Blog

Why is everybody so concerned about work-life balance?

According to one urban legend, based on 1950s pop psychology*, workaholics are greedy and selfish people who are bound to die from a heart attack.

Not really. As the great David Ogilvy once said: “Men die of boredom, psychological conflict, and disease. They do not die of hard work.” This is especially true if your work is meaningful.

Most of the studies on the harmful effects of excessive work rely on subjective evaluations of work “overload.” They fail to disentangle respondents’ beliefs and emotions about work. If something bores you, it will surely seem tedious. When you hate your job, you will register any amount of work as excessive — it’s like forcing someone to eat a big plate of food they dislike, then asking if they had enough of it.

Overworking is really only possible if you are not having fun at work. By the same token, any amount of work will be dull if you are not engaged, or if you find your work unfulfilling.

Maybe it’s time to redefine the work-life balance — or at least stop thinking about it. Here are some considerations:

Hard work may be your most important career weapon. Indeed, once you are smart-enough or qualified to do a job, only hard work will distinguish you from everyone else. Workaholics tend to have higher social status in every society, including laidback cultures like those found in the Caribbean, Mediterranean, or South America. Every significant achievement in civilization (from art to science to sport) is the result of people who worked a lot harder than everyone else, and also happened to be utterly unconcerned about maintaining work-life balance. Exceptional achievers live longer, and they pretty much work until their death. Unsurprisingly, the 10 most workaholic nations in the world account for most of the world’s GDP.

Engagement is the difference between the bright and the dark side of workaholism. Put simply, a little bit of meaningless work is a lot worse for you than a great deal of meaningful work. Work is just like a relationship: Spending one week on a job you hate is as dreadful as spending a week with a person you don’t like. But when you find the right job, or the right person, no amount of time is enough. Do what you love and you will love what you do, which will also make you love working harder and longer. And if you don’t love what you are doing right now, you should try something else — it is never too late for a career change.

Technology has not ruined your work-life balance, it has simply exposed how boring your work and your life used to be. Did you ever try to figure out why it is so hard to stop checking your smartphone, even when you are having dinner with a friend you haven’t seen in ages, celebrating your anniversary, watching a movie, or out on a first date? It’s really quite simple: None of those things are as interesting as the constant hum of your e-mail, Facebook, or Twitter account. Reality is over-rated, especially compared to cyberspace. Technology has not only eliminated the boundaries between work and life, but also improved both areas.

People who have jobs, rather than careers, worry about work-life balance because they are unable to have fun at work. If you are lucky enough to have a career — as opposed to a job — then you should embrace the work-life imbalance. A career provides a higher sense of purpose; a job provides an income. A job pays for what you do; a career pays for what you love. If you are always counting the number of hours you work (e.g., in a day, week, or month) you probably have a job rather than a career. Conversely, the more elusive the boundaries between your work and life, the more successful you probably are in both. A true career isn’t a 9-5 endeavor. If you are having fun working, you will almost certainly keep working. Your career success depends on eliminating the division between work and play. Who cares about work-life balance when you can have work-life fusion?

Complaining about your poor work-life balance is a self-indulgent act. The belief that our ultimate aim in life is to feel good makes no evolutionary sense. It stems from a distorted interpretation of positive psychology, which, in fact, foments self-improvement and growth rather than narcissistic self-indulgence. This misinterpretation explains why so many people in the industrialized Western world seek attention by complaining about their poor work-life balance. It may also explain the recent rise of the East vis-à-vis the West — you will not see many people in Japan, China, or Singapore complain about their poor work-life, even though they often work a lot harder. Unemployment and stagnation are in part the result of prioritizing leisure and pleasure over work.

In short, the problem is not your inability to switch off, but to switch on. This is rooted in the fact that too few people work in careers they enjoy. The only way to be truly successful is to follow your passions, find your mission, and learn how to embrace the work-life imbalance.

*Friedman, M.; Rosenman, R. (1959). “Association of specific overt behaviour pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings.” Journal of the American Medical Association (169): 1286-1296]

Toni Braxton says she doesn’t feel that old spark anymore when it comes to music, and she wants to retire from the biz to focus on her acting career. After a career spanning over twenty years, the songstress says she’s ready for something new.

“For what I do I have to love it. I have to feel that excitement and it’s gone,” she said. “I’m just not going to do any albums anymore; maybe touring occasionally here and there because I love performing, but not as much as I did in the past. But no new projects.”

The mother of two has found some success on stage–she starred in Beauty And The Beast and Aida on Broadway–and has a popular reality show, “Braxton Family Values”, which focuses on the singer and her sisters. But she wants more, and says she knows she’s capable of doing something deeper.

“I hate to have reality star behind my name. That’s just not what I wanted to be when I grew up. I would like to play a lesbian,” she said. “I don’t know why. And do a whole make-out scene and the whole thing; just something completely different than people would expect from me. Not a lipstick lesbian, either.”

Braxton has long been an advocate for gay rights and has said she is very close with her LGBT fanbase.

“I love my boys because my boys help me be a better girl,” she said. “My choreographer and my video director are gay, and they’ve been my best friends since I started in the industry.”

On Valentine’s Day, as you settle in with your significant other for some food, wine, and probable sex, remember that all of those feelings you’re feeling can be easily explained by chemical reactions in your brain.

OK, maybe not all of it. AsapSCIENCE doesn’t want to take the mystery out of love or anything, they just want to let you know that your brain on love is pretty much the same as your brain on coke. And it’s the result of millions of years of evolution, baby.

Yeah, evolution. You know how hot that is, baby.

[AsapSCIENCE]

Quick test: name one company that does one thing and does it very well. The companies that occupy the limelight are typically diversified giants that achieve growth through constant expansion into new markets and the introduction of additional product lines (just think P&G, GE, and Microsoft).

But the truth is that the really successful companies are highly focused, achieving unprecedented efficiencies by designing a business model with a razor-thin focus and learning to do the one thing really well. Many of us academics still teach an old case about Shouldice Hospital, which only treats simple cases of hernias and nothing else but does it better than anyone. A more recent example is Quidsi, the driving force behind Diapers.com web site which sells only baby consumables. Some of readers may also recall ING Direct, which is focused on a narrowly defined set of simple financial services, and Southwest Airlines, which still has one class (economy) and one aircraft type (Boeing 737).

Thanks to this extreme focus there is no need for complicated processes, expensive equipment and underutilized (and expensive) resources. As a result, Southwest Airlines turns planes around much faster than competitors, ING Direct can avoid having hundreds of physical bank locations and Shouldice can schedule surgeries in a well-oiled production process with no downtimes or waiting.

Despite these advantages, such companies are actually quite rare in much of the Western World and it is much more “normal” to see complex conglomerates in which none of the above applies.

Except in Germany (and to a lesser extent in other German-speaking countries).

The amazing resilience of the German economy is often attributed to its reliance on Mittelstand companies, small to medium sized enterprises. These typically family-run businesses employ more than 70% of all German employees in the private sector, and are export-oriented, making Germany the second-largest exporter in the world. There is a wonderful account of these companies in the book Hidden Champions by Hermann Simon, former INSEAD professor and now Chairman of Simon, Kucher & Partners. During a recent presentation at INSEAD Hermann described some of their common features:

• Most Hidden Champions are extremely focused in what they do. To give a few examples: Jungbunzlauer supplies citric acid for Cola-Cola worldwide (and a few other salty and sweet chemicals), TetraMin is the number one producer of fish food, Uhlmann is the world leader in packaging systems for pharmaceuticals, and Flexi is the number one manufacturer of dog leashes worldwide.
• They do one thing but they do it extremely well by achieving tremendous efficiencies, making them cost-competitive despite their location in a very expensive country.
• Due to the simplicity of their product lines, their organizations avoid complexities and intricate structures, resulting in very lean management hierarchies.
• To compensate for their razor-thin focus on just a single product (or product category), they diversify internationally and enjoy great economies of scale.

All of these characteristics make these companies perfect examples of focused business models, which seem to thrive even in harshest economic conditions. Which raises some interesting questions: why don’t we see more of these firms in other countries? Is there something about their cultures that is hard to sustain? Does public ownership bring pressures to continually grow by going into new areas?

Whatever the answers to these questions, we do believe that extreme focus is an often-overlooked way to innovate a business model — for startups and established companies alike. Our own favorite US-based examples of such successful companies are Diapers.com and messenger bag manufacturer Timbuk2. What new focused company will come next?

Google Nexus owners, unlock your devices and start checking for updates because Android 4.2.2 Jelly Bean is now rolling out. The latest software version is reportedly hitting Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 7 and Nexus 10 devices, with no word at the moment relating to the Nexus 4.

The Android 4.2.2 update bumps up the build number to version JDQ39 and mostly appears to contain minor fixes. No official changelog has been provided by Google at this moment, but users are reporting improvements for Bluetooth streaming which now presents “less hicups […] but still not perfect” with apparent disconnects when switching from Wi-Fi to cellular data.

The update comes in at little over 46MB and considering the fairly significant size may feature plenty more under-the-hood changes. Android 4.2.2 is currently rolling out in waves and will likely hit the Nexus 4 in the following days if previous deployments are of any indication. For Galaxy Nexus owners there is an OTA Android 4.2.2 update file that can be manually downloaded and installed afterwards using ADB Sideload in the recovery.

UK supermarket chain Tesco is set to launch a free online video streaming service called Clubcard TV.

Currently being internally beta tested by employees and set to launch officially this spring, it will (as the name suggests) be available to all shoppers with a Tesco loyalty card. And the really good news is it will be entirely free. According to Tesco, the new service is a “thank you to our customers — there are no charges, contracts or subscriptions”.

Powered by Blinkbox, the movie and TV streaming service that Tesco bought a 80 percent majority stake in 2011, it will let customers watch both movies and on-demand TV. At the moment it’s web-only, but hopefully Tesco will be adding a mobile app at some point in the future.

With all apologies to my colleague Joe Wilcox, who bashed the Apple rumor of an “iWatch”, I must respectfully disagree. I get his point, don’t get me wrong. Most people of the “modern” generation do not even wear watches. In fact, they may not even own them. The cell phone has become the time piece of choice in today’s world. I also understand that a watch is not the ideal place to check your email.  The screen is simply too small.

However, there are uses for these devices for some of us. Not all of us, but some. I am a runner. Have been since middle school — more years ago than I care to mention. Those of us who ran cross country and track, and later moved to road races, care about time and smartphones don’t cover it. Sure there are apps for that — Map My Run, Run Keeper, Nike…they all do the job. My colleague Wayne Williams loves Zombies, Run! But, who wants to strap a 4.5-inch screen to their arm and go for a run?

I am not saying the rumored Apple “iWatch” is a good idea. What I am saying is that smart watches in general have a future, although it is certainly a niche one. Sure, if Apple releases a watch then the sheep will form lines around its store waiting to hand over their money, but it will be mostly be for a status symbol.

However, real smart watches, like the recently released Pebble, have a function for some of us. That particular item contains both GPS and Run Keeper, an app that can track your run, preventing the necessity of the old practice of driving a course before running it. Yes, some of us do that — we are obsessed with distance and time, pace must be calculated. there are watches for that already, but what is wrong with a bit more functionality?

No, I don’t need Dick Tracy-type software for a watch. I honestly do not need to know who is calling via my watch, although glancing at wrist, as opposed to fishing Galaxy Nexus from its home in my right front pocket would be handy. My Timex Ironman has worked just fine. But, devices like the Pebble could save me time and gas. I personally think this revolution can work, but it will be a small one. It is a niche product, but one that certainly has a home.

Yusuf Mehdi is one of my favorite Microsoft executives. When he played a pivotal role within MSN leadership (before the division became the Online Services Business), a perennial, 7-year money loser turned a profit and continued doing so — for eight consecutive quarters — until the autumn 2005 reorganization that led to Windows Live rebranding. OSB hasn’t made a dime since. Mehdi kicked around in different roles, talent greatly wasted, before moving to the Entertainment & Devices division in November 2011. I posted: “Yusuf Mehdi is the best thing to happen to Xbox in years“.

However, out of respect for decorum, I should say next best thing. In September 2012, Microsoft named former CBS executive Nancy Tellem as E&D president. She is Mehdi’s boss after all, and both spoke yesterday about Xbox’s future. She comes from an entertainment background and he is corporate vice president of Microsoft’s Interactive Entertainment Business, which should tip-off future direction.

“Yes, we started with video games, but we have been on a journey to make Xbox the center of every household’s entertainment”, Mehdi asserts — and that’s a bold statement. Expressed differently: Entertainment console. Sony, which affiliate is a movie studio, has had only marginal success transforming rival PlayStation 3 into an entertainment platform. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 is about a decade in market and largely seen as a gaming console with entertainment benefits. How does A get to Z, or X, if you prefer?

Mehdi claims the transition is underway. Cumulative Xbox 360 and Kinect sales are 76 million and 24 million, respectively. Microsoft sold 5.2 million consoles just during the holiday quarter. Last month, the company put Xbox Live subscribers at 40 million through end of the year. Fresh number today: 46 million. Xbox Live subscribers spent about 3 hours each day on the console during 2012.

Ponder this number: 18 billion hours of entertainment consumed on Xbox last year. Not that Mehdi defines what the big “E” means. Entertainment app usage grew 57 percent from 2011.

“We believe that Xbox is being used by more people in the household, during more hours in the day and for more forms of entertainment”, Mehdi claims. “People are using Xbox in the morning to work out with the Kinect Nike+ Fitness program, kids are watching cartoons, families are enjoying movies and of course people are playing blockbuster games like Halo 4”.

NU Ads, NUI Direction

If you listen to Tellem, Xbox Live is becoming an entertainment network, with interactive TV content coming in the future. Dare I suggest original programming? Tellem is responsible for Xbox Entertainment Studios, based in Los Angeles, which produced an interactive red carpet experience for the Grammys and another for the upcoming Academy Awards. Kinect Sesame Street TV is project, too.

Anyone using console and cloud service surely can see where Microsoft is headed. From games to Hulu, Netflix, U-verse and Xbox Music — or Kinect — the 360 strives far from its video games roots. The question: How much more can the Redmond, Wash.-based company take Xbox?

Much depends on the efforts of execs like Mehdi and Tellem to make the content deals, or to extend the broader entertainment platform separate from and alongside Xbox 360’s successor, which is expected for holiday 2013.

“When I worked in traditional TV, we would find ourselves saying things like ‘Wouldn’t it be cool if we could add an interactive aspect directly into the show and engage directly with the viewers?’” Tellem says. “With Xbox, that is possible today”.

Kinect’s role cannot be understated. This year, Microsoft plans to release 40 voice-controlled, customized television apps. Prime objective: Interactivity, using the new user interface, or NUI.

Earlier I assigned TV network ambitions to executives’ goals, in part because of advertising. Mehdi spent much of his remaining OSB years working on content and advertising, skills he brings to E&D. Once again, Kinect is pivotal. In autumn, Microsoft rolled out what it calls “NUads” in Canada, United Kingdom and United States, with Subway and Toyota among the advertisers. Consumers engage with the ads — speaking or waving, for example. Mehdi claims that 37 percent of consumers responded to interactive-polling, which beats passive commercials TV watchers can skip using DVRs. (Photo top shows a poll.)

To date, Microsoft can’t chock up great online services ad successes — nothing like Google. Can NUads be different or can Xbox truly become an entertainment console? Perhaps, if the Mehdi magic making MSN profitable comes to Xbox.

President Barack Obama awards Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry, during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Feb. 11, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy)

This afternoon, former Army Staff Sgt. Clinton Romesha received the Medal of Honor in a ceremony at the White House. He's the fourth living individual to do so.

On Oct. 3, 2009, Romesha was part of a unit attached to Combat Outpost Keating in the northeastern mountains of Afghanistan. In the early morning, while most of the unit was still asleep, they came under attack. Fifty-three Americans found themselves defending a position the Defense Department later "indefensible" from more than 300 Taliban fighters.

It soon became one of the most intense battles in the war in Afghanistan.

"With gunfire impacting all around him," President Obama said, "Clint raced to one of the barracks and grabbed a machine gun. He took aim at one of the enemy machine teams and took it out. A rocket-propelled grenade exploded, sending shrapnel into his hip, his arm, and his neck. But he kept fighting, disregarding his own wounds, and tending to an injured comrade instead."

Despite those heroics, the Taliban advanced, and the American defenders withdrew to a single building. They became convinced that their position would be entirely overrun. And then, the President told the audience in the East Room, "Clint Romesha decided to retake that camp."

"Clint gathered up his guys, and they began to fight their way back," he said. "Storming one building, then another. Pushing the enemy back. Having to actually shoot up — at the enemy in the mountains above. By now, most of the camp was on fire. Amid the flames and smoke, Clint stood in a doorway, calling in airstrikes that shook the earth all around them."

Even then, the battle wasn't over. Romesha and his team covered three of their comrades who were pinned down in a Humvee as they made their escape. Then he led a 100-meter charge, under fire, to recover the bodies of others who had died — rather than leave them to the enemy.

When told he would receive the Medal of Honor, Romesha downplayed his actions — and lauded the efforts of the rest of his team. And as President Obama acknowledged, there were indeed a lot of heroes in Afghanistan that day.

"If you seek a measure of that day, you need to look no further than the medals and ribbons that grace their chests," he said, "for their sustained heroism, 37 Army Commendation Medals; for their wounds, 27 Purple Hearts; for their valor, 18 Bronze Stars; for their gallantry, 9 Silver Stars."

Read the full remarks here. Or watch the video. 

If you’re geek, and even if not, Bill Gates’ Reddit chat is worth reading, if you missed the live event at 1:45 pm EST today. Microsoft’s cofounder held the “Ask Me Anything” in part to promote the annual letter for the foundation he runs with wife Melinda.

I’ve seen Gates give speeches in numerous venues, many not suited to him. The worst must be about a decade of Consumer Electronics Show keynotes. Gates and CES mixed like positively-charged particles. I never saw one presentation there that really zinged. These weren’t his people, no matter how much geekier the attendees after Comdex died.

But today, Gates found his audience and comfort zone, banging on keyboard unseen, firing off fast answers with charisma, wit and believability. Reddit seemed so right to start and proved to be in practice. On the same day that the Pope announced he would step down on February 28, another global shaker rocked the purest, most-modern incarnation of the computer bulletin boards of Gates’ youth.

Select highlights

I’ve grabbed some questions (from Reddit users) and Gates’ answers. The real charm (and annoyance) of Reddit are the comments. What I present below lacks the extended context and storytelling you can get by going directly to the AMA.

Q. “What is the greatest achievement of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in your opinion and how do you choose which causes to support?”

Gates answers: “So far our biggest impact has been getting vaccines for things like diarrhea and pneumonia out which has saved millions of lives. Polio will be a great achievement along with key partners when that gets done”.

Q. “Which world-wide health cause are we perfectly capable of easily solving and on the cusp of achieving but just need to put it over the top with a little more attention or resources to actually solve?”

Gates answers: “Polio is the first thing to get done since we are close. Within 6 years we will have the last case. After that we will go after malaria and measles. Malaria kills over 500,000 kids every year mostly in Africa and did not get enough attention until the last decade. We also need vaccines to prevent HIV and TB which are making progress”.

Q. “What is something that needs to be changed in the world, but money won’t help?”

Gates answers: “It would be nice if all governments were as rational as the Nordic governments – reaching compromise and providing services broadly. The Economist had a nice special section on this last week. Africa governments have often been weak but you can’t write a check to change that. Fortunately the average quality is going up. Mo Ibrahim tracks this in a great way. (http://www.moibrahimfoundation.org/IIAG/)”

Q. “What’s your worst fear for the future of the world? (edit: I terms of policy/politics/etc — e.g. SOPA/ITU)”

Gates answers: “Hopefully we won’t have terrorists using nuclear weapons or biological weapons. We should make sure that stays hard. I am disappointed more isn’t being done to reduce carbon emissions. Governments need to spend more on basic energy R&D to make sure we get cheap non-CO2 emitting sources as soon as possible. Overall I am pretty optimistic. Things are a lot better than they were 200 years ago”.

Q. “Windows 7 or Windows 8? Be honest, Bill”.

Gates answers: “Higher is better”.

Q. “What emerging technology today do you think will cause another big stir for the average consumer in the same way that the home computer did years ago?”

Gates answers: “Robots, pervasive screens, speech interaction will all change the way we look at ‘computers’. Once seeing, hearing, and reading (including handwriting) work very well you will interact in new ways”.

Q. “Since becoming wealthy, what’s the cheapest thing that gives you the most pleasure?”

Gates answers: “Kids. Cheap cheeseburgers. Open Course Ware courses”.

Q. “What type of computer are you using right now?”

Gates answers: “I just got my Surface Pro a week ago and it is very nice. I am using a Perceptive Pixel display right now – huge Windows 8 touch whiteboard. These will come down in price over time and be pervasive… (http://i.imgur.com/1JqrLVc.jpg)”

On Tuesday, February 12 at 9:00 p.m. ET, President Obama will deliver his annual State of the Union Address. Once again, we will be streaming an enhanced version of the speech that features graphics, data and stats that highlight the issues thePresident is discussing on WhiteHouse.gov/SOTU. We will also live stream that broadcast through the White House Live App on Facebook, YouTube and our Google+ page. 

Immediately following the speech, we’ll be streaming a virtual Q&A live from the White House. During this special “Open for Questions” event, a panel of senior advisors will be answering questions about the President's address submitted by citizens via Twitter (using the hashtag's #WHChat & #SOTU), Google+ and Facebook, as well as from the live in-person audience of White House Social participants.  

In the days following the speech, Administration officials will continue to take questions on key issue areas addressed in the President's speech submitted by the public on social media during an "Open for Questions" marathon.  

You can submit questions during the event on Twitter (#WHChat & #SOTU), Facebook and Google+ or ahead of time with participating sites. Each “Open for Questions” event will be streamed live on WhiteHouse.gov/SOTU.  Check out the full line up below.

"Open for Questions" Marathon

Tuesday, February 12th: 

​10:00 p.m. ET: Post-SOTU "Open for Questions"

• Brian Deese, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council
• Josh Earnest, Principal Deputy Press Secretary (@JEarnest44)
• Sarah Bianchi, Director of Economic and Domestic Policy for the Vice President
• Felicia Escobar, Senior Policy Director for Immigration
• Roberto Rodriguez, Special Assistant to the President for Education Policy
• Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Policy

Wednesday, February 13th:

• 2:30 p.m. ET: Jobs and the economy with Jason Furman, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, moderated by Yahoo! Finance
• 3:15 p.m. ET: Education with Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education moderated by Babble
• 4:00 p.m. ET: Energy and the environment with Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, moderated by Popular Science. 

Thursday, February 14th:

• 4:30 p.m. ET: "Fireside Hangout" with President Obama

Friday, February 15th:

• 3:00 p.m. ET: Reducing gun violence with Bruce Reed, Chief of Staff to Vice President Biden, moderated by iVillage. 
• 4:00 p.m. ET: Immigration reform with Cecilia Munoz, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) recently released a study by Daniel Ahn and Michael Levi showing how a new tax on oil—which would ultimately raise pump prices by $1.20/gallon—might benefit Americans. The two main reasons were: (a) right now oil is too expensive, so taxing it would help, and (b) The revenue from a new oil tax would allow the government to spend more money, thus making the economy stronger. If the reader has not yet fallen out of his or her chair, in the rest of this blog post I’ll show that I’m not making this up.

CFR: We Need to Tax Oil Because It’s Overpriced

To establish the first claim, I can just quote from the introduction of the article itself, which says: “Economists have long argued that taxing oil consumption would be the most efficient way to address U.S. vulnerability to overpriced and unreliable oil supplies.”

It’s hard to even say much in response to this type of claim. If the problem with oil is that it’s “overpriced,” how in the world is it “efficient” to deal with that by slapping a tax on it?

As far as the “unreliability” of oil from overseas, again, it is unclear how Americans are helped by making oil more expensive. After all, if OPEC decided to cut off oil exports, the way that would manifest itself to American consumers would be a sharp rise in the price of gasoline at the pump. So to avoid this awful possibility, the CFR study proposes to…tax oil and raise prices at the pump.

A much more sensible and “efficient” solution to the problem of potential disruptions in oil imports from foreign regimes, is not to make oil artificially more expensive with a US-based taxed, but to remove US government obstacles to the development of North American supplies.

CFR: An Oil Tax Would Do the Most Good If It Were Used to Boost Government Spending

As if the introductory sentence weren’t bad enough, the meat of the article looks at various scenarios for the use of a tax on oil equal to 1.5% of GDP. Here are the three different ways that new revenue could be used, as analyzed in the study:

So in the baseline reference case, the study assumes that corporate taxes will rise by 0.5% of GDP, individual income taxes will do the same, while the government will cut its spending by 3% of GDP, for a total deficit reduction of 4% of GDP. Against this baseline case, the CFR study assumes there will be a new tax on oil, of 1.5% of GDP, which will (eventually) lead to $50/barrel tax, working out to $1.20/gallon price hikes at the pump if the tax were simply passed on.

How to use the new oil tax revenue? The CFR study looks at Variation 1, which devotes all of the new revenue to restoring half of the planned cuts in government spending. In other words, relative to the baseline case, Variation has the government impose a net tax increase on oil, so that the government can spend more.

In Variations 2 and 3, the new oil tax revenue is used to partially offset other planned tax hikes (i.e. meaning a tax cut, relative to the baseline), absorbing some of the oil revenue and leaving less for government spending.

The following figures show how the study models the impact of these variations on the economy:

The above figures are quite instructive to see whether we should trust whatever model the CFR study used to generate their conclusions. Notice that Variation 1 leads (in the left graph) to a consistently growing economy, relative to the baseline case, and (on the right graph) to a consistently declining unemployment rate.

Step back and think about what that means. The CFR study is saying that if the government slapped a $50/barrel tax on oil, which works out to $1.20 per gallon of gasoline, and if it then used all of the revenue to increase government spending, then this would help the economy over an 8-year-period.

One might ask, almost in jest, “Well if a new oil tax of 1.5% of GDP is a good idea, why not make it bigger?”

Fortunately, the CFR study does just that. In the next section, they “demonstrate” that doubling the oil tax to 3% of GDP—i.e. $100/barrel of crude, or $2.40/gallon—and using all of the revenue to fuel government spending, would make the economy grow even faster, and create more jobs, than the Variation 1 from above.

Again, there’s not too much to say in response to this analysis, except that it is self-evidently absurd. Taxing energy to fuel increases in government spending is a terrible idea, if one wants to boost economic output and lower the unemployment rate. To achieve those goals, opening up federal lands to development would be much more sensible.

Conclusion

The irony is that there is nothing special about oil in the CFR study’s analysis. They don’t make an argument about climate change or other negative externalities, even though that was the context of the discussion. The actual mechanics of the underlying economic model are not spelled out, but it appears that the “results” are simply due to the alleged benefits of maintaining government spending. It is not clear why the same “results” couldn’t be generated by a 1.5% of GDP tax on coal, milk, or Slim Jims. It seems the crucial thing in the CFR study is that government spending be maintained, in order to keep the economy humming.

For people who don’t think government spending is the source of economic strength, a better policy would be to unleash entrepreneurs to develop domestic energy resources. This would reduce energy prices and make the supplies more reliable, thus mitigating the alleged problem with oil consumption. In addition, it would allow for more revenue for the federal (and other) governments, allowing them to reduce the deficit without raising other taxes.

Vice President Joe Biden holds a roundtable with law enforcement officials and members of congress on gun safety, at Girard College in Philadelphia, PA, Feb., 11, 2013.

(Official White House Photo by David Lienemann)

Today, Vice President Biden traveled to Philadelphia to meet with law enforcement officials and hold a roundtable discussion to talk about the Administration’s plan to reduce gun violence.

In addition to Vice President Biden, the roundtable included Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, Senator Robert Casey, Congressman Robert Brady, Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz, Congressman Chaka Fattah, New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, and police chiefs and prosecutors from other cities and communities.

In the meeting, the participants discussed the challenges for law enforcement as they work to reduce gun crime. The Vice President pledged to continue the Administration’s fight to put 15,000 police officers on the street – and also argued that there is a consensus growing behind sensible gun safety legislation. He called for getting assault weapons and high capacity magazines off the streets, requiring background checks for all gun purchases, and a federal gun trafficking statute, among other proposals.

read more

An edited interview with Harvard Business School professor and leadership historian Nancy F. Koehn.

Pope Benedict XVI just resigned, citing age and poor health. Aside from the whole “no pope has resigned in the past 600 years” thing, why is this important in the grand scheme of how we understand work and leadership? …

Lesson number one is about the importance of endurance and physical stamina, and the ability to keep one’s self and one’s energy at a high, healthy level on a very consistent basis. It’s amazing how hard that is — and it isn’t specific to Pope Benedict XVI. This is about everyone else as well, and we don’t talk about it very much. Except when the president of the United States’ annual physical comes out, we don’t talk about how physically, mentally, and emotionally strong a leader has to be to sit at these tables that have so much on them.

Lesson number two is more about how extraordinarily difficult effective leadership is. The pope stepping down for health reasons is something we all pay attention to because he’s the pope and he’s a leader for well over a billion people. His job is hard. It’s not hard just because there’s abuse and scandal within the organization.

At one level this resignation feels really distant, and at other, when you really peel it down, it’s not. It’s about how much is on leaders’ plates and how much that’s not going to change. Quite the opposite: he’s stepping down because it’s not like it’s going to get better tomorrow.

So what’s the answer for leaders who are older, who are sick, who are tired? Is it to step down when you feel like you can no longer do it anymore? Or is there an increased pressure to keep working as long as you can?

I don’t think this is primarily about age. I think it’s really about energy and enthusiasm and a kind of physical, moral, intellectual, and emotional verve — an appetite. It’s something that every leader is responsible for maintaining and feeding.

If it’s reading Keats’ poetry or dancing the tango every other Tuesday night or listening to a great symphony or if it’s being a D.J. once a week — if that is what keeps a pope or a CEO or a president or a missionary fresh and fed and fueled, then by god that is on their plate and part of their responsibility as a leader.

That doesn’t just mean getting on the treadmill for an hour every morning. It means rehabbing and refreshing your heart, your sense of humor, and your recovery. It’s not recovery every eight months; it’s not two weeks in Nantucket. …

Pope Benedict XVI is someone who has probably looked himself in the mirror and looked at his predecessors — no one else has done this — and said, “For me, I need to do this. Because I’m taking an honest look at my physical and mental and spiritual balance sheet, and I don’t have enough assets right now.”

In some ways, it’s an act of great responsibility. Of really responding to his spiritual duty.

Backing up a bit, why don’t we talk about how hard it is to be a good leader?

Because we want to believe, on some very romantic level, that leaders are born. That they’re superhuman. That they’re cut from special cloth, that they’ve descended from Mount Olympus to help all of us. We want to believe that because it gets us excited about signing up to work with them. It kindles our hope that people with power have a sense of great responsibility and have answers that we don’t see.

There are good things about this inclination, this cognitive dissonance. But it’s not real.

There’s something equally valuable, equally inspirational about taking that page of the textbook out — “leaders are born and they’re special” — and instead reading the page that says “leaders are made as much as they’re born, maybe more so, and that they’re made in unexpected ways. And that they recognize how human they really are.” That is what allows us to relate to them, follow them, and pick up their gauntlet. And it also shows us what people are capable of in terms of leading from the better angels of their nature. …

There are very few “positions for life” left — the pope, tenured professors, and U.S. Supreme Court justices seem to be the holdouts. Does his decision further change the “have one job until you retire or die” narrative?

It does change it. If you think about something like tenure, for example, there are a lot of forces pressing against the idea of lifelong job security. At many institutions, they’re chipping away at the original rationale behind tenure — which is giving people who write and teach the freedom to say what they need to say.

There are these new pressures on institutions and the people who lead them that start to suggest new paradigms and structures being built in the wake of things like the destruction of lifelong jobs. I suspect we’ll see some more of this around the Supreme Court over the next 10 years, or at least debate over it.

And there’s going to be debate now about the pope and how he’s chosen. And we have to ask ourselves: Can we afford, in the broad sense, to give people a position for life when it appears that there is so much intensifying turbulence and change everywhere? We’re talking about turbulence as the new normal and, really, whether any job or position can be granted for life within all that.

When art and fandom meet, it’s often a beautiful thing to behold; when they meet under the same roof to raise money for sick children, it’s a thousand times sweeter.

While artists have been paying tribute to their favorite films, books, and television shows for years, perhaps no one thing has gotten more love than the “Star Wars” series. Whether it’s to show love for the original trilogy, the newer films, or a combination of both, fans are loyal to a fault and will often go to extreme lengths to create detailed artwork and costumes to celebrate them. That makes them perfect candidates to raise money for a good cause, and one group is hoping to make their project for 2013 a success.

Members of the MidSouth Garrison of the 501st Legion have had so much interest in their past fundraising projects–such as the TK Helmet Project and the As You Wish Helmet Project, which raised money for the Make A Wish Foundation–that they decided to try it again this year, but with a twist. Instead of helmets, they’ve attracted artists from all over the country to create one-of-a-kind Vans shoes to be auctioned off. Every bit of the money raised will go to the University of Kentucky Children’s Hospital.

Tyler Phillips of the 501st spoke to WebProNews about the idea, noting that once news of an artist call for the fundraiser got around, the group got responses to The Shoe Project from all over the world. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, they weren’t able to accommodate everyone.

“My wife and I researched custom shoes online, and it appeared as though Vans were the most popular because of the large open area they featured on the shoe. Once we pitched the idea to Lucasfilm and got their approval they helped us pitch the idea to Vans and get them involved,” he said.

Vans graciously donated ten pairs of their shoes for the fundraiser, which will be displayed at the Lexington Comic and Toy Convention in Kentucky on March 16th and 17th. After that, they’ll be posted on eBay for auction, with 100% of the proceeds going to the UK Children’s Hospital. Phillips says that, depending on the interest this year, they’d love to do the project again in 2014.

For now, the group is waiting on approval from Lucasfilm before they can officially announce the artists, but we’ll keep you updated on the project with a sneak peek at the shoes as soon as they’re ready. For more information, check out the project’s Facebook page. Also not to be missed: The Western Kentucky Ghostbusters. These guys (and lovely ladies) are full of heart and devote countless hours to fundraising for the UK Children’s Hospital, as well.

TK Helmet Project: “Lost”
Artist: Amy Vatanakul

TK Helmet Project: Viking Helmet
Artist: Tory, of “Mythbusters”

TK Helmet Project: “Pharaoh”
Artist: William O’Neill

Lead image: Jilliann Silva

Do you use Microsoft Outlook 2010, 2007 or 2003 to store your contacts and calendar on your computer and want to wirelessly synchronize these items with your BlackBerry Z10, but your email provider doesn’t support these features? If so, today I’d like to show you how to you can sync these items wirelessly between your BlackBerry Z10 and Outlook using Outlook.com and the Microsoft Outlook Connector.

We’ll use your existing Microsoft account or connect Outlook with your BlackBerry Z10 using the new Outlook.com service from Microsoft. The reason for doing this is simple as well; these accounts support wireless synchronization with your BlackBerry Z10. Since Outlook makes it easy to manage multiple accounts, you can enjoy the benefits of wireless synchronization with your email provider as well as wireless synchronization of your contacts and calendar.

Read more at the Inside BlackBerry Help Blog »

Meet Adeline.

Adeline is already pretty cool. But she’s going to be really cool when she grows up. Here, watch this video and you’ll see why.

Here’s Adeline hearing Bad Brains for the first time. You can’t teach this stuff. As one YouTube user put it, “slamdancing is in our genetic code.”

“Turn it up a little bit!”

D’aaawwwww…I mean, MOSH!