More money, more happiness? Well, no, not exactly. But still, economist Robert Frank‘s article makes some interesting points about how to spend your money so as to virtually insure no increase in your happiness or well-being.
A tip of the blogging hat to the good folks at Arts and Letters Daily for pointing this article out to the ignorant masses, including me.
OK, the “flip-flop” attacks have got to stop. If this politician changes his mind, or that politician changes her mind, they’re wafflers, flip-floppers, etc. This weak charge is then trotted out by the opposing candidate as if it were some moral flaw. It is this moronic attack that is currently being leveled against Kerry by Bush.
It’s called learning, folks. When people who are guided by reason acquire new information, sometimes it changes their mind. This should be a desirable thing–we want leaders and decision makers who can broaden and deepen their understanding of issues and act in ways that takes all the information available into account.
If you never change your mind on anything (or at least, not once you’ve said it publically), then it seems to me that either:
1). You are of the opinion that you already know everything. This is mere arrogance.
2). You can’t learn new things. This is being ineducable, and it is tragic.
3). You don’t feel you need to learn new things, even though you know there is more to be learned. This is laziness and smells of duplicity as well.
Only in the modern political circus would someone hold logic, reasoning and critical thinking to be bad things. The desire to mindlessly cling to a decision–despite receiving additional information that would lead any rational actor to change course–is folly, not leadership. These cynical and mean-spirited attacks on Kerry strike one as the actions of a candidate with nothing positive to offer about himself.
Shame on you, Mr. President! While you may be proud of promoting a short-sighted, uninformed, and provincial approach to political action, the founding fathers likely would be sickened to the point of nausea.
The men who developed the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights were lovers of reason, logical thought, and open debate. It was their willingness to listen to one another, and to change direction when they saw they were heading in the wrong direction, that gave us our country.
Go ahead, Mr. Kerry–change your mind when new information calls for it. Most of us mere mortals understand how that works–we do it ourselves.
I have no idea what this really means or entails, but it apparently makes it easier for my friend (and others) to check The Malcontent out. And trust me, if you don’t write any better than I do, you want as few barriers to people reading you as possible.
Now that’s what I call making the world a better place!
Someone should make these guys part of the real Department of Homeland Security. Because when bad free verse takes the cash prize, the terrorists win.
Now if they would only train a crack team of commandos to stop high school students from writing love sonnets and poems about death…..
See the Boston Globe story here.
So, a friend just emailed me about National Homeless Voter Registration Week, which runs September 26-Oct. 2 this year. Now, admittedly, I had never thought about this issue before, but it seems quite reasonable that you should not lose your franchise to vote (particularly in state-wide or national level elections) simply because you are without shelter.
This lead me to wonder what the laws are governing the registering of voters who do not have a place of residence–that is, in what district do you register to vote, if you don’t live anywhere in particular?
The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty has a Model State Homeless Voter Registration Act, which is available at the website for the National Coalition for the Homeless. A thought-provoking document (at least for us nerdy-lawyer-types), it points out just how hard it is to ensure that everyone who wishes to participate in elections gets the opportunity to do so.
Todd Purdum’s analysis in the New York Times online edition provides a very interesting bit of perspective on the likely impact of the 9/11 commission report, but the general thrust of the article kills me.
The headline encapsulates my complaint. (Heads are usually not the responsibility of the reporter, but of the copy editor)
“Swift Action on Advice From the 9/11 Commission Is Unlikely” is like reporting “Ocean swimmers likely to get wet.” I mean, come on, what a crazy idea. A slow-moving federal government? Next you’ll be telling me that multinational corporations have an undue influence on national policy, or that money buys you access to power, or that the media is fair and unbiased.
New motto? “All the news that’s fit to print not news.“
So, not 10 minutes after I made my last post, I got an email from one of the folks I talk to regularly about their job. Just to give you a flavor of the feelings that the average person I talk to is expressing, I have quoted from his email (with permission). He is an lawyer specializing in intellectual property issues, at a moderate size boutique firm.
I really, really need a new job doing something else. I almost quit about 20 minutes ago and the more I think about it the more I want to, except that the “rational” side of me is arguing not to throw a good paying job away with nothing else lined up. I don’t think I can take this job anymore. Have no interest or sense of urgency whatsoever. Problem is I can’t think of what else to do that has even the remotest interest to me and make a living and maintain health insurance. I thought the job would be better by now but it is just sucking the life out of me. Feel completely trapped. And a vacation isn’t the answer as I just dread having to come back to this hell hole. I know that resigning will make me feel better for a couple of days but that is all, then the frantic pace of trying to find something new to do will drive me over the edge.
His email is pretty typical of what I’m hearing.
OK, so I’ll go with what I know.
Lately, it has occurred to me that nearly everyone I know hates their current job. A couple dozen people talk with me regularly about what they do for a living, and usually they ain’t so happy. My impression of wide-spread dissatisfaction was so strong that I did some unscientific polling and the vast majority of those I asked expressed a strong visceral dislike for their current employment situation.
Now, I use a totally crap phrase like “current employment situation” (worthy of your average Human Resources double-speak bastard) because of variation in the reported sources of animus towards the job. Some liked what they do, but hated where they worked. Some liked where they work–actually, usually with whom they work–but hated what they actually do. And some, particularly the lawyers (who were oversampled in this survey), hated what they did, where they did it and with whom.
Let me hasten to point out that almost every one with whom I spoke holds a comfortable white-collar job, with decent benefits, adequate pay and reasonable hours. (Again, the lawyers are excepted–very long hours, with obscenely high pay and usually good benefits). Many are working in their chosen field, or at least in their chosen sector (education, nonprofit, corporate). They are not, as a whole, very negative folks. But they all express a strong desire to do something else for a living.
Why is this?
Management seems to play a large role in a lot of cases. Most of the folks who kvetch to me are in their late 20s-early 30s and report working for managers in the 50s who engage in rampant cronyism when it comes to hiring, promotion, bonuses, work assignments, and perks. In several cases, management hires personal friends or former colleagues as high-priced consultants to come in and do things that the staff is perfectly qualified to do (in some cases, exceptionally qualified).
I don’t really understand why you would hire bright, motivated, gifted employees and then do nothing with them–no career development, no mentoring, no promotions from within the organization. It is counterintuitive, short-sighted, and leads to bad morale.
And, if my experience as a senior staffer is any indicator, management and senior staff constantly complain about how the junior staff is always turning over, with little reflection about why that might be. My personal feeling is that many, if not most, of the managers in organizations are people with little or no desire to actually lead. They take the rewards of leadership, but little of the responsibilities. This is not a new idea, but we never seem to learn from it.
If you really like your job, comment or email me here.
If you really hate your job, feel free to do the same.
OK, I just figured out how to enable comments on this thing.
Now if I just had something to say……..
Just Googled “blogger’s block” and was glad to see I’m not alone. Cold comfort.