Obama, SNAP and conservative Americans

Every time someone tells me the stock market is about to take a tumble, I think I should take some money off the table.  I reallocate my portfolio from time to time. But, I worry that the bubble may burst at any moment (especially since we have seen it happen twice since the turn of the Century).

I have the luxury of such worries.  Since 2009, the major stock market indices have more than doubled.  Life is good. 

What else has experienced as nearly a dramatic increase?  Food stamps!  The government’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has expanded from $33.5 Billion in fiscal year 2009 to$47.6 Billion in 2013 – an increase of nearly 60%.

Meanwhile the poor have become a main topic of our national political debate.

The President has framed this year’s Congressional campaign by expressing two clear ideas.  One is correct; the other is not.

First, the proposed 40% increase to the minimum wage will not lift anyone out of poverty.  Many of the poor are permanently unemployed and earn nothing.  And, many minimum wage workers are second income earners in two income households.  In other words, they’re not poor.  Even for a 40-hour per week minimum wage worker, an increase from $7.25 to $10.10 would raise an annual salary from about $15K to $21K – a big increase, to be sure, but hardly enough to lift one out of poverty. 

Speaking of his political opponents, the President has also said, “Their philosophy is simple: You’re on your own… [I]f you’re out of work, can’t find a job. Tough luck, you’re on your own. You don’t have health care: That’s your problem. You’re on your own. If you’re born into poverty, lift yourself up with your own bootstraps, even if you don’t have boots. You’re on your own.”

And, on this score, he is correct.

Where is the conservative solution?  If you are a Christian (as many conservatives are), you “must be open-handed to your brothers”.  Is that ethic reflected in the political rhetoric we hear from conservatives in Washington?

It’s easy for conservatives to point to the flaws in the current system of entitlements for the poor.  It needs to be overhauled.

If your household income is $15K today, you are eligible to receive federal assistance with a value of about $25K through a combination of housing, Medicaid, SNAP and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).

If you increase your income, you get less help from the government.  Is it any wonder that conservatives believe that liberal programs have created a “culture of dependency”?

Yet, I believe there is a conservative constituency that will support effective programs to help the poor.   That constituency will respond to solutions that appeal to their charitable instinct and are both community-based and fiscally sound.

Churchgoing Christians have demonstrated a consistent track record of charitable giving.  On average, they give more than 4 times as much to charity as non-denominational citizens. 

Here in Rochester, NY, charities that support the poor are abundant:  Catholic Charities, Foodlink and the University of Rochester Medical Center provide moral, material and medical support to the community.   Rochester Cares matches volunteers with opportunities to help.  Local churches and organizations like Voices Against Poverty live up to Christian ideals providing spiritual and financial support. 

Education reform is the focus of non-profits like e3 Rochester, the Coalition for Common Sense in Education and the Rochester Education Foundation.

But, it’s important to understand that voluntary charitable contributions will not be sufficient to provide what’s needed to support the poor.  Americans give approximately $40 Billion to charities each year.  If you spread that across the 48 Million SNAP recipients, it amounts to about $800 perperson.  Governments – local, state and federal – must participate to support any transformational effort.

It’s also important to understand that the federal government alone cannot do it.  That is not because of a lack of funds.  It is because central planning doesn’t work as has been demonstrated by the last 50 years of Great Society programs.

Helping the poor doesn’t require increasing already massive government programs. It requires thinking carefully about who is in need and how their need can best be met. In some cases, the right solution will involve the government. In others—such as a failing family culture, children caught in ineffective schools, or people permanently dependent on government —the right answer is for the government to get out of the way.

The only question is…

WHO WILL LEAD?

Why we moved from sunny Florida to Rochester, NY

Downtown Rochester, NY

A friend termed it “wonderfully counterintuitive” when we told him we were moving from Florida to NY’s third largest city to semi-retire.  Most people weren’t that polite.  A more typical response was a Catch-22 inspired question, “are you crazy?”

The truth is that 18 years in Florida left us burned out by the hot, sticky weather, and with a sense that we never quite fit in.

We’ve always had a connection to Rochester.  My wife and I met here when we worked at Citibank and we’ve traveled here for summer vacations many times over the years, finally investing in a condo on Canandaigua Lake a few years ago.  Still Rochester is not a logical choice for most and has its own array of good, bad and ugly.

The Good

Rochester is a college town with a highly educated populace and the entertainments that educated north easterners enjoy — music, theatre, museums, outdoor sports and dining.  

Kodak founder George Eastman wasn’t the city’s founder but he might as well have been.  He laid the groundwork for technical manufacturing that continues to be a Rochester strength. He established the Eastman School of Music, among the best music schools in the country. His name adorns buildings at both of the major universities here and his mansion – now a museum – anchors its swankiest street, East Avenue. 

The festival season kicked off last week with the Lilac Festival.  Next month, the highlight will be the Rochester International Jazz Festival.  Last year’s attendance approached 200K.  You don’t have to enjoy jazz to appreciate the festival or to appreciate its significance.  In a small city, an event like RIJF wouldn’t exist were it not for a ready audience of people who crave non-mainstream entertainment.

The job engine of Rochester was The Big 3 (Kodak, Xerox and B&L).  In the wake of their now diminished presence, a very entrepreneurial culture has sprung up.

But, the emotional connection springs from Rochester’s existence at the juncture of Brooklyn wise-ass and Midwest nice.  Sarcasm is not mortal combat here; it’s just fun.

The Bad

If you know the difference between latitude and longitude, you know the winters are bad here.  This one just ended was among the worst with record setting, sub-zero temperatures.  But, we have our consolations, too.  I have considered proposing a new city motto, “Rochester – No hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, drought, wildfires, mud slides or dustbowl but Icy”.  Whaddaya think?

More than the weather, taxes are at the top of the ‘Bad’ list.  New York has the highest tax burden of any state in the nation.  We also have the highest debt per capita; so, there’s little hope of relief in the foreseeable future. 

The Ugly

When I worked here in the last century, downtown Rochester was an energetic place.  Citibank’s offices were located at State and Main along the Genesee River.  At lunchtime, it bustled with be-suited bankers, lawyers and other professionals.  There was a robust choice of upscale restaurants.  It was a cool place to hang out.

That’s no longer the case. The city feels hollow. 

A local study now rates Rochester as the fifth poorest city among the nation’s 75 largest. We have the state’s second highest crime rate (Buffalo is slightly higher), more than 3 times that of New York City.

Rochester is not alone in this quagmire of poor neighborhoods, weak families, lousy schools and lack of opportunity.  It’s a national problem. It’s not only a shame; it’s shameful for a nation of so much wealth.

The programs implemented and promoted by liberals for the last 50 years have not worked. But, it’s worse that conservatives seem to be in denial.  To say that everyone should succeed on their own merits ignores the lack of equal opportunity among our urban poor. 

Rochester’s city school system has been ranked worst in the state and, to make matters worse, the state’s best (in Pittsford) is only a few miles away.

 

The Erie Canal in Fairport, NY

Local efforts among the non-profit community have shown some progress. National organizations like the Urban League are active here.  And, there is also an active charter school movement in the city.  By September, the city will have 14 of them.

But, none of these efforts have reached the critical mass necessary to lift the community out of poverty.

Yes, we love it here.  But, we are happily ensconced in the charming, little Village of Fairport along the Erie Canal.  For Rochester to be a great city again, we must find a way to address our greatest challenge:  our inner city, urban poor.

WHO WILL LEAD?

A Sibling Rival, Now Gone

I learned that my brother had passed away by text message at 2 AM.  I was expecting it so checked my iPhone when I woke up 51 minutes later.  That may seem an odd way to learn about the death of someone so close.  However, the vigil had been long and he was 3000 miles away.  I was among the 12 or 20 situated remotely who learned about it en masse.

A friend – a first-born child like me – once described the source of sibling rivalry this way:

“When you’re born, you get all your parents’ attention.  They constantly praise you, show their love and tell you how unique and special you are.  Then, one day, another kid comes along and your parents treat him the same way…”

What’s up with that?

Though sibling rivalry begins as a battle for the attention for one’s parents, it’s different from other battles in that its protagonists share a foxhole.  So, my brother, Steven, and I shared experiences with one another that we shared with no one else.  Without knowing it or intending it, we formed a “Bond of Brothers” (pun intended).

We were cowboys together. 

I am the scowling presence on the left.  My brother, Steven, always had a better outlook on life than I.  He could always smell the roses…..

I remember when this picture was taken perhaps because in the aforementioned battle for attention, Steven won this skirmish.

We had our first dog together. 

That’s Steven with his arms around the neck of our Collie, Duchess.

A female character in a TV show I was watching once said, “There is something wrong with a man who can’t love a dog”.  It can also be said that there is something right with a man who can.  And, Steven loved many of them during his life. 

We were class presidents together.  I’m not sure how this happened or why.  But, it did.  The kids at school joked that we were the Kennedy’s of Cold Spring Harbor. 

Along the way, Steven decided to abandon the field of battle.  He became more true to himself.  He created some distance from his family.  He changed his name (or his presentation of it).  Steven became Stephen and his middle name, Paul, became Paolo.  It was minor act of rebellion. 

We were a family of engineers.  My father was a draftsman in one of his many jobs after the war.  In his construction business, he was called upon to interpret many a blueprint.  My uncle was an aerospace engineer who worked on the project that put the first man on the moon.  I got my engineering degree at the Naval Academy.  My brother, Chris, got his at MIT. 

Steven? 

Steven got a degree in music.  He was still smelling the roses. 

He worked as a musician when he could in Manhattan for many years until he followed a young beauty to New Mexico.  They married outdoors on a wonderful summer day.  We all sat in a circle and spoke, in turn, about how we felt that day.

The matchbooks at each table setting said,

Steve & Linda

Burnin’ Love

A hippie wedding with a touch of Elvis.  Perfect!

Along the way, he accumulated a wonderful extension of his family.  They were centered on their own spiritual well-being and each other’s.  They formed a support network that accompanied him on his life’s journey.  Near the end, they brought comfort food, fresh fruit and wine to share.  They held hands, told stories and spread the love.  And, they embraced those of us who parachuted in from our more traditional world on the east coast. 

Steven had a debilitating disease for the last dozen years or so of his life.  At times, he was in excruciating pain.  Yet, he never complained and greeted everyone with only love in his heart and a smile on his face.

We almost lost him on Christmas Day but he fought back.  Most remarkable was how he spent his time during his last days.  He Skyped with all of his friends and family one-by-one – New York, New Mexico, Virginia, Florida, California – so he could tell each how much he appreciated knowing them and what they brought to his life.

It was remarkable how many lives he touched and how many were grateful to have known him. 

If you believe in birth-order theory, you know that the second child represents the interests of the mother.  Like my mother in her last days, Steven had a smile for everyone and greeted everyone with love – until he could no longer do so.

At its core, leadership is about the example you set for those around you.

The example set by my brother can be summarized in one word…

… Grace.

Stephen Paolo Calia died on April 16, 2014.  He was 62.

Progress or Greed? Which is it?

When people ask about your kids, what do you tell them?  More than likely, you tell them about the teams they play on, the activities they’re involved in, their progress in school and their accomplishments, right?  My kids are older so I talk about the success they have found in their careers.

One of my twins is a successful banker. His brother has worked for a growing software company for the last decade or so.  I am very proud of them.  They are both moral, do-the-right-thing people.

Despite their focus on succeeding at business, I don’t think of them as greedy.  I think of them as successful. 

The media focuses our attention on the 1%, the billionaires whose wealth is beyond the dreams of most people.  I think it’s important to get past the headlines. Most of the wealthy got where they are by creating value through a product or service they invented and/or sold or by risking their personal capital in an enterprise with potential.    

The big thinkers at Amazon and Google transformed the way we buy things and became billionaires in the process.  Warren Buffet studied investment and became one of the world’s richest men.  The innovations of Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and J. Craig Venter have all improved our lives and made them wealthy. 

If you read the business news you might conclude there is money to be made through innovation in energy production, 3D printing and biotechnology.  Some will get very wealthy.  That’s how our economy works.  Someone develops a product or service that consumers value and wealth is created. 

If one of your children made millions in stock options by working for one of these companies, would you think they were greedy?  Or, would you be proud of their success?

And, yet there is an undercurrent of intellectual dialog that crops up everywhere from the Sunday morning talk shows to LinkedIn discussions that describes the very wealthy as greedy.

Princeton University is hosting an art exhibit titled “Exhibition to spotlight the environment, corporate greed and consumerism”.  Bloomsbury USA has published a children’s book titled “Pandora Gets Greedy” about the exploits of a young girl who searches for greed in the time of the Roman Empire. 

 

Since our founding, Americans have struggled to achieve a balance between freedom to pursue our own ends and a virtuous society.  Jonathan Edwards, writing in The Freedom of the Will (1754), insisted that people are free because they pursue what’s in their own best interest.  But, he pointed out that human will could be corrupted by pursuing the apparent good for oneself at the expense of the apparent good in God.

 

More recently, Robert Kennedy warned against a singular focus on GNP [Gross National Product].  Speaking a few months before his assassination, he pointed out that GNP “does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.  It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile….”

 

Can we teach that lesson to our children without undermining their professional and financial success? 

 

The political speech that emanates from the dogma of the left and right will not help us understand how best to create a just society.  The liberal egalitarian view seeks to achieve equality by redistributing wealth.  The conservative libertarian view says we must respect freedom of choice.  If my choices lead to economic success and yours lead to starvation, so be it. 

 

In the end, the extreme libertarian view flies in the face of our Christian or humanist instincts.  However, the extreme opposite view – that wealth should be appropriated for the good of those less fortunate – undermines our economic prosperity and the value of hard work. 

 

Wealth is not, in and of itself, evil.  To describe those who attain it as greedy ignores the positive impact of our prosperity.  To be sure, if you are reading this post on your iPad while sitting in Starbucks, you are enjoying the fruits of a society built on capitalism. If you still have your teeth after age 60, have two cars in the garage and have time to play with your children, it is because of the value created by innovation and enterprise since the founding of our nation.

 

So, is it progress or is it greed?

WHO WILL LEAD?

 

WHO WILL LEAD?