A "53% guy" gets a response: Opposing viewpoints about "Occupy Wall Street"

In response to the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protest movement, a young man recently posted the photo above as part of a "53 percent" website.  This website was set up be parallel to but offer a different viewpoint from the "We are the 99%" stories that complement the OWS movement.

An open internet letter in response to the posting by this particular "53% guy" was featured recently in The Daily Kos.  The letter was written by Max Udargo.  It is remarkable as a "back at you" letter in that it is full of compassion. Because it is written without rancor or judgment, the letter demonstrates tools that we can use in the business world to communicate disagreement without making enemies.  It can help us sustain our relationships.

The points made in the original post by the "53% guy":

• he is a former Marine and works two jobs now
• he worked 60-70 hours per week to put himself through college
• he hasn't had more than 4 days in a row off in over 4 years
• he doesn't blame Wall Street for his situation
• he doesn't think anyone else should blame Wall Street

The points made by Max Udargo, in his response:

• he has honor and respect for how hard 53% guy works, and for his service as a Marine
• he doesn't think that the workload assumed by this young man can be maintained when he is 50
• he thinks that the American dream is closer to the 40 hour workweek
• sickness or family responsibilities would be difficult to accommodate under the current conditions of the 53% guy's life
• the 53% guy and all people everywhere deserve better

From an outside perspective, it seems clear that the letter writer disagrees with the young ex-Marine in a fundamental way.  Nevertheless, he has chosen to communicate his disagreement first by acknowledging and honoring the 53% guy's awesome qualities of self-discipline and commitment. Udargo takes the time to explain the ways in which he is on the 53% guy's side. He then explains the principles underlying the OWS movement, and how those principles might overlap with the 53% guy's own values.

Udargo steers away from judging the 53% guy in any negative or possibly mis-understandable way. When his tone shows any emotion or judgment, it is directed at the historical actions of financial corporations. Udargo uses the words "we" and " strong ally" to convey where his sympathies lie--with the 53% guy.

Follow up:

1.  What is the fundamental point upon which the 53% guy and Udargo disagree?

2.  What techniques does the 53% guy use to convey his point of view?  How do they differ from the techniques used by Udargo?

3. Think about a recent disagreement that you had with someone at work, at school, or in your personal life. What techniques did you use to convey that you disagreed?  What techniques did the other person or people involved use? How did it play out? 

Starbucks wants you and me to help create jobs

          photo by Paul J. Richards, AFP, Getty Images, on www.scpr.org 

Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, has another good idea: Americans can "micro-lend" to other Americans, thereby providing the funding for small businesses that financial institutions are shying away from in today's economy. This is what small businesses need to create new jobs. In an op-ed piece in the NYT, "We Can All Become Job Creators," Joe Nocera delineates the plan that will be seeded by a $5 million donation by the Starbucks Foundation.

On November 1, 2011, Starbucks and the Starbucks Foundation rolled out a process where they are the middlemen between customers that are willing to donate money, and Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) that are set up to make small business loans.  Typically, CDFIs make loans to "underserved" populations, so they are in the habit of making loans that big banks generally find too risky or too small to bother with.

To facilitate this plan, Starbucks got connected to an umbrella organization of CDFIs, called the Opportunity Finance Network, run by Mark Pinsky. Customers can make donations to "Create Jobs For USA," a non-profit, and the donated funds will be used as collateral to make 7 times as much money available to lend through the CDFIs. Customers making donations of $5 or more will get a wristband, courtesy of Starbucks.

image from NYT online content connect to linked article

Maybe that wristband will turn into "the" accessory of the season...or the perfect holiday gift for "someone who has everything." I made a contribution and got one for myself...so I am feeling as though I am a "job-creator" already.

Anyway, do the math.  If there are 10 million Starbucks customers, and they each give $5, that's $50 million.  Once that's leveraged at 7 times its value, that's $350 million of funds available for small business loans. Neighbor to neighbor. American to American.
Sounds like a win-win.

Follow up:

1.  Read up about Microlending at HowStuffWorks.  [The good information is not in the first page of article, but in the numbered articles 1-6 linked from that page.] Also check out Microcredit at Wikipedia.  Who are typical recipients of microlending funds?  Do an internet search to find out the names of the global organizations that support microlending. What person from Bangladesh was a microlending pioneer?

2.  When big banks are involved in making certain small loans (called "banking on bicycles"), what has sometimes gone wrong?

3.  Can you think of an argument against Howard Schultz's plan?  Has he thought of everything? Has he missed something? Consider what you may have read in one of the supporting articles before you answer this:  What is the absolutely best possible outcome of Howard Schultz's plan? Read the article at scpr.org if you need some help thinking of things that Schultz hasn't considered.

4. Howard Schultz's "big idea" from August was not very well received.  What was it? 

Gross National Happiness vs. Gross Domestic Product

image from bhutan tourism ministry

The recent wedding in Bhutan of King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck to Jetsun Pema on October 15, 2011 has brought the concept of Gross National Happiness vs. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) into the limelight once again.  

image from bhutan tourism ministry

According to the article, "Emulate Bhutan's Way to Gross National Happiness (GNH)" by Soo Ewe Jin (Malaysia Star online), the concept of "Gross National Happiness" was first developed by the current king's father in 1972. Instead of measuring success and wealth solely on the economic criteria of the GDP, this king also wanted to measure success on the well being of Bhutan's citizens. 

Over the years, the concept has gained popularity and the concept has spread to economic theory and international rankings (see Gross National Happiness rankings).

The main difference between the two measures is that the Gross Domestic Product only measures consumption, investment and spending.  If a building is built for $1 million, then gets vandalized and destroyed by fire, then is rebuilt, then is destroyed in a tornado, then gets rebuilt again, GDP measures that as $3 million in GDP--three times better than the value without the interim destruction.  This might not be the best measurement for judging wealth or success.  A straightforward but comprehensive explanation of GDP, its components and the ways it can be calculated, can be found in Wikipedia.

Gross National Happiness can seem to be more difficult to quantify; the issues are addressed in a policy paper by Med Jones of the International Institute of Management. More simplistically, GNH is measured on four parameters, or "pillars": 

• economic self-reliance
• respect for, and preservation of,the environment 
• the preservation and promotion of culture
• good governance in the form of a democracy

These national factors are interrelated and build from the bottom up, as delineated in this chart:

image from the document linked below by Pamela Shreiner, page 7

These concepts have spread beyond the borders of Bhutan.  They have been adapted and incorporated into academic business and economic planning. In a paper entitled "Exploring Gross National Happiness Using Balanced Scorecard and Appreciative Inquiry", submitted to the Second International Conference on GNH, Pamela Schreiner compared currently popular business decision-making models to the GNH concept.  She notes that the trend in decision making is to be more holistic, and include a broader range of outcomes, similar to the GNH model. Other researchers have also used inputs from the GNH model. The Malaysia Star article cites Richard Easterlin, an economics professor from USC, and other researchers as concluding that "once basic needs are met, policy should focus not on economic growth or GDP, but on increasing life satisfaction, or Gross National Happiness."

In the current environment of economic uncertainty, where financial algorithms can no longer predict market trends, the sustainable models have compelling appeal. This Venn diagram shows everything in balance.

graphic from 14wbpolicyglossary.wufoo.com

Follow up:

1. Access each of the links above until you can answer this question:  What countries ranked highest in GNH 2006, according to the article at the MSN Money site? What do these high ranking countries have in common?  How are they the same and different from the United States?

2.  Where is Bhutan?  What has been its political structure? What is the philosophy upon which the pillars of progress are built, according to Soo Ewe Jin's article?

3. If you want to hear a lecture on this topic, access this video  LINK from the GNHUSA conference, June 2010.  The introduction to the speaker is pretty dry, but hang in there.  The speaker, Eric Zencey, directly addresses GDP compared to measures of sustainable well-being.

After you watch, answer this question: What are some of the problems with GDP as a measure of economic activity, according to Zencey?