My Questions for Obama and McCain

I have a few questions for our presidential candidates. Although I don’t really expect thorough answers, I’d like to put both men on notice that this continuing junk about pigs, pseudo-racism, and hope/changeism is a waste of time we can ill afford.

What would I to scream to our Presidential candidates if I had the chance?

Here’s my first question:

How will you move US energy policy to adapt to a world where oil is scarcer and the competition for it fiercer? In other words, how will you deal with the probability of “peak oil?”

Our entire infrastructure is built around oil – interstate highway system, trucking goods across the country, suburbs, exurbs, NIMBY protests to creating local plants, geopolitical positioning of US troops and huge outlays of money borrowed from other places to pay for it all. If worldwide production of oil has peaked or will soon, then the US can either fight for access or adapt. Quite frankly, I’d rather adapt because adapting involves innovation, and the US badly needs to make stuff again.

Read the rest ->
Which brings me to question #2:

What will you do to move the US back into position as a country that makes things or, at least, is more self-sufficient than we are now?

Nothing against imports, but I don’t think the US should be completely dependent on imports for our everyday needs. Anyone tried buying shoes made in the US or toys lately? Harder than you might expect. Sure, you can find some US made shoes and toys, but they’ll be at the higher end of the price range.

During the last few years, most of the money the US generates has come from financial instruments. Not goods. We make more money from shuffling paper around than making things. Sounds good if the money is sloshing around, but the recent mortgage meltdown shows how dangerous it can be to rely on what is, essentially, buying and selling IOUs. And if our economy tanks, who will buy that paper anyway? It’s like a giant Ponzi scheme. As long as new money comes in, then people higher up can bank it. But you have to keep hustling new money. And Ponzi schemes inevitably end badly, with people on the bottom getting screwed and people on the top walking off with lots of cash.

I’d rather see us make things, innovate and make a “made in the US” label proof positive of quality. Yeah, hokey. But how can we survive if we don’t actually make things anymore? We can’t all be hedge fund executives or marketing analysts or distribution specialists or day-traders. What we really need right now are people to develop the next generation energy source, overhaul our physical infrastructure and make low to moderate cost shoes, clothes toys and other basic stuff of life.

Number 3:

Our politics stink and we’ve got a nepotism problem. We’re verging on becoming a DINO (democracy in name only), where only the connected gain power and power is the raison d’etre for both parties – not some long lost “values.” Anyone noticed that there are lots of second or even third generation families taking up seats in Congress? Is that bad? Not necessarily. But I don’t think it’s healthy either. Entrenched political families create and maintain ties to all sorts of groups over long periods of time. While voters may think sending the “grandson of so-and-so” to the Senate or House shortcuts the process of a politician finding his feet, it is a double-edged sword. The person who already has ties to Washington often does not have quite so firm a connection to the “home folks,” creating competing loyalties or interests. Why, for example, would it be a good thing to see a fourth generation Bush in Washington? Or, why would it be a good thing to see fourth generation Kennedy for that matter?

You know, I don’t like seeing movies with the children of stars either. Given that acting is remarkably lucrative after a point, why are the children of established stars given a boost over those trying to break in the industry? Yeah, I know – marketing. But I think it’s a cheat. You cannot convince me all those offspring are deserving, whether in politics or Hollywood. It’s often just nepotism.

Neoptism is a very bad way to allocate prestigious positions, lucrative jobs or prized spots in ivy league schools. It’s just another way to tip the scales in favor of the favored and waste potential talent. And our political parties now are simply the structures used to hand out the spoils.

With a country of 300 million people, just another political dynasty representative is the best we can do? And now that we have well-connected representatives – what do we get? Remember when Republicans wanted smaller government and lower taxes? Remember when Democrats stood for blue collar citizens who simply wanted a fair shake from the system? Republicans have given us a hugely bloated government now with inequitable income distribution and Democrats now think “blue collar” means “low information” racists. Yeah! What a pack of losers, except that their dysfunction shows “party values” are meaningless. Anyone voting strictly by party is a sucker. Haven’t you noticed how many representatives and senators become at least millionaires during their terms in office? Why is that?

Speaking of wasted talent – number 4:

What would you do if I told you that the US wastes around 31% of its human capital? Surprised? Well, women make up approximately 51% of the population but only show up in 20% or so of high paying jobs. That’s probably optimistic too. While more women than men are graduating from universities and post-graduate schools, they still are typically underemployed and/or underpaid. That’s a stupid waste of a resource.

And lest we skirmish in the never-ending mommy wars, here is an interesting anecdote. The women most likely to stay at home with children these days are middle class women. Why? Well, the women I talk with tell me it’s an economic decision as well as a family one. Quite frankly, middle class women – particularly professional women – don’t often make enough money to cover daycare, deal with daycare pickup / dropoff requirements (many charge by the minute if you are late picking up a child. Understandable. But try explaining THAT to an employer who wants you to stay for a late meeting) and school schedules that seem to have more and more teacher work days every year.

Women making more money may feel, probably correctly, that if they jump off the work track they will lose time, money and position, so they may stay at work. Poorer women simply don’t often have a choice and must work. Heaven knows how they patch together daycare and pay for it.

So, middle class women opt to stay at home partially because the pay just isn’t good enough to justify all the trouble to work. Yeah, nice problem to have, except that group includes teachers, nurses, non-profit managers, just to name a few. These aren’t typically your “rich people” jobs. Most women I talk with don’t want more money to stay in the work force. They want some job flexibility in how they work so that they don’t have to lose nearly all they make to childcare. Part time, flex time, job sharing – women pine for choices that allow them to be economically productive and still care for their families. Current US norms simply waste all that talent. Stupid.

Here’s the kicker though. Dealing with any of these questions requires leadership. A President needs to say “Moving the US from dependence on oil will be my priority for the next four years and I’m starting tomorrow with a “Manhattan project for energy.” Or some such.

Or how about “I will speak to the American people about what industries we have and what we need to re-create in an address to the nation on March 1 2009.”

Or how about “From now on, all candidates for national office will be required to present to would-be constituents basic financial, familial and all previous experience. While in office, all office-holders shall maintain appointment logs, votes cast and all press releases as well as donations and events attended in an easily accessible format that constituents can regularly check. And donations to campaigns must not only include money, but any connections the donor has to the candidate. Yeah, that’ll happen.

There are other issues; these are just the ones I’m thinking of today. My thoughts here are no doubt naive, need refinement and may not ever be possible. But I’m tired of the status quo and eating what I’ve been fed. While our loser Congress plays “who’s worse” about our economic problems, the dollar sinks against nearly every other currency and soon won’t be the currency of choice in oil trades or investments. We’ll owe more than we can ever repay and will repay what we can with wildly inflated dollars, ticking off our creditors even more.

While our political parties waste valuable female talent and rely on so-and-so’s grandson’s friend’s brother for the next open Congressional seat, our country doesn’t make full use of the bulk of its professional graduates. How stupid is that when we need more innovation and creativity than ever?

And we’ll end up needing $22.50 for a tube of toothpaste. Or it will be only $.49, but no one will have a job.

But hey, let’s just wear “Sarah Palin is a c–t” shirts and talk about her “trashy” daughter. Let’s “hope” for “change” or talk about pigs with lipstick. Let’s point fingers at each other and call each other racist because you’re black and vote for Obama or white and vote for McCain. It’s not as if we’ll sink together, after all.

And yeah, I do think one candidate is more qualified to serve, but I wish both would at least address these questions. It might make me feel less fatalistic. It might also help us find our way. But that’s just me.