Experts are supposed to have some special knowledge. Often this is scientific or medical knowledge. Sometimes it is mathematical or statistical. And more often than not it comes as a result of a Ph.D – a rigorous exercise that exposes the Ph.D to most if not all of the current body of knowledge around a subject.
We turn to experts when we need unequivocal expert statements to make crucial decisions in our lives and avoid death, disease, illness and unhappiness. We crave statements that say, “Wear Sun block to avoid skin cancer,” so we can affect a behavior that allows us and our loved ones to avoid pain and suffering.
Over time it appears that experts go from waffling about “correlation” and “causality” and start to make those kinds of statements. But those kinds of sweeping expert opinions are fraught with trouble. Please let me illustrate.
Recently I had the opportunity to talk with an acquaintance who is also an expert in skin health. We spoke on the day after the results of a study which indicated that sun block has little if any effect on melanoma (skin cancer) were reported in the popular press. In an article for The Columbus Dispatch, Ann Fernholm closes by noting that, “Several scientists actually warn that wearing sunscreen can give users a false sense of security, leading consumers to stay out in the sun longer.”
Now how about that! Yet another possible unintended consequence - the stuff you slather on (yeech!) to keep exposure to the sun from giving you skin cancer may just give you a false sense of security, and encourage you to stay out in the sun longer.
(Just for the record: I am not encouraging your to change your behavior based on my non-expert opinion. You figure it out on your own and live with the consequences of your behavior, just like me.)
You should read all of Ann’s interesting article in The Columbus Dispatch on this study. It can be found here: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2008/07/11/Sunscreen_study.ART_ART_07-11-08_A3_QFANOEH.html?sid=101
Unfortunately, my expert acquaintance was unaware of the new study results. When challenged, my acquaintance dismissed the findings, saying that this was “settled science,” and the study "has to be flawed."
I’m not sure I know what “settled science" is – but there sure are a lot of experts touting it these days. The very process of scientific discovery and exploration, what we call The Scientific Method, can prove correlation, but this is a far cry from causality and could be random coincidence.
We may be able to prove correlation using a testable hypothesis, or even many decades of testable hypotheses, but it is a long way down the road to say that you have “settled science,” with absolutely no possibility that randomness is involved to some degree.
As I ruminated on this short conversation (I ruminate too much) I realized that we generally don’t trust experts because they may not be up on the latest material, or they will ignore what disagrees with their expertise; or just as often, we know that they are compensated to hold a particular opinion and they would have to change employment, risk financial distress, or rework their whole ideology in order to say differently.
Whatever the reason, we get a sense that expert statements cannot be trusted. I reflected that my acquaintance's expert opinion on sun block is no better than advertising. Either way, I am making a decision based on the looks or sound of the argument rather than the facts of the argument.
But let’s not forget that we humans are fickle beings. We may not like or trust those who hold and spout unsupported or outdated opinions; but we don’t like the experts who keep saying things like, “That depends,” or “perhaps,” or even, “we are not sure, but …” or “On the other hand …” either. They appear to waffle, it takes forever to hear them out, and their answers don’t give us much assurance.
It may be we that we just have an aversion to expertise and when the question is truly important we should only trust what we find out on our own. What a concept.
Friday, July 25, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
A few thoughts on Faith and Masonry
A history fraught with misunderstanding by members of my faith and the Masonic Fraternity in Utah often leads those of my faith to ask me why I would want to be a Mason.
With that in mind, I'd like to discuss the Masonic membership of the first five Presidents and indeed, so many of the 19th Century male members of my church.
It is not my intent to share anything that would be offensive to either those of my cherished faith or those of my beloved Fraternity, nor will I divulge anything I have vowed to hold sacred. I will, however, speak honestly, openly and directly about my own studied opinions. I write my own thoughts in my own words, borrowing a phrase here or there from Masonic or LDS tradition.
There is among some members of my church a myth that Masonry was descended from the building of King Solomon’s temple, and that the 19th Century Fraternity possessed a fragment of truth, and perhaps even an “apostate” form of priesthood and temple worship.
This tradition posits that Joseph Smith needed only to enter The Fraternity in order to learn those forms of this so-called apostate education in order to repair them by revelation and produce a true form of "eternal" Masonry.
As we reason together, let us ignore the 16th and early 17th Century origins of the Symbolic Craft. Even scholarly Masons have a difficult time separating myth from truth when exploring the origins of Symbolic Masonry. I can easily see why the uninitiated would be confused.
The myths and moral lessons of Masonry may well use symbols from the building of Solomon’s Temple, but in my opinion the key to refuting the argument that Joseph needed to enter to see, repair - even "steal" the ritual form is that there are few true similarities between the two rites. What is most similar is the interactive form of learning shared by the two ritual forms.
Further, if the Prophet Joseph only needed to learn the lessons of some “apostate priesthood” from his Masonic experience, then the initiation of more than 2,500 LDS men into Masonic lodges in and around Nauvoo was surely a waste of time. Indeed, if this form of society was truly apostate, then it was also quite dangerous to their very souls.
If this form of education is dangerous to the souls of men, I am sure there were other forms of interactive learning available that Joseph Smith could have used to understand and produce such a learning experience.
This contention that Joseph entered simply to develop is a flawed argument. Now I realize that in matters of faith, logic is not always welcomed by some, but I tend to believe that the two are not mutually exclusive.
After years of research, especially my focus on the writings of those who knew Joseph, I have come to believe that after the Kirtland period of the early LDS church, Joseph Smith was drawn by Masonic brotherhood. He had been betrayed by some of those closest to him.
Joseph recognized, I believe, that not all the good men of the earth were or will be found within the confines of the LDS faith, and conversely, not all of the evil men of the world are on the outside of this or any other church.
There is a more logical argument for the initiation of many of the men of the fledgling church in Nauvoo. This is the hypothesis that LDS men joined to learn something of the brotherhood, charity and search for truth inherent in the ritual of the Masonic Society in order to inculcate those virtues – especially brotherhood, into their priesthood quorums (see note below.)
This argument is quite reasonable. It may or may not be the case. What is not rational is the belief that once these early leaders learned those lessons there was nothing more for future generations to learn by direct membership in the Masonic Fraternity.
It is important to know that only the escalation of differences created by simple misunderstandings like those still held by some today that kept my church and Masonry separate in Utah (and only Utah) for far too many decades.
It is my contention that there is still much for worthy men of the various creeds and classes to glean from Masonic ritual and experience. Further, it is my contention that there is nothing in Masonry which conflicts with any of the tenets of my own faith, and that it works hand in hand with my own faith to make me a better man.
I also argue that if the Masonic form was not apostate and therefore dangerous to the souls of most of the 19th Century leaders of my church and so many of the male population of Nauvoo, since it is largely unchanged since then in practice, ritual and symbolism, it is still not dangerous for LDS men.
Masonry may not be for every man, but I am hard pressed to say that any man who enters through it’s doors for however short a period is not improved in some way.
Having been an active member of the various priesthood quorums of the LDS Church for more than forty years, I can say with some authority that there is still much we need to learn of brotherhood and toleration, and I say this not in a spirit of criticism but by way of simple comparison.
Many times, I have said that I was drawn to Masonry by its philosophy, but I was surprised – even Shocked! by the brotherhood I experienced. I now find myself wanting to be a Mason fully-rounded in the three-fold tenets of Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth. I no longer want to be a one-dimensional Mason. I also want to practice more of the brotherly love I have experienced.
Churches of all denominations may be concerned about the amount of time that a Mason may spend at Masonry. As with anything enjoyable, it can be difficult to maintain a proper balance between family and associations, church and community, work and play. But this is no reason to discourage involvement with an organization that does so much good both for the individual man and the society at large.
What should be stressed is that there is a time and a place for both and balance in life is crucial to true happiness. There may be seasons of life where one is more involved in one more than the other quite naturally.
Still, the opportunity to sit in Lodge with good, like-minded men of the various creeds and classes of our community is more than simply an opportunity most never get outside the forced society of work or neighborhood where we tend to stratify into cliques. It is a privilege and it builds a sense of brotherhood and community that is unlike anything else I have experienced.
In Masonry there is a ritual experience espousing values of the highest moral caliber, with relevant ethical lessons of days long passed, and a brotherhood probably like nothing you have ever experienced, and it will not harm your individual faith, but it will deepen and increase it.
Recently a well-read, and deep-thinking member of my faith, at the end of an abbreviated tour of the Salt Lake Masonic Temple said, “It seems that our church would want to encourage men to be united to Masonry like they encourage boys to be Boy Scouts. Both work to bring about moral and decent men.”
And with that insightful thought from my new friend, Vincent, I'll end since I couldn’t have said it any better.
Note: For those of you who may not be familiar with an LDS Priesthood Quorum: a quorum is usually a geographic grouping of men with the same priesthood office. For example, a local Elder’s Quorum is made up of adult men who have been ordained to the office of Elder and live in a specific locale. It is led by a President who serves with two counselors and a secretary – all generally members of the Quorum.
With that in mind, I'd like to discuss the Masonic membership of the first five Presidents and indeed, so many of the 19th Century male members of my church.
It is not my intent to share anything that would be offensive to either those of my cherished faith or those of my beloved Fraternity, nor will I divulge anything I have vowed to hold sacred. I will, however, speak honestly, openly and directly about my own studied opinions. I write my own thoughts in my own words, borrowing a phrase here or there from Masonic or LDS tradition.
There is among some members of my church a myth that Masonry was descended from the building of King Solomon’s temple, and that the 19th Century Fraternity possessed a fragment of truth, and perhaps even an “apostate” form of priesthood and temple worship.
This tradition posits that Joseph Smith needed only to enter The Fraternity in order to learn those forms of this so-called apostate education in order to repair them by revelation and produce a true form of "eternal" Masonry.
As we reason together, let us ignore the 16th and early 17th Century origins of the Symbolic Craft. Even scholarly Masons have a difficult time separating myth from truth when exploring the origins of Symbolic Masonry. I can easily see why the uninitiated would be confused.
The myths and moral lessons of Masonry may well use symbols from the building of Solomon’s Temple, but in my opinion the key to refuting the argument that Joseph needed to enter to see, repair - even "steal" the ritual form is that there are few true similarities between the two rites. What is most similar is the interactive form of learning shared by the two ritual forms.
Further, if the Prophet Joseph only needed to learn the lessons of some “apostate priesthood” from his Masonic experience, then the initiation of more than 2,500 LDS men into Masonic lodges in and around Nauvoo was surely a waste of time. Indeed, if this form of society was truly apostate, then it was also quite dangerous to their very souls.
If this form of education is dangerous to the souls of men, I am sure there were other forms of interactive learning available that Joseph Smith could have used to understand and produce such a learning experience.
This contention that Joseph entered simply to develop is a flawed argument. Now I realize that in matters of faith, logic is not always welcomed by some, but I tend to believe that the two are not mutually exclusive.
After years of research, especially my focus on the writings of those who knew Joseph, I have come to believe that after the Kirtland period of the early LDS church, Joseph Smith was drawn by Masonic brotherhood. He had been betrayed by some of those closest to him.
Joseph recognized, I believe, that not all the good men of the earth were or will be found within the confines of the LDS faith, and conversely, not all of the evil men of the world are on the outside of this or any other church.
There is a more logical argument for the initiation of many of the men of the fledgling church in Nauvoo. This is the hypothesis that LDS men joined to learn something of the brotherhood, charity and search for truth inherent in the ritual of the Masonic Society in order to inculcate those virtues – especially brotherhood, into their priesthood quorums (see note below.)
This argument is quite reasonable. It may or may not be the case. What is not rational is the belief that once these early leaders learned those lessons there was nothing more for future generations to learn by direct membership in the Masonic Fraternity.
It is important to know that only the escalation of differences created by simple misunderstandings like those still held by some today that kept my church and Masonry separate in Utah (and only Utah) for far too many decades.
It is my contention that there is still much for worthy men of the various creeds and classes to glean from Masonic ritual and experience. Further, it is my contention that there is nothing in Masonry which conflicts with any of the tenets of my own faith, and that it works hand in hand with my own faith to make me a better man.
I also argue that if the Masonic form was not apostate and therefore dangerous to the souls of most of the 19th Century leaders of my church and so many of the male population of Nauvoo, since it is largely unchanged since then in practice, ritual and symbolism, it is still not dangerous for LDS men.
Masonry may not be for every man, but I am hard pressed to say that any man who enters through it’s doors for however short a period is not improved in some way.
Having been an active member of the various priesthood quorums of the LDS Church for more than forty years, I can say with some authority that there is still much we need to learn of brotherhood and toleration, and I say this not in a spirit of criticism but by way of simple comparison.
Many times, I have said that I was drawn to Masonry by its philosophy, but I was surprised – even Shocked! by the brotherhood I experienced. I now find myself wanting to be a Mason fully-rounded in the three-fold tenets of Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth. I no longer want to be a one-dimensional Mason. I also want to practice more of the brotherly love I have experienced.
Churches of all denominations may be concerned about the amount of time that a Mason may spend at Masonry. As with anything enjoyable, it can be difficult to maintain a proper balance between family and associations, church and community, work and play. But this is no reason to discourage involvement with an organization that does so much good both for the individual man and the society at large.
What should be stressed is that there is a time and a place for both and balance in life is crucial to true happiness. There may be seasons of life where one is more involved in one more than the other quite naturally.
Still, the opportunity to sit in Lodge with good, like-minded men of the various creeds and classes of our community is more than simply an opportunity most never get outside the forced society of work or neighborhood where we tend to stratify into cliques. It is a privilege and it builds a sense of brotherhood and community that is unlike anything else I have experienced.
In Masonry there is a ritual experience espousing values of the highest moral caliber, with relevant ethical lessons of days long passed, and a brotherhood probably like nothing you have ever experienced, and it will not harm your individual faith, but it will deepen and increase it.
Recently a well-read, and deep-thinking member of my faith, at the end of an abbreviated tour of the Salt Lake Masonic Temple said, “It seems that our church would want to encourage men to be united to Masonry like they encourage boys to be Boy Scouts. Both work to bring about moral and decent men.”
And with that insightful thought from my new friend, Vincent, I'll end since I couldn’t have said it any better.
Note: For those of you who may not be familiar with an LDS Priesthood Quorum: a quorum is usually a geographic grouping of men with the same priesthood office. For example, a local Elder’s Quorum is made up of adult men who have been ordained to the office of Elder and live in a specific locale. It is led by a President who serves with two counselors and a secretary – all generally members of the Quorum.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
The Wedding
Last Thursday we witnessed and celebrated Nicole’s wedding. It was a beautiful day. Oh sure, it was rushed and we had some mishaps, and even a couple of the extended family got their noses out of joint to some degree or another as with any wedding day in any other family. But it was a beautiful day.
I was overwhelmed by the love and generosity of so many of our friends, neighbors and family members. Their support means everything and support us they did.
We are delighted to welcome Dan to our family. We could easily see that Dan’s family has welcomed Nicole with the same open arms.
Nicole and Dan were married by M. Richard Walker, President of the Salt Lake LDS Temple. It is traditional for the Officiator performing the ceremony to say a few words of counsel and advice to the young couple prior to pronouncing the words they came to hear (“… you may kiss as husband and wife …”) and President Walker did not disappoint.
Nicole was counseled to receive Dan as her husband while Dan was similarly encouraged to receive Nicole as his wife. “Receive” was defined as taking them as the “worthy but imperfect human beings they are today.” They were told that in the world the method of improving one another is to point out the faults of one another to one another so they can improve upon them. President Walker instructed them that this method does not often lead to that desired improved state.
He counseled them instead to practice what many would call positive reinforcement – he termed it “… simply the gospel of Jesus Christ.” President Walker gave us a wonderful example. I paraphrase him poorly here, but I think you’ll get the point.
President Walker told Dan that one day soon, Nicole would have one of the worst days of her life and as she prepared dinner for that evening, the day would continue badly when the fine dinner she planned would be burned. Because of time and money constraints she would have to serve it.
What Nicole would be unaware of, in this illustration, is that Dan was similarly having a very bad day himself and could hardly wait to get home to his bride and a well cooked dinner. Imagine his surprise!
It is at this point that President Walker’s advice gets very practical. He told Dan not to make a joke of any kind, but especially not one even remotely related to Nicole, his mother and cooking. He told Dan to choke it down and when done, to simply thank Nicole for dinner.
He noted that Dan should not make the easy mistake of saying something like, “Thanks that was just great,” because Nicole would know he was insincere. Simple thanks was all that was needed and would be best.
And then President Walker noted that on another day when the fare was truly wonderful, Dan should heap all the praise he can on that meal. Nicole would adore him all the more because of his unconditional love with his simple and sincere thanks on the day when the dinner was less than either of them wished it to be and his praise on the day when it was deserved.
This has caused me to think much since then about what I believe is an axiom of human effort. I learned as a young LDS missionary in Western Scotland that people respond to how they are treated. As a leader of missionaries I lived by the motto, “Treat them like zits and they will act like zits.” While this may sound silly today, and I would probably trade the word zits for something else, this is still the way I feel about leadership in general.
When I discovered years ago that I was not always the positive, building leader that I wished to be, I decided then and there that I would not ever ignore the tough things, or even procrastinate, but that I would always prepare for them in the days, weeks and months ahead of such uncomfortable conversations by laying a groundwork of positive and thankful comments. I set out that day to say “thank you” for every effort and to say it all the time. I am not insincere. I thank people for what they have actually done.
There are some who do not understand this and think I overdo it. I assure you I do not. I’ve lived the other way. The fear-based style of leadership, or the picky, never satisfied style of some, quite frankly wears people down pretty quickly. Forget that ingratiating subordinate that says he has “learned so much from you.” His opinion won’t last any longer than your boss/subordinate relationship. And the rest of your staff is ready to leave when they have a remotely better opportunity.
The axiom of human effort? It is this: If someone makes some effort for you – especially one that is voluntary and you choose to find the errors or flaws, well, they probably will not make that kind of effort ever again. The only time they will is if they were doing it for something other than you. They freely gave. I think you owe them sincere thanks.
And if they ask how they can improve you owe them the truth – carefully and considerately delivered. But even then, you need to tell them more of the good than the bad. They say seven good things for every one bad (whoever “they” are.)
But I digress (as usual.) I’d tell you about the wedding reception, but most of you were there. It was very nice from my point of view even after an hour of bringing stuff into The Atrium at the Western Garden Center, standing there for two straight hours shaking hands, laughing and hugging my dearest friends, neighbors and family, and then spending the last hour loading stuff into cars.
So, it was a beautiful day. The happy couple are off honeymooning now. They look good together. They are so happy. How they will face the coming months of separation when Dan leaves in just a few weeks to attend Basic Training and Tech School for the Utah Air National Guard will be interesting to watch. I’m sure it will be painful. But the reunion will be exquisite.
I was overwhelmed by the love and generosity of so many of our friends, neighbors and family members. Their support means everything and support us they did.
We are delighted to welcome Dan to our family. We could easily see that Dan’s family has welcomed Nicole with the same open arms.
Nicole and Dan were married by M. Richard Walker, President of the Salt Lake LDS Temple. It is traditional for the Officiator performing the ceremony to say a few words of counsel and advice to the young couple prior to pronouncing the words they came to hear (“… you may kiss as husband and wife …”) and President Walker did not disappoint.
Nicole was counseled to receive Dan as her husband while Dan was similarly encouraged to receive Nicole as his wife. “Receive” was defined as taking them as the “worthy but imperfect human beings they are today.” They were told that in the world the method of improving one another is to point out the faults of one another to one another so they can improve upon them. President Walker instructed them that this method does not often lead to that desired improved state.
He counseled them instead to practice what many would call positive reinforcement – he termed it “… simply the gospel of Jesus Christ.” President Walker gave us a wonderful example. I paraphrase him poorly here, but I think you’ll get the point.
President Walker told Dan that one day soon, Nicole would have one of the worst days of her life and as she prepared dinner for that evening, the day would continue badly when the fine dinner she planned would be burned. Because of time and money constraints she would have to serve it.
What Nicole would be unaware of, in this illustration, is that Dan was similarly having a very bad day himself and could hardly wait to get home to his bride and a well cooked dinner. Imagine his surprise!
It is at this point that President Walker’s advice gets very practical. He told Dan not to make a joke of any kind, but especially not one even remotely related to Nicole, his mother and cooking. He told Dan to choke it down and when done, to simply thank Nicole for dinner.
He noted that Dan should not make the easy mistake of saying something like, “Thanks that was just great,” because Nicole would know he was insincere. Simple thanks was all that was needed and would be best.
And then President Walker noted that on another day when the fare was truly wonderful, Dan should heap all the praise he can on that meal. Nicole would adore him all the more because of his unconditional love with his simple and sincere thanks on the day when the dinner was less than either of them wished it to be and his praise on the day when it was deserved.
This has caused me to think much since then about what I believe is an axiom of human effort. I learned as a young LDS missionary in Western Scotland that people respond to how they are treated. As a leader of missionaries I lived by the motto, “Treat them like zits and they will act like zits.” While this may sound silly today, and I would probably trade the word zits for something else, this is still the way I feel about leadership in general.
When I discovered years ago that I was not always the positive, building leader that I wished to be, I decided then and there that I would not ever ignore the tough things, or even procrastinate, but that I would always prepare for them in the days, weeks and months ahead of such uncomfortable conversations by laying a groundwork of positive and thankful comments. I set out that day to say “thank you” for every effort and to say it all the time. I am not insincere. I thank people for what they have actually done.
There are some who do not understand this and think I overdo it. I assure you I do not. I’ve lived the other way. The fear-based style of leadership, or the picky, never satisfied style of some, quite frankly wears people down pretty quickly. Forget that ingratiating subordinate that says he has “learned so much from you.” His opinion won’t last any longer than your boss/subordinate relationship. And the rest of your staff is ready to leave when they have a remotely better opportunity.
The axiom of human effort? It is this: If someone makes some effort for you – especially one that is voluntary and you choose to find the errors or flaws, well, they probably will not make that kind of effort ever again. The only time they will is if they were doing it for something other than you. They freely gave. I think you owe them sincere thanks.
And if they ask how they can improve you owe them the truth – carefully and considerately delivered. But even then, you need to tell them more of the good than the bad. They say seven good things for every one bad (whoever “they” are.)
But I digress (as usual.) I’d tell you about the wedding reception, but most of you were there. It was very nice from my point of view even after an hour of bringing stuff into The Atrium at the Western Garden Center, standing there for two straight hours shaking hands, laughing and hugging my dearest friends, neighbors and family, and then spending the last hour loading stuff into cars.
So, it was a beautiful day. The happy couple are off honeymooning now. They look good together. They are so happy. How they will face the coming months of separation when Dan leaves in just a few weeks to attend Basic Training and Tech School for the Utah Air National Guard will be interesting to watch. I’m sure it will be painful. But the reunion will be exquisite.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Ah, not Greg!
I had the opposite of Greg today.
I HAD to go to “my” Post Office to pick up an envelope that was sent registered mail. Since I have been coming in to the office early all week, and knowing what kind of line develops at that place during a standard lunch hour, I set off after my 9:00 to 10:00 AM meeting ended and arrived at roughly 10:20 AM.
There is always a line. And the two counter staffers moved with absolutely no urgency and more than a little officiousness. Well, now that was an understatement. Apparently neither one of them got the memo that we now have choice in most of our Post Office transactions.
“Choice?” you ask. Why, yes, Choice (with a capital “C.”) And not just for packages. You see, I can get stamps just about anywhere these days. And I hear that at Costco, I can get them for a discount off the face value. We can even go, as I do, to another Post Office where Greg has turned service into a conversational art form.
But there are other choices that the Postal Service (USPS) may not understand are competitors. There is email. Who wants to pay that ever escalating charge for a stamp when you can use free email? Then, there are products like “Bill-Payer” which allow us to make electronic payments without ever licking another envelope. Oh, and couriers.
UPS and FedEx are so well entrenched in the package industry that I cannot imagine why you would want to use USPS – unless the extra couple of bucks is going to break you. And I read that USPS now uses UPS to transport those packages for them – and that they recently switched from FedEx planes – or is it the other way around? (Who cares? It isn’t USPS. It is someone else. They apparently can’t fly economically.)
The line was better than usual for the South Jordan Post Office -12 minutes at 10:20 AM. The wait while they found my letter was 7 minutes. And I am sure, by the speed the person was moving, that she didn’t actually take a break or have a smoke while looking, for at that rate, a cigarette would have taken closer to 20-minutes!
There were people spread out all over the place completing the things they had not completed properly prior to getting to the front of the line (obviously not intuitive!) And I especially loved the sign that tells you that “In accordance with Credit Card Company Policies, we will not accept a credit or debit card for payment that is not properly signed.”
That sign used to say, “In accordance with Federal Law …” Apparently they figured out there is no such law. I can hardly wait for them to determine there is no Credit Card Company policy against signing your credit card “See ID,” or “Check ID.” Most signatures are unreadable anyway, and if one guy I know can sign his with an “X” then why not a “Check ID.” And if the signatures don’t match, they are supposed to ask for ID, not refuse the transaction. Hmmmm.
The only thing I don’t know about the sign is whether it is on the wall at the West Valley Post Office where Greg works. Want to know why? Because with roughly the same number of people in and out of the Post Office, and the same number of people waiting on them, I wasn’t there long enough to note the time on my watch or to spend much time looking for signs.
Not only were they pleasant – but Greg and his co-workers got it done. Fast! Faster than Wendy’s. Well okay, Faster than Wendy’s before Dave died. But, you know what I mean; it was that kind of Fast!
And the officious thing sitting at the counter next to the person waiting on me commanded customers in a voice that was clearly something out of the officer corps of the US Navy. I wonder if it is the uniforms. Ah, memo to Counter Staff – this is not the military and you are not officers. Sorry.
I’m thinking that the South Jordan Post Office needs to take their people over to the West Valley Post Office for a dose of Greg. Who knows, maybe even they can figure this thing out.
I HAD to go to “my” Post Office to pick up an envelope that was sent registered mail. Since I have been coming in to the office early all week, and knowing what kind of line develops at that place during a standard lunch hour, I set off after my 9:00 to 10:00 AM meeting ended and arrived at roughly 10:20 AM.
There is always a line. And the two counter staffers moved with absolutely no urgency and more than a little officiousness. Well, now that was an understatement. Apparently neither one of them got the memo that we now have choice in most of our Post Office transactions.
“Choice?” you ask. Why, yes, Choice (with a capital “C.”) And not just for packages. You see, I can get stamps just about anywhere these days. And I hear that at Costco, I can get them for a discount off the face value. We can even go, as I do, to another Post Office where Greg has turned service into a conversational art form.
But there are other choices that the Postal Service (USPS) may not understand are competitors. There is email. Who wants to pay that ever escalating charge for a stamp when you can use free email? Then, there are products like “Bill-Payer” which allow us to make electronic payments without ever licking another envelope. Oh, and couriers.
UPS and FedEx are so well entrenched in the package industry that I cannot imagine why you would want to use USPS – unless the extra couple of bucks is going to break you. And I read that USPS now uses UPS to transport those packages for them – and that they recently switched from FedEx planes – or is it the other way around? (Who cares? It isn’t USPS. It is someone else. They apparently can’t fly economically.)
The line was better than usual for the South Jordan Post Office -12 minutes at 10:20 AM. The wait while they found my letter was 7 minutes. And I am sure, by the speed the person was moving, that she didn’t actually take a break or have a smoke while looking, for at that rate, a cigarette would have taken closer to 20-minutes!
There were people spread out all over the place completing the things they had not completed properly prior to getting to the front of the line (obviously not intuitive!) And I especially loved the sign that tells you that “In accordance with Credit Card Company Policies, we will not accept a credit or debit card for payment that is not properly signed.”
That sign used to say, “In accordance with Federal Law …” Apparently they figured out there is no such law. I can hardly wait for them to determine there is no Credit Card Company policy against signing your credit card “See ID,” or “Check ID.” Most signatures are unreadable anyway, and if one guy I know can sign his with an “X” then why not a “Check ID.” And if the signatures don’t match, they are supposed to ask for ID, not refuse the transaction. Hmmmm.
The only thing I don’t know about the sign is whether it is on the wall at the West Valley Post Office where Greg works. Want to know why? Because with roughly the same number of people in and out of the Post Office, and the same number of people waiting on them, I wasn’t there long enough to note the time on my watch or to spend much time looking for signs.
Not only were they pleasant – but Greg and his co-workers got it done. Fast! Faster than Wendy’s. Well okay, Faster than Wendy’s before Dave died. But, you know what I mean; it was that kind of Fast!
And the officious thing sitting at the counter next to the person waiting on me commanded customers in a voice that was clearly something out of the officer corps of the US Navy. I wonder if it is the uniforms. Ah, memo to Counter Staff – this is not the military and you are not officers. Sorry.
I’m thinking that the South Jordan Post Office needs to take their people over to the West Valley Post Office for a dose of Greg. Who knows, maybe even they can figure this thing out.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Greg
I’ve been frequenting the Post Office at 3490 South and 4400 West in West Valley City pretty much exclusively for the last few years. It isn’t close to any place I live, work or generally go. I stumbled upon it a couple of years ago when I was in the area for something else and had to mail a package.
Now, I go out of my way to do my business even though I have a good friend who is the Post Master – or whatever they call them these days, of the Post Office right on my way home. There is also another Post Office that services my home and where I HAVE to go to pick up packages or sign for mail. I don’t like it, but I HAVE to go there for some business. I prefer that West Valley Post Office that is way out of the way!
The reason is a guy named Greg. Greg is one of the Post Office employees that sits behind the counter and waits on people who walk through the door all day long, day in and day out. He loves his job. You can tell. And he seems to like his customers. You enjoy the experience. I’ll let others go if I think I can get to his window. And he does a very conversational job of cross-selling.
He is infectious. Over the last couple of years I have seen the general quality of all the counter staff at this Post Office become more like Greg. I think that a company that wanted to improve their customer service ought to send their people over to that West Valley Post Office and watch Greg all day long. Not only would they have lots to talk about, but they would probably also be infected.
Do you know who Greg reminds me of? Ian. Ian (sorry, it was thirty-years ago and I can’t recall his last name – it is remarkable I can remember his first!) was on the wait staff at the British tailor I went to see in Mildenhall, England to buy two tailored 100% wool suits with two pants and a waist-coat (vest for all you Yanks out there) prior to leaving to serve a two-year mission in Scotland and Ireland for my church in 1976.
Ian was not enthusiastic. He was not bubbly. Ian was genuine. Ian was attentive. Ian was kind and sensitive. Ian took wonderful care of me all through the buying process. And Ian conversationally “cross sold” me into a couple of beautiful ties to go with my two suits, dozen white shirts, and socks. He did this even though I already owned a “back of the closet door” full of ties to go with my suits. I remember Ian thirty years later. If I didn’t live in Utah, I’d go back there and buy some more suits from Ian. Frankly, I’ve been looking for an Ian here in Utah and he just isn’t here.
Sometimes I wonder if I ought to go be Ian at some place in Utah. I wonder if what I know about assisting people in making such an important decision about their image (which I learned from Ian) is something that I really owe to Utah men. But that is wistful thinking for another day …
Greg – now Greg ought to work for a tailor! I would imagine that he makes a decent living. If I was in the kind of business that needed someone like that right now, I’d go find out what it would take to get Greg to come work for me. I’d find a way to get that for him. And I would watch as his infectious spirit permeated the rest of my staff.
Go see Greg if you get a chance. And then tell me what you think. You can get stamps anywhere. You can’t see that kind of service at very many places. Especially not at a Post Office!
Now, I go out of my way to do my business even though I have a good friend who is the Post Master – or whatever they call them these days, of the Post Office right on my way home. There is also another Post Office that services my home and where I HAVE to go to pick up packages or sign for mail. I don’t like it, but I HAVE to go there for some business. I prefer that West Valley Post Office that is way out of the way!
The reason is a guy named Greg. Greg is one of the Post Office employees that sits behind the counter and waits on people who walk through the door all day long, day in and day out. He loves his job. You can tell. And he seems to like his customers. You enjoy the experience. I’ll let others go if I think I can get to his window. And he does a very conversational job of cross-selling.
He is infectious. Over the last couple of years I have seen the general quality of all the counter staff at this Post Office become more like Greg. I think that a company that wanted to improve their customer service ought to send their people over to that West Valley Post Office and watch Greg all day long. Not only would they have lots to talk about, but they would probably also be infected.
Do you know who Greg reminds me of? Ian. Ian (sorry, it was thirty-years ago and I can’t recall his last name – it is remarkable I can remember his first!) was on the wait staff at the British tailor I went to see in Mildenhall, England to buy two tailored 100% wool suits with two pants and a waist-coat (vest for all you Yanks out there) prior to leaving to serve a two-year mission in Scotland and Ireland for my church in 1976.
Ian was not enthusiastic. He was not bubbly. Ian was genuine. Ian was attentive. Ian was kind and sensitive. Ian took wonderful care of me all through the buying process. And Ian conversationally “cross sold” me into a couple of beautiful ties to go with my two suits, dozen white shirts, and socks. He did this even though I already owned a “back of the closet door” full of ties to go with my suits. I remember Ian thirty years later. If I didn’t live in Utah, I’d go back there and buy some more suits from Ian. Frankly, I’ve been looking for an Ian here in Utah and he just isn’t here.
Sometimes I wonder if I ought to go be Ian at some place in Utah. I wonder if what I know about assisting people in making such an important decision about their image (which I learned from Ian) is something that I really owe to Utah men. But that is wistful thinking for another day …
Greg – now Greg ought to work for a tailor! I would imagine that he makes a decent living. If I was in the kind of business that needed someone like that right now, I’d go find out what it would take to get Greg to come work for me. I’d find a way to get that for him. And I would watch as his infectious spirit permeated the rest of my staff.
Go see Greg if you get a chance. And then tell me what you think. You can get stamps anywhere. You can’t see that kind of service at very many places. Especially not at a Post Office!
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Sleight of Hand
In an article yesterday in USA Today titled, “Credit card fees eat up gas station profits,” it was noted that , “As gas prices have jumped, station owners' profit margins have shrunk because they now must pay higher fees to credit card companies to process payments.” (For the full article and on-line comments, see http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/2008-07-07-gas-prices-credit-card-fees_N.htm )
What most citizens (I hate that somewhere in the last decade someone tagged me a consumer) do not understand is that the article was one more shot in an on-going war – the war merchant associations are waging against card issuers and transaction processors. This article allowed the merchant associations to once again stake their claim of unfair price gouging.
Whew, talk about sleight of hand.
In the interest of full-disclosure, let me here declare that I work for one of those card transaction issuers and processors, and while I do not speak for them, I am biased. But lest you get the idea that my bias is purely because I work for a card transaction company, think again.
You see, several years ago I was a victim of the huge TJ MAXX (TJX) data release – the nice way to say that TJX was so irresponsible with my personal credit card data that it was stolen and my Credit Union replaced my debit card. And they have yet to send me even a note saying, “Sorry Lon,” let alone anything for my inconvenience. Oh, and lest you think the only inconvenience of a data release is when they steal your money, you haven’t had the pleasure yet, have you?
For your information, I stopped going there. I voted with my re-issued debit card.
But that was also the beginning of my self-education on the issue of merchant data security, interchange fees – or the rate the processors charge the merchant to turn your transaction into your payment, fraud, and charge-backs. In case you want to know, there is plenty out there on it and if you want to look at the complete picture, you shouldn’t just look at interchange fees in isolation.
I’m not a conspiracy nut – but I am a seasoned marketing guy with more than two decades of experience (and most of it is not in financial services) and I know that you position your product, service, campaign or brand by deciding which part of the story you tell. Merchants tell you, and more importantly, tell your elected representatives what they want you and your legislators to know, and withhold the rest of the story because it does not play that well.
Permit me to add a few plot twists that merchant associations leave out.
Merchant data security or the lack thereof is a huge issue they’d like to gloss over. They wish you would not pay any attention to how much data they have on their servers, how much they actually use, how long they keep it, why they keep it after they have been paid, or how well they secure it.
Merchants don’t want you to know the number one fraud issue they face never was bad checks, credit card charge-backs or even shoplifting. It was always employee theft. And they continue to face the issue, but employees are now getting into your data too.
Merchants don’t want you to know that their lapses cost the card transaction processors real money. Oh, by the way, this might be one of the reasons that the interchange fee is a part of the equation.
Merchants don’t want you to use a personal check. You may not see it the same way, but debit and credit cards took the place of the personal check in the mind of merchants years ago. Personal checks used to cost merchants time and money.
The fact that a clerk no longer has to look your card number up on a “hot sheet” booklet made of newsprint and issued weekly, means they no longer know what kind of infrastructure and employment is necessary to provide that “real time” authorization – the immediate verification of the sale.
Merchants do not want to talk about the fact that they added debit or credit payment options because you demanded them. We citizens value payment choice – that is the choice to use debit, prepaid, credit, check or cash for the transaction at hand. We do this for our convenience. We expect if there is any inconvenience in the transaction the merchant will be the inconvenienced party since they are serving us.
We expect them to like our money in whatever form we bring it to them. We don’t like limits on our options, and when they limit us and one of their competitors will not, we are more likely to take our business elsewhere.
Merchants don’t want you to understand that there are costs to processing your payment. They want you to think it is magic. They want you to think it is mysteriously and immediately done when you swipe your card.
They don’t want you to think about the telephone services and connections, the rooms full of servers, the people who have to support such processes and servers, the fraud that must be absorbed, the people who must answer your call, the fact that few of their 19-year old, minimum wage cashiers will check to see that you are who your card says you are, the claims against them when they misapply a charge and then refuse to reverse it, and the damage their “data releases” cost the card issuer and processor.
Merchants want you to think all of that is free.
Merchants think they can get the legislature to regulate the credit card companies because you are outraged and demand it. They know you want payment choice, and they want to give it to you, but they don’t want the costs. They want the magic. They want immediate. They want armies of people to support it and take their personal check and merchant credit headaches away, but not their people, and apparently, not their costs.
So merchants and merchant associations tell you this nice little bedtime nightmare and hope you will write your congressman.
I’ve got a better idea.
Lets all decide together that life-sustaining goods like groceries and gasoline shouldn’t be sold for a profit. Let’s demand that our congressmen regulate merchants of these items. Let’s get a three-judge panel determine the price of every life-sustaining commodity.
I’m sure lame-duck Representative Chris Cannon can get behind this like he did the Interchange Legislation that he recently co-sponsored and which actually might have been the reason for his primary election loss (ah, Chris, you forgot all those card issuers and transaction processors that are a part of your constituency … and they even wrote to you!)
There is only one real problem with my great idea. Merchants who cannot make a profit cannot stay in business, and then where are we? Why, right in 1970s USSR. Three-judge panels to determine prices fit there, not here.
If three-judge panels are not right for food and gas, why are they right for interchange fees?
Now if I were a conspiracy theorist, then there would be a preplanned and very personally profitable ending to this call for regulation for the merchant conspirators. But there isn’t.
You think the credit crunch is bad now? Without payment options it is worse. More like 1820 mercantile - cash or merchant credit only. No ATM.
Think water, no paddle.
What most citizens (I hate that somewhere in the last decade someone tagged me a consumer) do not understand is that the article was one more shot in an on-going war – the war merchant associations are waging against card issuers and transaction processors. This article allowed the merchant associations to once again stake their claim of unfair price gouging.
Whew, talk about sleight of hand.
In the interest of full-disclosure, let me here declare that I work for one of those card transaction issuers and processors, and while I do not speak for them, I am biased. But lest you get the idea that my bias is purely because I work for a card transaction company, think again.
You see, several years ago I was a victim of the huge TJ MAXX (TJX) data release – the nice way to say that TJX was so irresponsible with my personal credit card data that it was stolen and my Credit Union replaced my debit card. And they have yet to send me even a note saying, “Sorry Lon,” let alone anything for my inconvenience. Oh, and lest you think the only inconvenience of a data release is when they steal your money, you haven’t had the pleasure yet, have you?
For your information, I stopped going there. I voted with my re-issued debit card.
But that was also the beginning of my self-education on the issue of merchant data security, interchange fees – or the rate the processors charge the merchant to turn your transaction into your payment, fraud, and charge-backs. In case you want to know, there is plenty out there on it and if you want to look at the complete picture, you shouldn’t just look at interchange fees in isolation.
I’m not a conspiracy nut – but I am a seasoned marketing guy with more than two decades of experience (and most of it is not in financial services) and I know that you position your product, service, campaign or brand by deciding which part of the story you tell. Merchants tell you, and more importantly, tell your elected representatives what they want you and your legislators to know, and withhold the rest of the story because it does not play that well.
Permit me to add a few plot twists that merchant associations leave out.
Merchant data security or the lack thereof is a huge issue they’d like to gloss over. They wish you would not pay any attention to how much data they have on their servers, how much they actually use, how long they keep it, why they keep it after they have been paid, or how well they secure it.
Merchants don’t want you to know the number one fraud issue they face never was bad checks, credit card charge-backs or even shoplifting. It was always employee theft. And they continue to face the issue, but employees are now getting into your data too.
Merchants don’t want you to know that their lapses cost the card transaction processors real money. Oh, by the way, this might be one of the reasons that the interchange fee is a part of the equation.
Merchants don’t want you to use a personal check. You may not see it the same way, but debit and credit cards took the place of the personal check in the mind of merchants years ago. Personal checks used to cost merchants time and money.
The fact that a clerk no longer has to look your card number up on a “hot sheet” booklet made of newsprint and issued weekly, means they no longer know what kind of infrastructure and employment is necessary to provide that “real time” authorization – the immediate verification of the sale.
Merchants do not want to talk about the fact that they added debit or credit payment options because you demanded them. We citizens value payment choice – that is the choice to use debit, prepaid, credit, check or cash for the transaction at hand. We do this for our convenience. We expect if there is any inconvenience in the transaction the merchant will be the inconvenienced party since they are serving us.
We expect them to like our money in whatever form we bring it to them. We don’t like limits on our options, and when they limit us and one of their competitors will not, we are more likely to take our business elsewhere.
Merchants don’t want you to understand that there are costs to processing your payment. They want you to think it is magic. They want you to think it is mysteriously and immediately done when you swipe your card.
They don’t want you to think about the telephone services and connections, the rooms full of servers, the people who have to support such processes and servers, the fraud that must be absorbed, the people who must answer your call, the fact that few of their 19-year old, minimum wage cashiers will check to see that you are who your card says you are, the claims against them when they misapply a charge and then refuse to reverse it, and the damage their “data releases” cost the card issuer and processor.
Merchants want you to think all of that is free.
Merchants think they can get the legislature to regulate the credit card companies because you are outraged and demand it. They know you want payment choice, and they want to give it to you, but they don’t want the costs. They want the magic. They want immediate. They want armies of people to support it and take their personal check and merchant credit headaches away, but not their people, and apparently, not their costs.
So merchants and merchant associations tell you this nice little bedtime nightmare and hope you will write your congressman.
I’ve got a better idea.
Lets all decide together that life-sustaining goods like groceries and gasoline shouldn’t be sold for a profit. Let’s demand that our congressmen regulate merchants of these items. Let’s get a three-judge panel determine the price of every life-sustaining commodity.
I’m sure lame-duck Representative Chris Cannon can get behind this like he did the Interchange Legislation that he recently co-sponsored and which actually might have been the reason for his primary election loss (ah, Chris, you forgot all those card issuers and transaction processors that are a part of your constituency … and they even wrote to you!)
There is only one real problem with my great idea. Merchants who cannot make a profit cannot stay in business, and then where are we? Why, right in 1970s USSR. Three-judge panels to determine prices fit there, not here.
If three-judge panels are not right for food and gas, why are they right for interchange fees?
Now if I were a conspiracy theorist, then there would be a preplanned and very personally profitable ending to this call for regulation for the merchant conspirators. But there isn’t.
You think the credit crunch is bad now? Without payment options it is worse. More like 1820 mercantile - cash or merchant credit only. No ATM.
Think water, no paddle.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Lasting Remedies
“The measure of success is not whether you have a tough problem to deal with, but whether it is the same problem you had last year.” (John Foster Dulles, 1888-1959)
I read this enduring comment by former Secretary of State John Foster Dulles last night while my family continues to wrestle with the consequences of the advanced alcoholism and anti-social behavior of one of our beloved family members. The tough problems are not just the same ones we have seen but are repeating fast and furiously.
In fact, the problems are recurring more often - and with greater intensity than in previous years. And as they occur again, and again, some members of the extended family continue apply the same remedies used in past years - remedies which have quite obviously not worked.
I read this enduring comment by former Secretary of State John Foster Dulles last night while my family continues to wrestle with the consequences of the advanced alcoholism and anti-social behavior of one of our beloved family members. The tough problems are not just the same ones we have seen but are repeating fast and furiously.
In fact, the problems are recurring more often - and with greater intensity than in previous years. And as they occur again, and again, some members of the extended family continue apply the same remedies used in past years - remedies which have quite obviously not worked.
Some, like me for example, count the cost and argue that these “cures” are actually leading to an increase in the unwelcome behavior.
One by one, members of the extended family are coming to realize that providing a safety net to this well-loved, even well-liked, but exasperating family member is counter-productive. The frustration level with those who continue to provide “help,” that is, making resources available to misuse, is growing at a rate commensurate with the destructive behavior.
Decades ago, when I was appointed a minor leader in my local church congregation a wise old bishop told me that most people change only when they are in pain and then they only enough to stop the pain. I thought this overly pessimistic at the time; however, after almost two decades of such service, including as a bishop, I’ve come to know this to be quite true.
During my service to the members of my local congregation, I also learned that money rarely cures poor habits or behavioral choices. It tends to spread the problem over a longer period of time, and only puts off the needed change until all the resources, or the patience of those with the resources, are exhausted.
Until the pain is acute enough to force a change there will be no real change.
But what about the kids? Do you prop up a family unit with a parent, or parents who make poor decisions over and over again just so the children won’t suffer in any way? And if so, how exactly do you do that? The most painful suffering has little to do with where or how they live, or whether the bills are paid. It is related to how little abuse they are subjected to, and much parental attention and love they receive.
If the authorities don’t see a reason to remove the children from the home, what makes you think you should have the right to force your life-style choices on another family unit? If you don’t agree with the life-style choices of a family unit, you have few real choices available to you.
You can withhold your resources. That may make continued pursuit of the destructive life-style impossible. But don't forget, when the pain level rises so does the volume.
You could shut off contact – withhold your love, I suppose, but that would make any influence for good you might have with them impotent.
Of course, you can always lecture and preach at them. But that may ensure that they will stop visiting you, and again, any influence you might have on the situation is nil.
There may be times when they need honest answers, but those times usually correspond to a moment of pain when they reach out and not when you think they need to hear it. Those are golden moments. You should not pass those up no matter how hopeless the situation appears or becomes.
It all comes back to choices and liberty, true solutions and pain levels. Because one member of an extended family chooses to behave in a destructive manner does not mean that all members of the family lost the right to choose how they will spend their time or money.
One by one, members of the extended family are coming to realize that providing a safety net to this well-loved, even well-liked, but exasperating family member is counter-productive. The frustration level with those who continue to provide “help,” that is, making resources available to misuse, is growing at a rate commensurate with the destructive behavior.
Decades ago, when I was appointed a minor leader in my local church congregation a wise old bishop told me that most people change only when they are in pain and then they only enough to stop the pain. I thought this overly pessimistic at the time; however, after almost two decades of such service, including as a bishop, I’ve come to know this to be quite true.
During my service to the members of my local congregation, I also learned that money rarely cures poor habits or behavioral choices. It tends to spread the problem over a longer period of time, and only puts off the needed change until all the resources, or the patience of those with the resources, are exhausted.
Until the pain is acute enough to force a change there will be no real change.
But what about the kids? Do you prop up a family unit with a parent, or parents who make poor decisions over and over again just so the children won’t suffer in any way? And if so, how exactly do you do that? The most painful suffering has little to do with where or how they live, or whether the bills are paid. It is related to how little abuse they are subjected to, and much parental attention and love they receive.
If the authorities don’t see a reason to remove the children from the home, what makes you think you should have the right to force your life-style choices on another family unit? If you don’t agree with the life-style choices of a family unit, you have few real choices available to you.
You can withhold your resources. That may make continued pursuit of the destructive life-style impossible. But don't forget, when the pain level rises so does the volume.
You could shut off contact – withhold your love, I suppose, but that would make any influence for good you might have with them impotent.
Of course, you can always lecture and preach at them. But that may ensure that they will stop visiting you, and again, any influence you might have on the situation is nil.
There may be times when they need honest answers, but those times usually correspond to a moment of pain when they reach out and not when you think they need to hear it. Those are golden moments. You should not pass those up no matter how hopeless the situation appears or becomes.
It all comes back to choices and liberty, true solutions and pain levels. Because one member of an extended family chooses to behave in a destructive manner does not mean that all members of the family lost the right to choose how they will spend their time or money.
Running to the rescue may be the most destructive thing we can do over the long haul.
Choosing not to apply band-aids when hospitalization is needed will cause the pain to increase to unacceptable levels. They call this “tough-love” and everyone can talk about it right up until the moment they have to apply it. At that point, I have noticed, the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth hold hands with guilt and uncertainty and combine to break down the most fortified defenses.
And God help those whose defenses are cemented, for they are in for a long, lonely ride until most of the rest of the family come to recognize the inadequate nature of their own assistance.
What is not inadequate even if it seems simple? It seems to me that the big things are holding their hand when the pain is intense, reminding them we love, accept and believe in them, and being completely honest with them when they want to know what they need to do. And allow, as my Grandmother Tibbitts used to say, the chickens to come home to roost. Let them feel, see and taste the consequences of their decisions. They are, after all, their decisions. They chose.
Secretary Dulles died when I was three-years old, and he may have been talking about national or global problems when he made this timeless and quoted comment, but if the solutions we are using aren’t making the tough problems we face different from year to year, we are simply recycling the same problem into a different time and space. We aren’t using real solutions. All we are doing is assuaging our own guilt and making ourselves feel falsely hopeful for a time.
We ought to change.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Our brilliant Legislature
Today I add more to my comments of June 12, 2008 under the headline: “Crime and Punishment.”
On June 28, 2008, the Deseret News ran an article by Ben Winslow under the headline: “Pay to Stay at the Purgatory Jail,” that gave us this “good” news: “The Washington County Sheriff's Office is implementing a "pay to stay" program at the Purgatory Jail effective July 15. The jail's new chief said it is designed to offset increasing inmate housing costs, as well as an experiment in reducing recidivism among criminals. “
Obviously there are three possible and inspired ideas under-pinning such a decision:
1) There is a misperception among our legislators that our inmates have $50/hour jobs waiting for them.
Why, with those jobs they will be able to pay off a 30-day incarceration in less than 30-hours. Now that sounds reasonable! Especially if we don’t consider the fines that our judges hit them with prior to sending them to jail or prison and without any regard for their ability to pay. But, wait, with that lucrative job waiting for them, and say a $1,000 fine to pay off – they are only adding another, what, 30-35 hours? They should have it all cleaned up in less than two weeks!
2) Perhaps our legislators believe that our criminals have somehow cached the illegal and ill-gotten gains of their pre-jail life and this is a brilliant new means to get it back.
3) Or maybe, our legislators understand all too well that our criminal element will be forced to return to their illegal behavior and this is a new method of taxing that behavior.
Again, quoting Winslow’s article:
"The $45 flat rate will cover all housing costs. Inmates will start being charged from the moment they're moved from booking to housing and end when they're released. [Washington County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Jake] Schultz said discounts will be offered at the Purgatory Jail for inmates who are discipline free (10 percent off), go through education programs (another 10 percent discount), and pay it in full when they're released (up to 50 percent off).
"If they got released and they want to pay in full, they took self-help and had been discipline free, they could potentially have a 70 percent cut," he said. "We're really hoping to promote the rehabilitation process."
Now that makes me feel better since those education programs are working so well already. I assume they are talking about the formal education programs and not the informal prisoner run programs that give young apprentices a journeyman education in fraud, drug chemistry, or financing criminal activities.
Again, from Winslow’s article regarding other jails looking at “pay for stay” fees:
"The Legislature passed this as a signal, as an indication of where they want us to go," said Box Elder County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Kevin Potter.
The Box Elder County Jail is expected to start charging its inmates as soon as they can settle on a price. (Update: They decided on a $45/day charge.)
"That's probably our biggest debate right now," said Potter …
And in what I think is one of the understatements of the year, Winslow notes: “One problem that jails worry about is actually collecting the money. Often, inmates are too poor to make bail and paying a hefty fine after being in jail from arrest to court and through sentencing could be outrageous.”
Lon's second rule of unintended consequences says, "The owners of a system that delivers unintended results or consequences will continue to add new and creative means to deliver those unintended results."
We, therefore, shouldn’t be too hard on the Purgatory Jail “chief” for believing this is an "experiment in reducing recidivism among criminals." How could he know the current system is circular, and is netting unintended results, delivering the same people to his jail over and over again? Oh, wait, he would only need to look at the paperwork or in the cells to see that something is truly wrong. D’oh!
To the legislature, I say, as our favorite stooge would say, “Another fine mess you’ve gotten us in!” Truly stellar! Let’s be sure and re-elect them all. I’m sure they are the smartest people in the state and we couldn’t do any better.
On June 28, 2008, the Deseret News ran an article by Ben Winslow under the headline: “Pay to Stay at the Purgatory Jail,” that gave us this “good” news: “The Washington County Sheriff's Office is implementing a "pay to stay" program at the Purgatory Jail effective July 15. The jail's new chief said it is designed to offset increasing inmate housing costs, as well as an experiment in reducing recidivism among criminals. “
Obviously there are three possible and inspired ideas under-pinning such a decision:
1) There is a misperception among our legislators that our inmates have $50/hour jobs waiting for them.
Why, with those jobs they will be able to pay off a 30-day incarceration in less than 30-hours. Now that sounds reasonable! Especially if we don’t consider the fines that our judges hit them with prior to sending them to jail or prison and without any regard for their ability to pay. But, wait, with that lucrative job waiting for them, and say a $1,000 fine to pay off – they are only adding another, what, 30-35 hours? They should have it all cleaned up in less than two weeks!
2) Perhaps our legislators believe that our criminals have somehow cached the illegal and ill-gotten gains of their pre-jail life and this is a brilliant new means to get it back.
3) Or maybe, our legislators understand all too well that our criminal element will be forced to return to their illegal behavior and this is a new method of taxing that behavior.
Again, quoting Winslow’s article:
"The $45 flat rate will cover all housing costs. Inmates will start being charged from the moment they're moved from booking to housing and end when they're released. [Washington County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Jake] Schultz said discounts will be offered at the Purgatory Jail for inmates who are discipline free (10 percent off), go through education programs (another 10 percent discount), and pay it in full when they're released (up to 50 percent off).
"If they got released and they want to pay in full, they took self-help and had been discipline free, they could potentially have a 70 percent cut," he said. "We're really hoping to promote the rehabilitation process."
Now that makes me feel better since those education programs are working so well already. I assume they are talking about the formal education programs and not the informal prisoner run programs that give young apprentices a journeyman education in fraud, drug chemistry, or financing criminal activities.
Again, from Winslow’s article regarding other jails looking at “pay for stay” fees:
"The Legislature passed this as a signal, as an indication of where they want us to go," said Box Elder County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Kevin Potter.
The Box Elder County Jail is expected to start charging its inmates as soon as they can settle on a price. (Update: They decided on a $45/day charge.)
"That's probably our biggest debate right now," said Potter …
And in what I think is one of the understatements of the year, Winslow notes: “One problem that jails worry about is actually collecting the money. Often, inmates are too poor to make bail and paying a hefty fine after being in jail from arrest to court and through sentencing could be outrageous.”
Lon's second rule of unintended consequences says, "The owners of a system that delivers unintended results or consequences will continue to add new and creative means to deliver those unintended results."
We, therefore, shouldn’t be too hard on the Purgatory Jail “chief” for believing this is an "experiment in reducing recidivism among criminals." How could he know the current system is circular, and is netting unintended results, delivering the same people to his jail over and over again? Oh, wait, he would only need to look at the paperwork or in the cells to see that something is truly wrong. D’oh!
To the legislature, I say, as our favorite stooge would say, “Another fine mess you’ve gotten us in!” Truly stellar! Let’s be sure and re-elect them all. I’m sure they are the smartest people in the state and we couldn’t do any better.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)