I expected better from the NY Times. I did not expect The Times would recycle, as it did in today’s article on the troubles at Sears Holdings, the often-reported but factually false statement that “retailers make all their money at Christmas. Or they don’t make any money at all.”
Black Friday. How often have we been “treated” to media reports that Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, derived its name because it is the day when the ledger books of retailers turn from red ink to black as shoppers rush out to buy, buy, buy all the stuff they’ll put under the Christmas tree, or Hanukkah menorah, for friends, family and mostly themselves?
Perhaps at one time, when retailing was an industry of mostly small, independent merchants, the Black Friday tale was true. But in today’s chain-store dominated retail world, most companies already are flush with profits. At the risk of bogging you down with too much data, take a gander at the list of 54 retailers below. All of them are public companies that reported results through the third quarter of their current fiscal year (the period ended for most around October 31, well before Black Friday). Next to each name are its net earnings in 2011 versus the same nine-month period in 2010. Losses are noted in parentheses.
You’ll notice that of the 54 companies, just 12 reported losses this year; nine did so a year ago. Some companies, such as Big Lots and Lowe’s, had lower profits this year compared to 2010, but they still showed black ink well before Black Friday.
It is true a bad holiday shopping season could easily wipe out any accumulated profit during the prior 39 weeks. But that doesn’t excuse inaccurate reporting that retailers make all their money at Christmas. Though we will never be spared the incessant hype for Black Friday and beyond, hopefully next year we won’t be told companies like Macy’s, which recorded more than half a billion dollars in net earnings through October, needs Black Friday to start earning a profit.
Company—9 mos. 2011—9 mos. 2010
Wal-Mart $10.980 billion vs. $10.781 billion
Target $1.948 billion vs. $1.885 billion
Dollar Tree $300.4 million vs. $234.8 million
Big Lots $92.3 million vs. $112.5 million
Dollar General $474.2 million vs. $405.3 million
Duckwall Alco ($550,000) vs. ($5.4 million)
Fred’s $23.6 million vs. $21.0 million
Home Depot $3.109 billion vs. $2.751 billion
Lowe’s $1.52 billion vs. $1.73 billion
Sears Holdings (includes Kmart) ($743 million) vs. ($232 million)
Belk $57.5 million vs. $32.6 million
Bon-Ton ($90.3 million) vs. ($63.5 million)
Dillard’s $322.4 million vs. $70.0 million
JC Penney ($65 million) vs. $118 million
Macy’s $511 million vs. $180 million
Saks $37.8 million vs. $22.9 million
Nordstrom $447 million vs. $381 million
Kohl’s $711 million vs. $626 million
Ross Stores $465.2 million vs. $393.0 million
Stage Stores ($1.7 million) vs. $5.7 million
Stein Mart $14.1 million vs. $29.9 million
TJX $1.02 billion vs. $1.01 billion
Urban Outfitters $146.0 million vs. $197.7 million
Abercrombie & Fitch $108.1 million vs. $57.7 million
American Eagle Outfitters $100.4 million vs. $53.6 million
Buckle $95.4 million vs. $85.2 million
The Children’s Place $53.0 million vs. $51.0 million
Gap $615 million vs. $839 million
Ann Taylor $84.4 million vs. $65.4 million
Cato Corp. $54.7 million vs. $47.9 million
Charming Shoppes $11.1 million vs. ($23.6 million)
Chico’s $115.8 million vs. $94.7 million
Coldwater Creek ($86.9 million) vs. ($7.1 million)
Limited Brands $491 million vs. $352 million
New York & Co. ($28.0 million) vs. ($91.5 million)
Talbots ($58.6 million) vs. $13.6 million
Wet Seal $14.0 million vs. $7.3 million
Big 5 Sporting Goods $11.7 million vs. $16.6 million
Cabela’s $73.0 million vs. $45.9 million
Dick’s Sporting Goods $152.8 million vs. $94.6 million
Golfsmith $6.5 million vs. $222,671
Hibbett Sports $43.2 million vs. $33.9 million
Office Depot $75.3 million vs. $53.7 million
Staples $701.1 million vs. $607.2 million
Books-A-Million ($10.4 million) vs. $2.2 million
Build-A-Bear Workshop ($8.1 million) vs. ($8.2 million)
Michaels Stores $79 million vs. $0
Toys “R” Us ($194 million) vs. ($162 million)
GameStop $165.2 million vs. $170.2 million
Williams-Sonoma $114.3 million vs. $86.8 million
Guitar Center ($64.8 million) vs. ($54.2 million)
Best Buy $467 million vs. $626 million
RadioShack $60.3 million vs. $149.1 million
Tiffany $260.8 million vs. $187.2 million
(Editor’s Note: This will be the last posting of 2011. Thank you all for sticking with me. If you like my musings and rants, tell a friend or relative to log on and sign up. It’s free, and sure to be topical and probably controversial in 2012. I hear there’s an election coming up... Have a happy and healthy New Year!)
Friday, December 30, 2011
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Is Sears Worth Holding?
It’s the post-Christmas season, that favorite time of year for stock analysts and business journalists to bang out on their keyboards early obituaries for Sears Holdings, operator of Sears and Kmart stores. The latest hospice vigil comes on the heels of the company’s announcement it would close 120 stores after disappointing holiday sales.
For more years than not over the last nearly four decades, I have been part of the annual exercise of wondering just how long these two venerable retail chains could survive. Seemingly year after year, customers have abandoned Sears and Kmart for fresher, more nimble, more price sensitive competitors, be they Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Bed Bath and Beyond, Old Navy or Amazon.com.
A true test of whether a company can, or should, survive, is the answer to the following question—would you miss it if closed its doors forever? Syms and its subsidiary Filene’s Basement are in the process of shuttering. I was a frequent Syms shopper. I must have bought at least 20 suits from Syms over the years. Though I haven’t bought a suit in about five years, I still liked walking the stores, both the one across the street from my former office and the outlet in Westchester. Just last week, for old times sake, I stopped by the Syms in Westchester. It was a depressing visit. Customers were picking over the bones of the remaining merchandise and fixtures. I’ll miss it. Maybe Century 21 will take its place. That would be nice.
Would you miss Sears or Kmart? I would. More Sears than Kmart. I’ve bought many a tool from Sears. Craftsman tools. Break them and get a free replacement. I broke the shaft of an awl back in my firewood-splitting days. Brought it back to Sears for a replacement, no questions asked. I’ve bought washing machines, dryers, a freezer and a refrigerator. I’ve bought apparel there as well, nothing fancy, just some shirts, underwear, Levi’s jeans. Everything I’ve bought at Sears, it seems to me, I bought on sale, perhaps even clearance. And that’s part of the company’s problem. Almost nothing in Sears is worth buying at full price, nothing enticing to make me want to go to Sears. Even its Consumer Reports top-rated laundry machines weren’t appealing until they went on sale and the salesman had to throw in added incentives.
Still, knowing Sears was there, and possibly carried what I wanted, was a comfort, a crutch to my consumerism. I’d miss Sears if it weren’t there. There was a time, from 1980 through about 2000, when I was fortunate enough to be the first journalist to interview every new, incoming head of Sears. I also knew the chief executives of Kmart, back then an independent company not part of Sears Holdings.
I can’t say I enjoy shopping at Kmart. It just never feels right inside its stores. I never find any apparel, except Hanes or Fruit of the Loom underwear, worth buying. Except, one time I bought a silk tie in a Kmart outside Detroit. I can’t tell you how many of my friends complimented me on that tie. I resisted asking them for $3 so I could buy one for them.
For more years than not over the last nearly four decades, I have been part of the annual exercise of wondering just how long these two venerable retail chains could survive. Seemingly year after year, customers have abandoned Sears and Kmart for fresher, more nimble, more price sensitive competitors, be they Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Bed Bath and Beyond, Old Navy or Amazon.com.
A true test of whether a company can, or should, survive, is the answer to the following question—would you miss it if closed its doors forever? Syms and its subsidiary Filene’s Basement are in the process of shuttering. I was a frequent Syms shopper. I must have bought at least 20 suits from Syms over the years. Though I haven’t bought a suit in about five years, I still liked walking the stores, both the one across the street from my former office and the outlet in Westchester. Just last week, for old times sake, I stopped by the Syms in Westchester. It was a depressing visit. Customers were picking over the bones of the remaining merchandise and fixtures. I’ll miss it. Maybe Century 21 will take its place. That would be nice.
Would you miss Sears or Kmart? I would. More Sears than Kmart. I’ve bought many a tool from Sears. Craftsman tools. Break them and get a free replacement. I broke the shaft of an awl back in my firewood-splitting days. Brought it back to Sears for a replacement, no questions asked. I’ve bought washing machines, dryers, a freezer and a refrigerator. I’ve bought apparel there as well, nothing fancy, just some shirts, underwear, Levi’s jeans. Everything I’ve bought at Sears, it seems to me, I bought on sale, perhaps even clearance. And that’s part of the company’s problem. Almost nothing in Sears is worth buying at full price, nothing enticing to make me want to go to Sears. Even its Consumer Reports top-rated laundry machines weren’t appealing until they went on sale and the salesman had to throw in added incentives.
Still, knowing Sears was there, and possibly carried what I wanted, was a comfort, a crutch to my consumerism. I’d miss Sears if it weren’t there. There was a time, from 1980 through about 2000, when I was fortunate enough to be the first journalist to interview every new, incoming head of Sears. I also knew the chief executives of Kmart, back then an independent company not part of Sears Holdings.
I can’t say I enjoy shopping at Kmart. It just never feels right inside its stores. I never find any apparel, except Hanes or Fruit of the Loom underwear, worth buying. Except, one time I bought a silk tie in a Kmart outside Detroit. I can’t tell you how many of my friends complimented me on that tie. I resisted asking them for $3 so I could buy one for them.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Art in the Hinterlands
For the second time this month the NY Times has reported on culture coming to northwest Arkansas, specifically on the opening of the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville. For those not in the know, Bentonville is the corporate hometown of Wal-Mart, the largest retailer, indeed the largest company, in the world. Crystal Bridges is, in the words of the December 4 Times piece, “the ambitious pet project of Alice Walton, 62, who, as the daughter of Wal-Mart’s founder, Sam Walton, is the third-richest woman in the world, according to Forbes.”
Here are links to the two articles, in the order they appeared:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/travel/art-meets-leisure-in-bentonville-arkansas.html?scp=2&sq=alice%20walton&st=cse
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/arts/design/crystal-bridges-the-art-museum-walmart-money-built-review.html?hp
I met Alice Walton twice, in 1981 and 1982, if memory serves me right, each time at the conclusion of a canoe trip for stock analysts and journalists attending Wal-Mart’s annual meeting weekend. After the Saturday morning shareholders’ meeting, Sam Walton would command a flotilla of mostly New York-based numbers crunchers and Wal-Mart executives. We would end up at a campsite beside the river where Alice was busy preparing Mulligan Stew for the ragged pack. I can’t say it was the most savory meal I’ve eaten, but after you’ve been dipping an oar for more than three hours it was quite appreciated. The cold beer washing it down enhanced the flavor.
Alice didn’t get involved in the retail enterprise, so I didn’t really follow her career which included interests in finance.
I’m not sure where Alice got her penchant for art, but I’d bet it was from her mother, Helen. Before one of her parents’ vacations, a trip to Europe reminiscent of scenes depicted in many a book or movie about an American matron touring the Continent to soak up culture, Sam Walton called our office in a tizzy. Speaking to one of my former bosses, the late Dick Groberg, he pressed him for the names of retailers he could visit while Helen made her way through the galleries and museums of Europe. Sam Walton didn’t build an empire by poring over artifacts and paintings. He took inspiration from current enterprises, wherever they might be.
Here are links to the two articles, in the order they appeared:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/travel/art-meets-leisure-in-bentonville-arkansas.html?scp=2&sq=alice%20walton&st=cse
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/arts/design/crystal-bridges-the-art-museum-walmart-money-built-review.html?hp
I met Alice Walton twice, in 1981 and 1982, if memory serves me right, each time at the conclusion of a canoe trip for stock analysts and journalists attending Wal-Mart’s annual meeting weekend. After the Saturday morning shareholders’ meeting, Sam Walton would command a flotilla of mostly New York-based numbers crunchers and Wal-Mart executives. We would end up at a campsite beside the river where Alice was busy preparing Mulligan Stew for the ragged pack. I can’t say it was the most savory meal I’ve eaten, but after you’ve been dipping an oar for more than three hours it was quite appreciated. The cold beer washing it down enhanced the flavor.
Alice didn’t get involved in the retail enterprise, so I didn’t really follow her career which included interests in finance.
I’m not sure where Alice got her penchant for art, but I’d bet it was from her mother, Helen. Before one of her parents’ vacations, a trip to Europe reminiscent of scenes depicted in many a book or movie about an American matron touring the Continent to soak up culture, Sam Walton called our office in a tizzy. Speaking to one of my former bosses, the late Dick Groberg, he pressed him for the names of retailers he could visit while Helen made her way through the galleries and museums of Europe. Sam Walton didn’t build an empire by poring over artifacts and paintings. He took inspiration from current enterprises, wherever they might be.
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Season of Giving and Taking
In this season of giving, news reports remind us it also is the season of taking, as in “Shoplifting tab to hit $1.84B,” according to the Associated Press.
The AP story said in the “four weeks leading up to this Christmas, an estimated $1.84 billion in merchandise will be shoplifted from retailers in the U.S., according to The Global Retail Theft Barometer. That’s up about 6% from $1.7 billion during the same period last year.”
No doubt about it, “five-finger discounts” are trending up, what with an economy that hawks purchasing at too many people unemployed or too underemployed to afford all the goodies they and their families want.
The dirty little secret of retail losses from what the industry calls “shrink,” however, is that insiders—retail employees—steal more than customers. It’s been that way for years. Employee theft accounts for about 44% of all losses, compared to 36% from shoplifting. The rest, the AP reported, results from vendor theft and administrative error.
Some years ago I heard about Kmart’s efforts to control insider losses. Management would review each employee’s monthly store purchases. If they fell below a certain percentage of take home pay, red flags would be raised. After all, why would an employee not buy household and health and beauty aid supplies, stationery and other commodity purchases at Kmart, where they’d get an employee discount? One possible explanation would be the employee was simply taking home the goods without paying for them. An investigation would follow.
The story, perhaps, was apocryphal. But I always thought it had a ring of authenticity to it.
Choose Your Obscenity: Which to you is more obscene, the throngs of mostly young men who grappled last week to get their grubby hands on $180 a pair Nike Air Jordans, or the $88 million reportedly paid by the 22-year-old daughter of a Russian billionaire for a 6,774-square-foot penthouse apartment at 15 Central Park West in Manhattan?
Perhaps neither affronts you. By my very question you can surmise I find both disdainful. Push come to shove, as happened across the country with the Air Jordans, I’d have to say I am more repulsed by the real estate transaction (I also wasn’t too excited by another deal at the same address, a mere $24 million for a three-bedroom apartment.)
I’m not against the free market setting prices. But let’s be real, people. The apartment doesn’t come with Central Park thrown in, just a view. I’m not sure if the apartment comes furnished, but even if did and everything inside it was trimmed in gold, $88 million is a little much. I’ve seen castles and mansions, all with extensive grounds, that would sell for less.
As Gilda pointed out, one has to wonder from where the money to afford these purchases came. The Russian father is an oligarch of questionable morality and business dealings. While rank and file Russians struggle, oligarchs and their minions have brazenly usurped wealth, natural resources and power.
The Manhattan real estate market has been pumped up by financial industry bogeymen, er, I mean, moneymen. Naw, I mean bogeymen. Rarely do they contribute anything tangible to human endeavor. Their sole purpose is to make money through arcane, manipulative practices few understand, fewer regulate. Their mistakes plunged the nation and world economies into turmoil. Millions lost jobs, retirement savings, homes. With rare exception, only they and their gilded lifestyles have rebounded. They’ve made it almost impossible for ordinary people to invest without anxiety as their computer-generated trading systems produce huge stock market fluctuations, not just daily but also hour to hour.
It’s hardly a wonder, therefore, when the common folk fight for a pair of sneakers. It’s the most tantalizing asset many of them will ever own. Which is an obscene commentary on our society.
The AP story said in the “four weeks leading up to this Christmas, an estimated $1.84 billion in merchandise will be shoplifted from retailers in the U.S., according to The Global Retail Theft Barometer. That’s up about 6% from $1.7 billion during the same period last year.”
No doubt about it, “five-finger discounts” are trending up, what with an economy that hawks purchasing at too many people unemployed or too underemployed to afford all the goodies they and their families want.
The dirty little secret of retail losses from what the industry calls “shrink,” however, is that insiders—retail employees—steal more than customers. It’s been that way for years. Employee theft accounts for about 44% of all losses, compared to 36% from shoplifting. The rest, the AP reported, results from vendor theft and administrative error.
Some years ago I heard about Kmart’s efforts to control insider losses. Management would review each employee’s monthly store purchases. If they fell below a certain percentage of take home pay, red flags would be raised. After all, why would an employee not buy household and health and beauty aid supplies, stationery and other commodity purchases at Kmart, where they’d get an employee discount? One possible explanation would be the employee was simply taking home the goods without paying for them. An investigation would follow.
The story, perhaps, was apocryphal. But I always thought it had a ring of authenticity to it.
Choose Your Obscenity: Which to you is more obscene, the throngs of mostly young men who grappled last week to get their grubby hands on $180 a pair Nike Air Jordans, or the $88 million reportedly paid by the 22-year-old daughter of a Russian billionaire for a 6,774-square-foot penthouse apartment at 15 Central Park West in Manhattan?
Perhaps neither affronts you. By my very question you can surmise I find both disdainful. Push come to shove, as happened across the country with the Air Jordans, I’d have to say I am more repulsed by the real estate transaction (I also wasn’t too excited by another deal at the same address, a mere $24 million for a three-bedroom apartment.)
I’m not against the free market setting prices. But let’s be real, people. The apartment doesn’t come with Central Park thrown in, just a view. I’m not sure if the apartment comes furnished, but even if did and everything inside it was trimmed in gold, $88 million is a little much. I’ve seen castles and mansions, all with extensive grounds, that would sell for less.
As Gilda pointed out, one has to wonder from where the money to afford these purchases came. The Russian father is an oligarch of questionable morality and business dealings. While rank and file Russians struggle, oligarchs and their minions have brazenly usurped wealth, natural resources and power.
The Manhattan real estate market has been pumped up by financial industry bogeymen, er, I mean, moneymen. Naw, I mean bogeymen. Rarely do they contribute anything tangible to human endeavor. Their sole purpose is to make money through arcane, manipulative practices few understand, fewer regulate. Their mistakes plunged the nation and world economies into turmoil. Millions lost jobs, retirement savings, homes. With rare exception, only they and their gilded lifestyles have rebounded. They’ve made it almost impossible for ordinary people to invest without anxiety as their computer-generated trading systems produce huge stock market fluctuations, not just daily but also hour to hour.
It’s hardly a wonder, therefore, when the common folk fight for a pair of sneakers. It’s the most tantalizing asset many of them will ever own. Which is an obscene commentary on our society.
Friday, December 23, 2011
A Blink Before Brinkmanship Returns
Now that House Republicans have blinked and joined their Senate counterparts in recognizing politics as the art of compromise, 160 million Americans can enjoy two more months of lower payroll taxes, while the unemployed can breathe easier for another eight weeks with jobless benefits before brinkmanship returns to the nation’s capital in the form of another exasperating debate on fiscal policy.
Try as I might to avoid political commentary, it’s virtually impossible. So here goes...
During his tenure representing the state of Wyoming in the U.S. Senate (1979-1997), Alan Simpson was not on my list of favorite senators. The tall, craggy 80-year-old conservative Republican could be quite charming, folksy and jocular, but his politics was clearly way to the right for my tastes.
Simpson, however, by his own admission on the Brian Lehrer Show on NPR Wednesday, would find it impossible to get a Republican nomination today as he’s an advocate of personal privacy, which means he supports gay rights and abortion rights. As co-chairman with Erskine Bowles of the Deficit Reduction Commission, he also acknowledged the need to raise more revenue through new or higher taxes, heresy among Tea Party members and the Republican faithful who have lined up like lemmings behind them.
Switching over to the EIB (Excellence in Broadcasting) Network to listen to some conservative talk show “wisdom,” I was disappointed Rush Limbaugh was on vacation. But his substitute, Mark Davis of WBAP in Dallas, didn’t fail to deliver more grist to the mill. He praised, for example, Republican members of the supercommittee charged with working out a deal on the budget for sticking to their guns. In other words, for not compromising. It was another unfortunate example of standing on principle at all costs, even if it meant the government might shut down, the public would be hurt and trust in elected officials to effectively govern and legislate decreased.
Davis also debunked the argument that conservatives are racist. His proof—they went “ga-ga” over Herman Cain and their favorite Supreme Court justice would be Clarence Thomas. At the same time he decried Attorney General Eric Holder for playing the race card to explain why he and Barack Obama are viciously attacked. It’s just policy differences that bring on the attacks, he said.
My need for some Rush was somewhat sated by a commercial featuring his mellifluous voice. He was pitching membership in the Heritage Foundation, a think tank dedicated, he said, to personal liberties. I wonder, though. What’s more personal than choosing your sexual orientation, or choosing whether to carry a pregnancy to full term? Not sure, but I would guess Alan Simpson would have a hard time being a member of this right-wing organization.
Simpson also had some interesting thoughts on Newt Gingrich and why so many Republican leaders have trouble supporting his candidacy for president. Seems that when Newt was Speaker of the House he agreed during a private meeting with President George Bush the First to a plan to buttress the economy that included a tax hike. Bush reluctantly agreed despite his “Read my lips, no new taxes” pledge. But when it came time to vote, Gingrich publicly repudiated the agreement. He is untrustworthy, not a man of his word, said Simpson. Not surprising, therefore, that Bush 1 yesterday endorsed Mitt Romney.
Of course, Republicans aren’t the only ones dishing out disappointment this holiday season. Obama has indicated he would sign a bill permitting indefinite detention for not only foreign nationals but also for American citizens thought to be supporters of terrorism. Incarceration without trial could last as long as hostilities remain active. Since there’s no foreseeable end to terrorism, even after Osama bin Laden was killed, anyone detained could languish in prison forever. Obama has been as bad for civil liberties as Bush 2.
Try as I might to avoid political commentary, it’s virtually impossible. So here goes...
During his tenure representing the state of Wyoming in the U.S. Senate (1979-1997), Alan Simpson was not on my list of favorite senators. The tall, craggy 80-year-old conservative Republican could be quite charming, folksy and jocular, but his politics was clearly way to the right for my tastes.
Simpson, however, by his own admission on the Brian Lehrer Show on NPR Wednesday, would find it impossible to get a Republican nomination today as he’s an advocate of personal privacy, which means he supports gay rights and abortion rights. As co-chairman with Erskine Bowles of the Deficit Reduction Commission, he also acknowledged the need to raise more revenue through new or higher taxes, heresy among Tea Party members and the Republican faithful who have lined up like lemmings behind them.
Switching over to the EIB (Excellence in Broadcasting) Network to listen to some conservative talk show “wisdom,” I was disappointed Rush Limbaugh was on vacation. But his substitute, Mark Davis of WBAP in Dallas, didn’t fail to deliver more grist to the mill. He praised, for example, Republican members of the supercommittee charged with working out a deal on the budget for sticking to their guns. In other words, for not compromising. It was another unfortunate example of standing on principle at all costs, even if it meant the government might shut down, the public would be hurt and trust in elected officials to effectively govern and legislate decreased.
Davis also debunked the argument that conservatives are racist. His proof—they went “ga-ga” over Herman Cain and their favorite Supreme Court justice would be Clarence Thomas. At the same time he decried Attorney General Eric Holder for playing the race card to explain why he and Barack Obama are viciously attacked. It’s just policy differences that bring on the attacks, he said.
My need for some Rush was somewhat sated by a commercial featuring his mellifluous voice. He was pitching membership in the Heritage Foundation, a think tank dedicated, he said, to personal liberties. I wonder, though. What’s more personal than choosing your sexual orientation, or choosing whether to carry a pregnancy to full term? Not sure, but I would guess Alan Simpson would have a hard time being a member of this right-wing organization.
Simpson also had some interesting thoughts on Newt Gingrich and why so many Republican leaders have trouble supporting his candidacy for president. Seems that when Newt was Speaker of the House he agreed during a private meeting with President George Bush the First to a plan to buttress the economy that included a tax hike. Bush reluctantly agreed despite his “Read my lips, no new taxes” pledge. But when it came time to vote, Gingrich publicly repudiated the agreement. He is untrustworthy, not a man of his word, said Simpson. Not surprising, therefore, that Bush 1 yesterday endorsed Mitt Romney.
Of course, Republicans aren’t the only ones dishing out disappointment this holiday season. Obama has indicated he would sign a bill permitting indefinite detention for not only foreign nationals but also for American citizens thought to be supporters of terrorism. Incarceration without trial could last as long as hostilities remain active. Since there’s no foreseeable end to terrorism, even after Osama bin Laden was killed, anyone detained could languish in prison forever. Obama has been as bad for civil liberties as Bush 2.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Random, and Not So Random, Acts of Kindness
They are beautiful, heartwarming gestures I do not mean to belittle. But the anonymous charity of Secret Santas randomly giving out $100 bills to those they think are in need, or paying off a stranger’s layaway charges at Kmart, is not the answer to the paralyzing and pervasive poverty enveloping our nation. They are not the solution to a capitalist system that has divided our country, indeed, large parts of the rest of the world as well, into spheres of plenty and spheres of void.
However generous they are, random acts of kindness should not lull us into believing they can relieve our fellow citizens of the trauma of unemployment, of the despair of having a loved one in need of medical care without adequate health insurance, of squelching the pangs of hunger that ache each night in the bellies of too many of our young.
My conservative friends and relatives tell me government is not the answer. They would have the hungry and the needy rely on the generosity of their fellow human to ease their pain and tribulations, all the while exhorting them to bootstrap themselves into success. Newt Gingrich would dismiss child labor laws and have children of poverty clean schools so they can learn a work ethic, as if taking away the functions of school janitors is any way to reduce unemployment or increase the take-home pay of the working class.
I seem to recall George H.W. Bush more than 20 years ago waxing euphoric over a “thousand points of light” to help transform the country. Perhaps people are more charitable these days. But the number of families living at or below the poverty level keeps growing. The gap in income between the average worker and the average chief executive keeps growing. “Shared sacrifice” is a phrase that needs to be parsed in a new way—corporate executives get more shares, while the rest sacrifice.
Temporary generosity has but a temporary impact. Even if all of those who can afford it tithed, we would still require government intervention to bolster the economy and provide a safety net. How else to explain corporate America’s reluctance to invest in the United States, to hire more workers, even as companies sit on a treasure trove of cash. Neither government regulation nor a high tax rate is strangling our economy. Rather, it is the way we compensate our executives. They manage for short term gain, their bonuses tied to an annual bottom line. Say what you will about Amazon.com’s products and services, you can’t deny founder/CEO Jeff Bezos has stuck to his guns in defending a long-term strategy that has bedeviled Wall Streeters seeking more immediate returns.
Mitt Romney wants everyone to know not all businesses succeed, so don’t blame him if some of the companies his Bain Capital acquired filed for bankruptcy or had to lay off workers. Fair enough. So then let’s not allow him to scald President Obama for investing U.S. funds in Solyndra, a solar energy company that went belly up. New technologies need government assistance, sometimes direct, sometimes indirect. An example of the latter is the sales tax exemption many online retailers have enjoyed versus brick and mortar stores.
Compassionate conservatism is another hollow term. Even when conservative dogma is based on religious belief, as with the Right to Life movement, compassion for the unborn is not extended to the newborn. Conservatives want cuts in aid to dependent children, in early education programs, in school lunch programs.
Let’s not abandon the less fortunate. Let’s continue to donate food, clothing, dollars to worthy charities and individuals. But let’s not forget that without government assistance far too many of the citizens of the richest country on earth would not have a roof over their heads, meals to be eaten, schools to attend, pre- and post-school programs to enrich their growth years, doctors to visit, jobs to go to each day. These are not random acts of kindness. They’re the very foundation of what a government is supposed to do—protect and care for its citizens.
However generous they are, random acts of kindness should not lull us into believing they can relieve our fellow citizens of the trauma of unemployment, of the despair of having a loved one in need of medical care without adequate health insurance, of squelching the pangs of hunger that ache each night in the bellies of too many of our young.
My conservative friends and relatives tell me government is not the answer. They would have the hungry and the needy rely on the generosity of their fellow human to ease their pain and tribulations, all the while exhorting them to bootstrap themselves into success. Newt Gingrich would dismiss child labor laws and have children of poverty clean schools so they can learn a work ethic, as if taking away the functions of school janitors is any way to reduce unemployment or increase the take-home pay of the working class.
I seem to recall George H.W. Bush more than 20 years ago waxing euphoric over a “thousand points of light” to help transform the country. Perhaps people are more charitable these days. But the number of families living at or below the poverty level keeps growing. The gap in income between the average worker and the average chief executive keeps growing. “Shared sacrifice” is a phrase that needs to be parsed in a new way—corporate executives get more shares, while the rest sacrifice.
Temporary generosity has but a temporary impact. Even if all of those who can afford it tithed, we would still require government intervention to bolster the economy and provide a safety net. How else to explain corporate America’s reluctance to invest in the United States, to hire more workers, even as companies sit on a treasure trove of cash. Neither government regulation nor a high tax rate is strangling our economy. Rather, it is the way we compensate our executives. They manage for short term gain, their bonuses tied to an annual bottom line. Say what you will about Amazon.com’s products and services, you can’t deny founder/CEO Jeff Bezos has stuck to his guns in defending a long-term strategy that has bedeviled Wall Streeters seeking more immediate returns.
Mitt Romney wants everyone to know not all businesses succeed, so don’t blame him if some of the companies his Bain Capital acquired filed for bankruptcy or had to lay off workers. Fair enough. So then let’s not allow him to scald President Obama for investing U.S. funds in Solyndra, a solar energy company that went belly up. New technologies need government assistance, sometimes direct, sometimes indirect. An example of the latter is the sales tax exemption many online retailers have enjoyed versus brick and mortar stores.
Compassionate conservatism is another hollow term. Even when conservative dogma is based on religious belief, as with the Right to Life movement, compassion for the unborn is not extended to the newborn. Conservatives want cuts in aid to dependent children, in early education programs, in school lunch programs.
Let’s not abandon the less fortunate. Let’s continue to donate food, clothing, dollars to worthy charities and individuals. But let’s not forget that without government assistance far too many of the citizens of the richest country on earth would not have a roof over their heads, meals to be eaten, schools to attend, pre- and post-school programs to enrich their growth years, doctors to visit, jobs to go to each day. These are not random acts of kindness. They’re the very foundation of what a government is supposed to do—protect and care for its citizens.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Cracked Teeth
I’d like to blame AARP for my cracked tooth, but I can’t.
Let me explain. Thursday evening I was leafing through the December 2011/January 2012 issue of AARP The Magazine and came across a nutrition article entitled, “Go Nuts!.” It extolled the virtues of eating various nuts to lower “bad” LDL cholesterol. Almonds, in particular, also were said to reduce insulin resistance, a quality important to someone with borderline high blood sugar levels, as I am.
Friday morning I cracked my tooth on an almond. I can’t blame AARP, however, because almonds have been part of my breakfast regimen for more than 15 years. Almonds, cashews, raisins, red grapes, an apple, a banana, some cheese or Trader Joe’s O’s, with an ample helping of whipped cream—ambrosia of the gods, I call it—have nourished me most mornings.
So you see, it’s not as if I can blame AARP for turning me on to almonds. AARP should have be a little more circumspect in its suggestions, though, considering its age-based membership of 50-plus adults is prone to deteriorating dental work. Perhaps I should have taken a clue from the table of contents teaser copy for the story. It read, “Get Cracking.”
The first time I cracked a tooth on some food was slightly more than 20 years ago. I went to Los Angeles to meet with the president of Vons Supermarkets early one morning at a new concept store, Tiengas, targeted toward the expanding Hispanic community. It was a beautiful store, with lots of food preparation stations, including a tortilla maker in the middle of the store and more fresh food and meat cuts than I’d ever seen (you wouldn’t believe parts of a pig I saw displayed there that I’d never imagined people ate).
Anyway, at the conclusion of the store tour, I was invited upstairs to the manager’s office for some breakfast. As my cholesterol was pretty high back then, I deferred the offer of rancho huevos, essentially scrambled eggs. My host persisted, however, saying it would insult the cook who had come in early just to prepare the breakfast.
On my first bite I felt a crunch. I jumped back asking if the cook had left egg shells in the mix, only to realize I had cracked my tooth on the softest of foods. How embarrassing! How upsetting that I might incur a $550 dental bill for a crown, the going rate at the time.
Talking over my predicament several days later with a friend who headed our company’s human resources department, we agreed I would submit a worker’s compensation claim. After all, the only reason I put the eggs into my mouth was because the Vons president insisted. It was clearly a work-related claim, I reasoned.
The compensation board agreed. I received full reimbursement for the crown.
The same happy result cannot be related about the fate of the Tiengas experiment. Management closed the stores after determining Hispanics preferred shopping in traditional stores with enlarged ethnic offerings rather than their own supermarkets.
Let me explain. Thursday evening I was leafing through the December 2011/January 2012 issue of AARP The Magazine and came across a nutrition article entitled, “Go Nuts!.” It extolled the virtues of eating various nuts to lower “bad” LDL cholesterol. Almonds, in particular, also were said to reduce insulin resistance, a quality important to someone with borderline high blood sugar levels, as I am.
Friday morning I cracked my tooth on an almond. I can’t blame AARP, however, because almonds have been part of my breakfast regimen for more than 15 years. Almonds, cashews, raisins, red grapes, an apple, a banana, some cheese or Trader Joe’s O’s, with an ample helping of whipped cream—ambrosia of the gods, I call it—have nourished me most mornings.
So you see, it’s not as if I can blame AARP for turning me on to almonds. AARP should have be a little more circumspect in its suggestions, though, considering its age-based membership of 50-plus adults is prone to deteriorating dental work. Perhaps I should have taken a clue from the table of contents teaser copy for the story. It read, “Get Cracking.”
The first time I cracked a tooth on some food was slightly more than 20 years ago. I went to Los Angeles to meet with the president of Vons Supermarkets early one morning at a new concept store, Tiengas, targeted toward the expanding Hispanic community. It was a beautiful store, with lots of food preparation stations, including a tortilla maker in the middle of the store and more fresh food and meat cuts than I’d ever seen (you wouldn’t believe parts of a pig I saw displayed there that I’d never imagined people ate).
Anyway, at the conclusion of the store tour, I was invited upstairs to the manager’s office for some breakfast. As my cholesterol was pretty high back then, I deferred the offer of rancho huevos, essentially scrambled eggs. My host persisted, however, saying it would insult the cook who had come in early just to prepare the breakfast.
On my first bite I felt a crunch. I jumped back asking if the cook had left egg shells in the mix, only to realize I had cracked my tooth on the softest of foods. How embarrassing! How upsetting that I might incur a $550 dental bill for a crown, the going rate at the time.
Talking over my predicament several days later with a friend who headed our company’s human resources department, we agreed I would submit a worker’s compensation claim. After all, the only reason I put the eggs into my mouth was because the Vons president insisted. It was clearly a work-related claim, I reasoned.
The compensation board agreed. I received full reimbursement for the crown.
The same happy result cannot be related about the fate of the Tiengas experiment. Management closed the stores after determining Hispanics preferred shopping in traditional stores with enlarged ethnic offerings rather than their own supermarkets.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
