet of Mammon, who care nothing for the people beneath them.
Business has created a society guided by greed, where compassion and empathy are signs of weakness, where helping the environment and saving people’s lives are not cost-effective, and where bullying is a legitimate tactic to get ahead in the workplace, in classrooms, in relationships, in politics.
Business enabled Trump to become our president-elect.
So, yeah, I basically hate the business world, and I pretty much have no respect for people with MBAs. I truly believe that they are ruining the world.
Then I read “To Pixar and Beyond” about a company owned by one of the most famous business assholes in the world---Steve Jobs---who calls in a (gasp!) corporate lawyer to save this company, which by all rights should have folded years ago, and take it public.
And I enjoyed it. A business book. A book chock-full of ridiculous business terms like “stock options” and “IPOs” and “profit motive”. A book in which the narrator is a stinkin’ corporate lawyer.
Damn you, Levy, for making me like you! And making me kind of like Steve Jobs! And for educating me on how start-up companies work! And for saving Pixar!
No, seriously, thanks a hella ton for that last point. I love Pixar. My wife and I own every single Disney/Pixar movie ever made, on VHS, DVD, and blu-ray. My three-year-old daughter has grown up loving the “Toy Story” movies and the “Cars” movies and “Finding Nemo” and “Finding Dory” and “Brave” and, well, all of them.
Pixar is one of the only Hollywood studios doing anything even remotely original and unique. While Hollywood churns out sequel after sequel or remake after remake or some obscure comic book adaptation of a superhero nobody has ever heard of or a big-budget epic film based on a video game, Pixar actually makes movies in which story and character development actually matter.
Which is why Levy’s story is so fascinating and, well, almost suspenseful, because the little computer animation company that could was almost the little computer animation company that never was.
Levy starts the book with the phone call in 1994 that changed his life, literally.
Jobs had acquired Pixar in the late-‘80s from George Lucas’s Lucasfilm. He had hoped to turn it into a revolutionary imaging computer and software company, but it had gone nowhere. When Levy was asked by Jobs to join the Pixar team as the chief financial officer, he found a company on the brink of going under. Any other CEO would have pulled the plug years before, but Jobs saw something special in Pixar. Over a short amount of time, Levy did as well.
Pixar had everything riding on the success of their first full-length computer-animated motion picture, “Toy Story”, which was a few storyboards and about 20 minutes of a very early-stages scene when Levy joined.
Jobs and Levy had extraordinary confidence and faith in the brilliance and creativity of the Pixar team, led by John Lasseter.
Unfortunately, the company needed funding, and the best way to do that was to go public.
There was also the issue of a convoluted contractual agreement worked out between Pixar and Disney’s then-CEO, Michael Eisner, who was notorious for his lackluster and (some would say) disastrous mismanagement of Disney.
“To Pixar and Beyond” should not be a book that I found fascinating or endearing in any way, but I did, and I’m glad I read it.
It gave me faith and hope that not all businesses are bad, that not all business people are assholes and not all companies are evil, soul-sucking monstrosities bent on world domination and/or destruction.
I still think the majority of them are, though... Just sayin’... ...more
It's easy to get sidetracked. I have become quite a pro at it. My wife says I just have undiagnosed ADHD, and while she may be right, I can't imagine It's easy to get sidetracked. I have become quite a pro at it. My wife says I just have undiagnosed ADHD, and while she may be right, I can't imagine that it can solely explain why I have such a hard time staying focused and finishing things. Take this book, for example. Francesca Gino's thoughtful and entertaining book "Sidetracked" is a good read, and yet I stopped and started it numerous times to read other books. I just get so easily distracted sometimes, which honestly scares the crap out of me because my wife and I are going to have a kid in November, and as excited and joyous as I am, I don't feel in the least bit ready. Okay, I do, actually, but it worries me that I'm the type of guy who occasionally forgets to take the garbage out to the curb for weekly pick-up. Aaargh! It's the same day every frickin' week! WHY THE F*** CAN'T I REMEMBER! And why the hell can't I remember to put lids back on ketchup bottles or pickle jars, or put the lunch meat back in the fridge?
Sadly, Gino's book doesn't really help in answering those very specific questions. I would actually have been pretty amazed if she had included a chapter entitled "Why can't you put lids back on pickle jars?". In that case, this book would have been perfect for someone like me. In truth, the book is full of extremely useful information, much of it applicable to real-life scenarios, but much of it probably targeted more toward business people. Gino is an associate professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, specializing in the ethics and sociology of business practices. Basically, she knows how and why marketing works and how one can avoid the "tricks" that advertisers use.
While it may sound a bit dry for those of us who don't have MBAs, it's actually pretty fascinating. Incorporating detailed research studies, anecdotes from the business world, and examples from her own personal life, Gino's book explains why our decision-making skills and behavior are affected less by our personal values and ethics and more on seemingly innocuous external factors, such as wearing sunglasses and the type of car a person drives. Our mind plays so many little tricks on us, which often causes us to lose sight of our initial goal and get completely derailed. And make us unable to put lids back on jars....more
Courtroom dramas are hit or miss with me. I realize the potential for great human drama in a courtroom. As someone who has been called for jury duty fCourtroom dramas are hit or miss with me. I realize the potential for great human drama in a courtroom. As someone who has been called for jury duty four times in my life and actually ending up picked for a jury on two trials (a rape of a minor and an embezzlement scheme), I actually found the experience pretty intense and fascinating. For some reason, though, that intensity doesn’t always translate into fiction.
Then again, I hadn’t read The Lincoln Lawyer series.
What Michael Connelly has done for police-procedural in his Harry Bosch novels, he does for courtroom dramas in his Lincoln Lawyer novels. He makes the courtroom drama believable, exciting, and rife with human emotion. He also makes his stories feel like they are ripped from today’s headlines. They feel current and poignant.
Take, for example, the fourth book in the series, “The Fifth Witness”. In all fairness, this probably felt more current back when it was written in 2011. It was a few short years after the 2008 financial crisis. Millions of families were losing their homes due to predatory lending practices that caused the housing bubble to explode. Honestly, though, things haven’t changed much. The foreclosure industry is still, sadly, a lucrative industry.
In the book, Mickey Haller has found that foreclosure defense is raking in a lot more than criminal defense. There’s certainly a never-ending stream of victims. One of his newest clients, Lisa Trammel, a single mom who was being forced out of her home by the bank, has been arrested for the murder of the banker who was trying to foreclose on her house.
The evidence seems clear-cut, but Haller takes the case anyway. He’s confident that, guilty or not, he can win the case.
Another phenomenally good crime thriller from Connelly. More than any of his previous Haller novels, this one delves deeper into the idea of defense ethics. Also, Haller makes a major life decision. (‘Nuff said.)...more
Loading...
