Job Search

                There comes a time in everyone’s life that they have to decide what they want to do (next).  I am typically one to procrastinate, not plan, and ignore things I deem unimportant.  However, the choice of a next job is something I have given considerable thought, and will likely think about even more in the next few months before I need to make the change.

                Several factors are important to me in this decision.  (In no particular order)

-          Must-haves:

o   Proximity to quality graduate programs

o   Availability of jobs for my significant other

o   Small work facility

o   “Good” job

-          Nice-to-haves:

o   Big(er) city... ~1M people

o   Not in the Southeast

o   Reasonable cost of living

While “good” job is pretty vague, I have a pretty good idea of what I want to do.  I have very much enjoyed working at a small facility, and want to continue that.  I enjoy being solely responsible for some function, without having anyone else to rely on, and having discretion to make decisions and changes as I see fit… and being held accountable for such.  I want a job where I will learn how that business works; not in a micro sense of how my function works, but in a macro sense as how that entire facility functions.  I want a job where I can make decisions directly and not simply report on how well I have cajoled others into doing “my” project.  I don’t particularly care for “exposure to management” as it is unavoidable in any circumstance, and I don’t want a significant achievement in my professional career to be a stack of business cards from people I have an in with only due to my job and not necessarily due to my performance in that job.  

Proximity to significant other… it’s been two years, it is something I want to change, and now it’s time for me to make it happen.  Enough said. 

And finally, access to a good university or business school is something I am really looking for.  I don’t know what the next step in my life will be, but I enjoy learning and would like to continue my formal education while I have the time and money.  At this point it is really a “keep the options open” move, but worth considering before moving off to another state. 

Just a couple more months to the next year or two of my life!

Full Body Project

http://www.leonardnimoyphotography.com/7body.htm

While this might not be a typical posting topic for me, it struck me as I was watching the Colbert Report as it relates to my current book – The Fountainhead. 

                If I got the interview correct, the photographer’s message is that all people are beautiful, and that our society holds unrealistic standards of beauty for women particularly.  He continues in saying that this would be a great addition to any home with an adolescent female as it demonstrates an alternative perspective of beauty and one that would make young women less distressed over their own appearance.  (He also says that oral sex among adolescent women is increasing because they are uncomfortable with their bodies… so we should make them feel better about themselves so they have intercourse instead?  I was a little confused on that point…)  Regardless, the American ideal in terms of body weight is unrealistic for the average female, and utterly unattainable for some. 

He is likely proposing one of the following:

1)       Standards of beauty are arbitrary and need to be deliberately chosen, and he is purposefully challenging the norm

2)      We shouldn’t have ideals that are unattainable by some because it might make them feel bad

If he is saying the latter, I couldn’t disagree with him more.  This is the logical equivalent of saying “Having Einstein as an ideal of mental achievement promotes despair among aspiring intellectuals as many can never reach that level.”  While both may be true, the whole point of an ideal is that it is an ideal:  unachievable by most (if not all), but still something to be sought after and aspired to.

If this leaves some people feeling dissatisfied, then so be it.  At least it poses a challenge for those willing to work towards a goal and attempt to achieve something – whether it be physical beauty or intellectual achievement. 

Proposing mediocrity as an ideal is a dangerous idea.  Suppose we could all just be content to be fat, dumb and happy… wouldn’t that be a great world?  Who wouldn’t want to be blissfully ignorant?  I count myself as one who would not be pleased.  Aspiring to mediocrity is not my idea of achievement, or the attainment of human potential, or even the purpose of any living thing… let alone mankind. 

Happiness

I’d like to begin with an admission:  I have no formal education in the area of psychology, nor have I spent much time reading about this topic.  That being said, the following is my opinion and may or may not be well founded in reality; merely my perception of it. 

My view of happiness is some sort of satisfaction of desires.   More simply:  getting what you want.  While that may seem simplistic, I think it covers a good deal of what would constitute happiness for most people. 

Example 1:

A child wants a toy.  When the child receives said item, they are happy.  This works with slightly more complication for adults and their somewhat more complex desires:  say a vacation, TV, home, or car. 

I think the first objection to this would be, “but does that really make you happy?”  The argument goes along the lines of people not being happy with their new toy several days/weeks/months after it is first obtained.  While this may be true, I think at least the initial response is happiness.  And assuming that human beings have an insatiable appetite for more and better things, it is not much of a stretch to predict that people will always be somewhat dissatisfied with the status quo and will generally strive for more.  (Not many 6 year olds stay perpetually blissful till death after the receipt of that one toy they have to have… if only it were that simple)  So to answer the above question, yes, it does make you happy, but as your desires shift, so to it becomes necessary to fill different desires to attain that happiness. 

Example 2:

Rich kid vs. poor kid.  Ever noticed that people who have everything they could imagine growing up never seem to be really that happy with their lives?  Conversely, many people with very modest upbringings will be tremendously happy with simple desires satisfied – such as graduation from college. 

I think this is a good example of a desire satisfaction model of happiness.  If you have incredibly high baseline expectations of life growing up with everything, merely maintaining that is hard, let alone achieving and obtaining more things that you desire – say a 40 foot yacht instead of a 30 foot yacht.  Conversely, if someone grew up almost starving, and grows up to be even moderately successful and raise a family, they could be perfectly happy never even owning a boat – let alone a yacht of titanic proportions. 

Example 3:

Continual improvement.  Happiness also seems to come very much from betterment of living conditions, quality of life, and belongings.  Take a brand new Honda Civic.  If you drive a Geo Metro, you’d probably be very happy about the upgrade.  However, if you drive a Porsche 911, it probably would depress you. 

The one caveat I think of off hand is the fact that peoples desires at different stages in life change.  For example, a 20 something might be interested in having better and faster cars, where a 30 something with a family may be more concerned with a home or their children.  While it is not as simple to demonstrate the shift in importance between dissimilar items, one can easily imagine that the same general concept holds true:  such that happiness is still attained in that an improvement in overall desire satisfaction is accomplished. 

So what?  What does that mean?  I think this general conception is a fleshed out version of an opinion expressed by my grandfather:  “if you have everything you can imagine when you are 30 years old, where do you go from there?”  And the only real answer is backwards, except for the fortunate few who have the talent, means, and fortune to continue bettering their circumstances.  Unfortunately, this also leads to a lot of people trying to keep up with the Jones’ and either go bankrupt, or are disappointed in not being able to buy that better car every other year. 

My solution is simple in theory, but perhaps more difficult in reality.  In a word:  patience. 

Do you need that new TV this year, or can you stretch it out a little longer?  Do you need that big fancy car now, or can you keep what you have, invest that money, and buy your dream car later in life (if it is still so important at that point)?  The main point is that despite how happy that bump might make you, you have to realize the next bump up is going to be that much harder to attain.  Also, the lower your baseline or expectations, the better your chances of getting what you want – as those levels are much more easily attained. 

So when that kid asks for the latest greatest cell phone that will make the entire school envy them, does it really do them much good in the long run to be at the panicle of mobile technology in 6^th grade?  I think not. 

We the Living

 This book is another classic in my opinion.  From a first pass, it is not quite as moving as Orwell’s “1984”, but it is much more life affirming – even if it is equally depressing. 

But to take a step back, this is Ayn Rand’s story of a young woman in communist Russia around the 1920’s.  And without going into much detail of the story specifics, it is about the suffering, pain, and hardships she endures to chase the things she wants.  The moral of the story is that despite the fact that times were difficult, and things were not always going well, it was her ideals she was fighting for, things that mattered to her… and that made it all worthwhile. 

From my perspective, this is like “1984” in terms of criticism of a collective society, but also adds the route of escape by showing what it is exactly in each of us that makes such a scheme unbearable.  Both stories show how a collective society requires that each individual abandon their personal interests, motives, and thoughts in favor of those promoted by society as beneficial to the collective.  While both main characters die in the end, the circumstances are much different – in 1984 he does after surrendering to the ultimate power wielded by the state causes him to cease to desire to life after accepting that what he did was wrong…  Kira in “We the Living” is a strong character who never gives up, and dies chasing her dreams – first slowly in Russia helping he lover, and ultimately in the wilderness trying to escape the country.

“We the Living” is really a testament to what makes life worth living, and why a communist society is doomed to failure:  it is our individual desires and pursuits that make up our life, and regardless of how bad things are, as long as people are chasing what is truly important to them, they still have hope and a reason to go on.  In a communist society, you are commanded to drop your personal interests, and fight for the collective good – whether you agree or not.

This also seems to hint at something close to existentialism which calls for a similar criticism of prevailing ideals and goals, and a pursuit of individual well reasoned goals and values.  Through all of my philosophical readings and literary readings, these are the two values I most agree with:  to always challenge the thought and reasoning of any ideal, and to make decisions for yourself based on those beliefs you hold to be true. 

I think it is in this sense that the book is titled – that Kira is truly living by making decisions not based on the prevailing thought, but based on her personal beliefs, and following those actions to lead a life that is full of meaning to her personally:  thus truly living.  In a sense, I also think it is a challenge to the reader to evaluate their own beliefs … and to act as if they are truly living their lives, and not living what someone else had planned for them. 

Mortgage Bailout?

Despite all of the politicians, celebrities, and religious figures calling for financial aid on behalf of consumers with sub prime mortgages, this is really a bad idea.  In turn, I want to look at this from a couple perspectives, and explore why I think this to be true.  But first, a little background information.

A long time ago (2002 era), the economy was distressed, inflation was believed to be poised to rise, and the fed slashed interest rates faster than the jaws on wall street could drop.  During the following period of near zero inflation and rock bottom interest rates, people started taking out loans with these low interest rates to finance real estate purchases – both for residences and speculation.  Since many financial institutions were unwilling to give fixed rate mortgages at the low rates of the day, the popular option was an ARM (adjustable rate mortgage) which is pinned to the prime rate set by the fed.  Now that the prime rate has gone up, the rates on these mortgages has gone up, and consumers are finding that they hold loans with payments which they can no longer afford.  To make matters just a little worse, the higher interest rates have also staved off demand for real estate, and for the first time in decades?  Real estate prices are declining.

Consumer:  while it is unfortunate that some people didn’t read or understand the documents they signed, their signature and agreement to their loan was secured.  I don’t fault people for their ignorance in this matter any more than I envy them living beyond their means.  Sure it is awful for all those people that bought something they couldn’t afford… but there are other consumers in the market that waited out the whole bubble to collapse so they can get into the market at a reasonable price.  On an individual basis, I think it is important that people are responsible for their own business, and not rely on the government to bail them out if they make decisions that turn out to be poor ones. 

Industry:  and as much as people blame shady lenders for the problems, they have just as much to loose in this whole deal as their consumers.  Beyond the poor reputation this gives lenders, defaulted loans are not loans they are making money on.  Lenders are in the business of taking calculated risks of a consumers ability to repay a loan and adjust the rate accordingly… not to resell the real estate on a defaulted loan.  Also, you’ll notice that stock value and headcount at these lenders is plummeting as well – not a good sign of a healthy business.  So while many people blame lenders for the defaulting mortgages, they are mostly suffering just as much as their customers.

Economy: and while a downturn in any economy or sector can be painful, a government bailout is not warranted unless there is a better reason than saving some consumers the hassle of moving or going bankrupt.  Part of being a capitalistic economy is the redistribution of resources… in this case financial and away from real estate.  So while it is harmful to consumers with sub prime loans, a government bailout would only artificially inflate real estate prices. 

Despite all of this, there might be some government regulation that is warranted.  I believe one thing they could do is help set some standards for transparency in complex financial documents signed by consumers.  I try to make a habit of reading terms and conditions, and most people look at me as if I had two heads when I do so, but the prose is often composed by lawyers for lawyers, and is not accessible to even an educated person who tries to understand what is being said.  This problem is further amplified when financial data is introduced.  I think clear standards of communicating these details to the consumer will go a long way towards boosting consumer confidence and avoiding this issue again.  And regardless, some people will always take the risk and hope for the best… but at that point you can't fault anyone but the consumer if they had all of the facts in mind when making the decision.