Moffat County, Colorado: Story of Two Families (Part II-Destiny Unfolds)

11 Thursday Feb 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Generational, History, Passionate People, Travel

Tags

Barrick, Colorado, Craig, Depue, Dust Bowl, emigrant, Family, family history, Frances Barrick, genealogy, Great Depression, John Wesley Depue, Kiser, Lucy Elizabeth Spicer, Mervin E. Barrick, Moffat, Moffat County, Vernon Kiser

Life on the Emigrant Car

The birth of Moffat County occurred in 1911, and it came with a wave of settlers who had been encouraged to claim homesteads in the county. Most travelled by train with their possessions in an emigrant car. The settlers would then hire wagons to deliver the household goods from the train station to the homestead. Both the Barrick and the Kiser families used emigrant cars to haul their possessions to northwestern Colorado.

Mervin Edward Barrick

1913-Barrick Family Emigration
The Barrick family came to Moffat County in April of 1913. 41 year-old Mervin E. Barrick filed for a homestead ten miles southwest of Craig. He, his wife, Lucy Elizabeth Spicer, and three boys, Buford (18), George Dean (12), and Floyd (8) rode the train from Boulder to the end of the line at Steamboat Springs. By that Fall, the track would extend to Craig, but now the family had to take the stage to Craig.

The family found life an adventure in the new country. In Craig they stayed in the Webb Hotel until the wagons with their belongings arrived. Once the wagons had caught up with them they were taken to their new homestead. The family written history gives a bleak description of arriving at their new home:

Lucy Elizabeth Spicer

“We arrived about the middle of the afternoon and unloaded in the sage brush (sic) and grubbed out a place to pitch a tent and a place to cook and sleep until we could build a tent house. We carried our water for a mile for a couple of weeks until we could dig out a spring closer to home.”

The family worked on the track extension near Hayden that summer, with Mervin and Buford working on the grade while Lucy and the two boys prepared and fed a work gang of up to 20 men. The next few years were a mix of working at the Mt. Harris coal mine and continuing to work on the homestead.

1918-Kiser Family Emigration

Earl Leroy Kiser holding his daughter Velma June with his mother Arminda Nixon and his grandmother Anna McFadden

Earl Kiser was 24, when he brought his wife, Mabel Warner and two year-old daughter, Velma June to Craig on April 24, 1918. They traveled by car for a week to get to Craig from Selden, Kansas.

Later Velma June, the eldest daughter recounted the events:

“April 17, Dad, Mother, June, Cecil, and Joe Sulzman started from Selden to Craig in an open Ford. We went to Aunt Orpha’s for dinner, took pictures and started on. We stayed with Uncle Dan Warner that night. We got to Uncle Ted Warner’s for late dinner Thursday and went to Uncle Art Warner’s that night. We left Art’s in a storm which lasted all day….”

The family travelled through northeast Colorado to Ingleside, located northwest of Fort Collins. From there they headed north, probably on a road that was a predecessor of U.S. Highway 287. The narrative continues:

“…That night we stayed at Ingleside, Colorado. We did our own cooking, and an Indian made our coffee. Monday night we stayed at Hanna, Wyoming; Tuesday night, at Dad, Wyoming, and Wednesday night in Craig at the Armstrong Hotel.”

Their homestead was northwest of Craig, but shortly after arriving they decided to take land at High Mesa. The next year Vernon Kiser was born at High Mesa making him the first Kiser child to be born in the County.

The family written narrative lists the highlights of 1919:

“1919. We bought Bess and Bell, a gray team, from Mr. Ledford in the spring. Vernon Warner Kiser was born October 17, with Dr. Davenport in attendance and Mrs. Strailey as nurse. Nina Kinley was the first teacher at High Mesa. Raymond Warren Comstock died of diabeted (sic) September 18. We spent Christmas at home. June got a doll and Vernon a rattle (from) grandpa and Grandma Lizzie Kiser.”

1920’s-Barrick and Kiser Families Grow

George Dean and Leona Barrick

In July of 1920, now 19 year-old George Dean Barrick married 16 year-old Leona Elizabeth Depue in Craig, Colorado. The Depue family had moved to the Moffat County from Weld County, north of Denver, sometime around or just before 1917. Leona was the youngest daughter of seven Depue children, two of which had died before she was born. Leona’s father, John Wesley Depue, died in Craig in 1917, at the age of 55.

George Dean and Leona Barrick had their first child in 1921, George Dean, Jr. In 1924, Frances Elizabeth was born, followed by three more daughters, Virginia Dale (1928), Lucy Mildred (1934), and Gladys Faye (1939). All the children were born in Craig.

Mabel Alta Kiser

Earl and Mabel Kiser would have two more sons, Loren Dale (1922) and Hubert Leroy (1925). They were both born in Craig. Vernon attended the High Mesa School until 1933, when he graduated from grade school. The next Fall he began attending High School in Craig; however, transportation to and from school was enough of an issue to warrant mentioning in the family history:

“Vernon drove our Ford part of the time and part time went with Byrl. Vernon played football, was right guard, No. 27.”

1936 Craig High School football team

193o’s – End of Homesteading
By the 1930’s Moffat County was changing. In the 1920’s the cattlemen had literally fought battles against sheepherders and settlers under the belief that the land they had used for grazing belonged to them. At one point the Colorado State Militia had to be called in to restore the peace between the cattlemen and sheepherders. By 1920, they had lost the battle over ownership of the land and the cattle ranching industry faded dramatically.

Homesteading peaked and was fading in the 1920’s. By 1934, the government had shut down programs encouraging settlers to come the area. Many of those who had homesteaded gave up their land and either left or moved into Craig. In 1920, 25% of county citizens lived in Craig. By 1930, that percentage had increased to almost 30%, and by 1940, almost 42% of Moffat County’s population lived in Craig.

Percent of Moffat County population living in Craig

This trend of living in town might not have surprised early explorers who expressed doubts that people could live off the land in the high desert of northwestern Colorado. It is also possible the Great Depression and Dust Bowl played a role in moving into town where work of jobs and opportunities were more likely.

NEXT: Part III – Another Radiator Springs

BACK: Part I – Pre-Homesteading

Moffat County, Colorado: Story of Two Families (Part I Pre-Homesteading)

10 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Generational, History, Lessons of Life, Relationships

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Barrick, cattle ranching, Colorado, Craig, Family, genealogy, History, Kiser, mining, Moffat, Moffat County, northwestern Colorado, population, railroads, Steamboat Springs

On or about November 20, 2015, Michael Warner Kiser died in his home of a heart attack. He was 65. His death marked the end of a century of Kiser/Barrick family history in Moffat County. This is the story of those families.

Early Northwestern Colorado
To understand northwestern Colorado it is important to know the context of the political and cultural history that shaped its destiny. Until 1847, northwestern Colorado was part of northeastern Mexico. In that year the Mexican Government signed the Treaty of Hidalgo Guadalupe at gunpoint after losing the Mexican American War. Colorado did not become a State until 1876 and Moffat County did not exist until 1911.

In 1847, Mexico was forced to relinquish all of northern Mexico to the United States, including what would become northwestern Colorado.

While Native Americans, primarily the Ute Indians thrived in northwestern Colorado, the opinions of early European explorers in the late 1700’s and 1800’s about the value of the area were not kind. In 1844, John C. Fremont said the country was nearly worthless. In 1869, John Wesley Powell came to the same conclusion, holding out that with massive irrigation the area might produce crops, but there wasn’t enough water.

In the 1860’s gold had been discovered in the mountain creeks west of Denver and men fanned out into the Rockies. In 1865, a group of men found small quantities of gold around an extinct volcano in northwestern Colorado. The primary discoverer, Joseph Hahn was apparently betrayed by one of his partners who left him and another man in the field while he allegedly was off to get supplies. He never returned and Hahn died in an attempt to reach civilization in April of 1867. The extinct volcano was named Hahn’s Peak in honor of him.

Hahn's Peak and the town after the Gold Rush

Hahn’s Peak and the town 40 years after the gold rush

Mining continued to expand in the late 1860’s in northwestern Colorado, but the lack of significant ore deposits and lack of access to and from the area brought an end to the fickle growth created by prospectors.

Farther west in the high desert of northwestern Colorado, Native Americans, primarily the Utes, maintained their traditional nomadic lifestyle; however, some western Europeans sought to retrain the indigenous people and make them adopt the western culture. The effort created conflict between the Native Americans and the caucasian invaders. In 1879, a minor incident of shoving an agent, Nathan Meeker, led to him requesting troops be sent to the area. Ultimately, both sides lost control of the situation and a U.S. Army detachment was attacked resulting in 50 men wounded or killed. An outcry for ‘justice’ led to the 1881 relocation of all Ute Indians from their Colorado lands into Utah. This opened the door for Congress to declare the vacated lands open to homesteading in 1882.

As the Utes were moved out, the cattle ranchers moved in. This created a pressing need for better transportation to the area to ship cattle to Denver; however, a centralized gathering point had to be established to move cattle in and out of the area and many of the existing towns lacked the geographic qualifications needed as a cattle and transportation center.

In the late 1880’s, the founding of Steamboat Springs created a target for those who sought to create a transportation link to northwestern Colorado. It also had the benefit of being near the Oak Creek area where new coal deposits were discovered.

Almost simultaneously, the inflow of homesteaders coming from the Denver side of the Rocky Mountains created the need to build roads and rail lines over the high altitudes and steep terrain of the Continental Divide, but the challenges would take years.

The railroad challenge was to build a mountain railway that would access all points west.

It would not be until 1909, that the railroad would reach to Steamboat Springs, and almost overnight Steamboat Springs became the largest cattle transportation center in the country. Had the railroad ended in Steamboat Springs, the town might have become twice as large and hindered the growth of any other communities in northwestern Colorado, but the plan for the railroad had never been to end in a community just on the other side of the Rocky Mountains.

Knowing the railroad was coming farther west, William H. Tucker established a townsite about 40 miles west of Steamboat Springs. One of his primary financial backers was Reverend William Bayard Craig, and so he named the town Craig. The first census of Craig in 1910 was only 392 people; however, with the completion of the railroad to Craig in 1913, the town would triple in size by the 1920 census to 1,297 citizens.

Population growth of northwestern Colorado

In 1911, the State legislature created Moffat County by carving out the western two-thirds of Routt County and made the three year-old town of Craig the new county seat. Growth in Steamboat Springs flatlined for decades after Craig and Moffat County were established and even with the development of one of the nation’s premier ski areas in 1963, Steamboat Springs remained Craig’s junior until the late 1990’s.

Two years after Moffat County was established, the Barrick family came to homestead. Five years after that the first Kiser family would follow them. That would begin a century of intertwining history of these two families that would end with the death of Michael Kiser in 2015.

NEXT: Part II – Two Family’s Destiny Unfolds

ALSO: Part III – Another Radiator Springs

Colorado By Any Other Name

19 Saturday Dec 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Generational, History, Recreation, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Colorado, Colorado river, name origins, Spanish, Spanish names

The sign may have accidentally got the origin of the name correct

Growing up in Colorado I was drilled in the origin of the name. From elementary school to adulthood I was told over and over that Colorado is Spanish for “color red.” It sounds logical because Colorado sort of sounds like Color Red. The rest of the tale is that it is based on the red in the Colorado River. Again, it almost sounds logical, so it must be true. Even today, a Google search of the origin of the State’s name will usually refer to the same story.

The problem is that “color red” in Spanish is “color rojo” which doesn’t sound quite like Colorado. If that was the real story the name of the State would be Colorojo, or Coloroyo considering how we English-speaking Caucasians butcher other languages.

In addition, rivers in the West can be reddish, but only for relatively short periods of time.

Now that I’m learning some Spanish the origin of Colorado would seem to be logically from the word, “coloured” or “colored,” which, in Spanish means many or multi-colored. Only in Spanish it is pronounced color-ed and if you properly enunciate the final consonant it sounds like “eda.”

The Spanish word for ‘many colored’ would seem to be a more logical explanation for the origin of the name “Colorado,” because if you have actually seen any significant river in and around the West, the colors change depending on season and runoff.

In the Spring and after a thunderstorm the runoff will often put the red, iron laden soil in the river, which can make it reddish; however, that is not the typical color of rivers for the rest of the year. Rivers like the Rio Grande and the Colorado are often a green to deep green color on a summer or fall day, and steel-gray in overcast skies and during winter.

Many Colored Colorado, or Color Red Colorado?

Many colored is not only a more appropriate description of the Colorado river, it is a better description of the State in general. Perhaps we need to stop repeating the tales of early settlers who often made up stuff to impress people on their wisdom and knowledge, and instead used common sense to find the truth about the origin of names, places, and things.

The Joy of No

01 Tuesday Dec 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bosses, committees, dictators, Human Interaction, meetings, No, organizations, Social Interaction, workplace

No is a perfectly acceptable answer….providing,

The idea or suggestion lacked thought or had no basis in fact. (e.g.; Would Donald Trump be a good President?)
The idea or suggestion has obvious flaws. (e.g.; Should we let a gun be in a room with a bunch of 2nd grade children?)
Is a matter of personal opinion or seeks personal approval. (e.g.; Would you go out with me?)

But when an idea or suggestion doesn’t fall under any of these categories, the “no” answer becomes a potential weapon of personal destruction for the person saying it, and a beautiful opportunity for the person on the receiving end.

Being the youngest of four boys, my brothers and parents became accustomed to telling me ‘no.’ I was constantly asking questions and making suggestions, and the ‘yes’ answer was likely to encourage me. In those situations where I actually had a good idea, it was enough that as the youngest member of the family, a ‘no’ answer was valid.

As an adult, I never had any expectations that my ideas and suggestions would be better received, so hearing ‘no’ was an irritation, but I accepted it as part of life.

However, I as grew older I noticed that some people seemed to enjoy telling other people ‘no.’ Often these people were in leadership positions and their tactic was to dominate and/or intimidate others. In some cases people would act as a dictator within the organization, silencing the ideas and opinions of others with a type of ‘no’ answer that implied dire consequences if the person didn’t drop the subject, or the idea was treated so lightly as if the person was unintelligent for making the suggestion. For years I thought that part of being a good manager was to have the privilege and responsibility to tell others, “NO!”

Then several years ago I joined a service club and became very involved in the organization. I served on several Boards and committees. I discovered that I could manipulate some people because I always knew their response to whatever I suggested would be, ‘no.’

It was then I realized that when someone says ‘no,’ it is a gift. The “No-ee” has done all they are required by making the suggestion or asking the question. The “No-er” has put their reputation and respectability on the line. The ‘no’ answer gives them all the responsibility, and, as a situation plays out, their failure to consider someone else’s idea or suggestion may be the fatal decision that brings them down.

I still find enjoyment of sometimes asking a perfectly legitimate question of someone I know will give me a ‘no’ answer. It is even more interesting to do this when I have more information about the issue or situation than they do and they can’t help but give me an answer that will eventually haunt them.

Still, I have learned that organizations and relationships with ‘no’ people are typically doomed. There’s a time to experience the joy of ‘no,’ and then there are times it’s best to walk away and shake the dust off your sandals.

Why Blog? Why Not? Six Reasons

07 Wednesday Oct 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Communication, Generational, Health, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Passionate People, Photography, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

art, Blog, Blogging, expression, self awareness, thoughts, writer, writing

Why Blog?

Because it’s there.

Blogging is the sand castle of writing, but waves don’t wash it away

Blogging is not a path to fame or fortune. If you think people are going to hang on your every blog post, you will likely be disappointed. If you think your blog is going to change the world, you will likely be disappointed. If you think people are going to pay you to write, you will likely be disappointed.
Blogging is the opportunity to write. Like dance, or acting, or painting, blogging is a creative art. The more you write, the better your skills. The more skilled, the more satisfying.
Blogging is expression. It is a public diary that exposes who you are and what you think. If you try to be someone you’re not, you likely will be embarrassed.
Blogging is long term. If your measure of success is the number of readers who read yesterday’s blog, you probably shouldn’t blog. The Internet is a library and Google is the librarian. Five years from now someone may search for information and discover your blog is exactly what they needed. That is success. Remember, your blog is one among billions, but time is without measure.
Blogging is about legacy. Your children’s children will have the opportunity to get to know you through your blog. It will expose them to your mind and your passions. Somewhere down the ancestry line will be a grandchild or great-grandchild who thinks exactly like you, and they will treasure the opportunity to get to know themselves through your writing.
Blogging is about finding yourself. Writing down our internal discussions can be revealing. We may not fully understand our values and who we are until it comes back to us in our own words.

Most people cannot fathom why anyone would blog, but if you blog, you are not ‘most people.’ That alone should reassure you of the value of blogging.

A Failure of Communication

06 Tuesday Oct 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, parenting, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, Website, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CAS, charter schools, Communication, Coral Academy of Science, Education, elementary, emal, Facebook, Gulen movement, Gulen Schools, high school, Iman, Instagram, K-12, middle school, Nevada, Reno, Teaching

“What we got here is a failure to communicate“
Prison Warden in Cool Hand Luke

Organizations should use extreme caution in employing anyone over forty-five for handling public image and public relations. I fall into that bracket and I’ve been studying social media since 2007, but I only know enough to understand that most ‘professionals’ of the traditional media don’t have a clue when it comes to communicating information to people in this century.

Traditional media professionals reminisce about the glory days when the game was to be on good terms with the editor of the local newspapers, have drinks with the news directors of the local television stations, and talk shop with the other local public relations (PR) directors at the bigger companies. Those were the days when a phone call could land a big story for the local news that would launch a new product or service. Top management would pat the PR guy on the back (or on the butt if the person was female) and tell him or her what a great job they did.

Those days are over.

The Internet, Facebook, customer reviews, Twitter, Yelp, and a thousand other media channels severely wounded traditional media and the old ways are never coming back. Yet, talk to an old PR person and say that nothing has really changed. It’s all about who you know. Old PR people don’t have a clue at how silly they sound.

I was at a school board meeting for a public charter school last week where a self-professed ‘expert’ in public relations announced that she was at a conference and learned that people no longer used websites to obtain information. She said that parents of school-age children only paid attention to Facebook and Instagram.

Actual “Principal’s message” from current school website….written at least three years ago

It should be noted, and that the school’s website is one of the worst on the Internet, and that the school is known for its severe deficiency in communicating information to parents.

Public Communication 2015
As part of the out-of-touch generation, take my advice with a grain of sodium chloride, or whatever water retaining additive you choose, but here is what I have learned in the past eight years.

It is true that many people from different generations tend to engage in social media at varying levels; however, there is no one single media that can reach everyone regardless of their generation. Education level, social economic status, and language all play a role in where people gather information. To declare that there are one or two media sources that parents of school-age children rely on is arrogant at best, and more likely, ignorant.

Any organization’s strategy has to be to use every possible form of media delivery to reach the stakeholders. In the case of a school, information has to be delivered through student folders, phone call announcements, in-school announcements, school website, parent emails, mail, Public Service Announcements (PSA,) school’s Facebook page, etc. Information must also be repeated in order to reach people when they’re listening. A single Facebook post is like going to a street corner at 6:00 AM and yelling out information and then assuming that everyone who passes by that street corner that day will hear the message.

But just sending out the same message through all the channels is ineffective. Social media channels are best used as a ‘reminder’ or ‘alert’ forum with a link back to one source (e.g.; the school website.) Long posts on Facebook make the information less likely to be read both now and in the future. Short posts with a link to more information for those interested is the most efficient method of delivery.

The website is NOT dead. In fact, it is more vital than ever. A charter school’s website is an information source for those considering enrolling their children, a primary source for parents for detailed information, and it establishes the public image for the school. A Facebook page is vital, and if you have a brilliant administration, Twitter can be the inside source for parents who want to know the inside scoop of what is happening now, but the school website will always be the 24/7/365 place for vital information.

It will take a decade or more to weed out the old PR professionals who live in the past; however, it doesn’t take a sixteen-year-old to know when someone doesn’t understand how to communicate in this century. If the stakeholders say they are not being adequately informed, it’s obvious the organization has a problem.

Bashing “Respect For Others” By Calling It “Politically Correctness”

01 Wednesday Jul 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, US History

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

African American, America, American, Confederate Flag, Donald Trump, Facebook, GOP, Hispanic, Mexican, political correct, respect for others, Twitter

I grew up in a small town. Mrs. Wick was the cranky old lady that lived next door. Mr. Valdez lived down the street and was a law enforcement officer.

It would have been easy to make fun of Mrs. Wick, but my mother would not allow us to do that, and in fact, we were taught to offer to help her whenever she needed it.

It would have been easy to disrespect Mr. Valdez in our small, almost-all-white town because he was Hispanic, but I would have never thought to do that, and his son was one of my best friends in elementary school.

Basic respect for the people in our town was how I was raised. It wasn’t being ‘politically correct,’ because it was part of being a decent person. Sure there were times when people failed to be decent, but the rodeo was only in town once a year and city people who pretend to be cowboys are idiots.

Today, our neighborhood is much larger. A Facebook post reaches around the world. Our community is no longer bound by city limits, county or state lines, nor national boundaries. What we say and do is part of a recorded history that will exist for hundreds, or possibly thousands of years.

It is not easy to be respectful of other people, but it is required. There should never be a question of whether or not to fly a confederate flag. It is always wrong to wave a symbol of traitors and racists in the face of our brothers and sisters around the world.

It is never appropriate to malign a group of honorable people who often risk their lives to have a better life in the United States by characterizing them as drug dealers and rapists. We have a responsibility to speak and act with respect to others. It is not a matter of being ‘political correct,’ it is a matter of personal honor and decency. That value has been the foundation of the strength of our country. It is why, when America faces a real threat, we drop everything and respond as one.

It is why Hitler failed, and Putin hates us. The test of a true American is the ability to respect others who are different in race, gender, religion, who they love, and where they are from.

Science Versus Stupidity

31 Sunday May 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Honor, Internet, Politics, Religion, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), solar, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

belief, Bible, church, Conservatives, evolution, fact, Global warming, GOP, logic, Mythology, Republican, Republicans, scientific process, stupid, Stupidity, Tea Party

Earth: Victim of Stupidity

“Science doesn’t have all the answers.”

It’s hard to know where to start when someone makes a statement like the one above. ‘Science’ isn’t an entity, so it can’t possess anything, but beyond the poor grammar is the issue of motivation and failed logic.

When a person makes this statement their motivation is often in defense of religion. The idea seems to be that if science doesn’t have all the answers, then religious and mythological beliefs are valid. Using this logic one could say that because nitrogen doesn’t make up all of the Earth’s atmosphere, (air is 78% nitrogen,) then the air we breathe is all fairy dust.

No intelligent person would say that science has all the answers. We are just scratching the surface of understanding the mechanisms by which our universe operates. Even after science has shown us how one system works, scientists may discover that there are other factors that affect that system. We are on a path of discovery and we have a long way to travel.

However, there are no shortcuts. Just because science hasn’t fully explained everything doesn’t give anyone license to invent an explanation that is based on opinion or agenda. This includes explanations that were created over a thousand years ago by people who didn’t even understand that urination and defecation are the end process of digestion.

All science begins with asking a question. Why? How? What? In the process of answering those questions, the scientific process rules some things out. By narrowing down what isn’t a cause or a factor the scientist begins to clarify the important causes or factors. Religion ignores this process and immediately jumps to an answer that lacks any support other than, “Because I say so!”

I have no problem with anyone’s mythological beliefs…until the believer wants the rest of society to abide by those beliefs. Public policies, laws, education and regulations that exist or are governed by someone’s mythological beliefs is pure stupidity, even if a majority believe in the mythology.

Those that don’t ‘believe’ in evolution, global warming, vaccinations, or any other scientifically based fact are stupid. I’m not calling anyone names, I’m saying they lack intelligence and logical thinking. They are incapable of making good decisions. They are, by definition, stupid.

Believe in God? Fine. But, giving credibility to religious beliefs over scientific fact defines one as being stupid. Making religious beliefs part of societal laws is mass stupidity.

The Day the World Will Stop: Changing of the English Throne

09 Saturday May 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Generational, Government, History, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Crown, England, Great Britain, Her Majesty, leadership, Prince Charles, Prince William, Queen Elizabeth II, Royal, Royalty, Succession, The Queen, Throne, UK, United Kingdom

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II

In 114 days (as of May 9, 2015,) Queen Elizabeth II’s legend will take one step further into history. On September 9th of this year she will become the longest-serving royal (63 years, 217 days) to ever grace the English throne. If you are younger than 65 years old you will not have known anyone other than Queen Elizabeth as the leader of England.

It is said she will not abdicate her throne, but will reign until her death. That is the expected choice, but possibly not the wisest.

It is likely her Majesty does not understand the impact her death will have on the world. Humans cling to the idea that some things do not change, and there are few people in the civilized world who don’t have a mental and/or emotional attachment to her and her place in our world. She is the constant that we all rely on to know that some things do not change.

The Queen’s Royal Coat of Arms (UK)

During her reign as Queen we have had twelve Presidents in the United States (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush (41,) Clinton, Bush (43,) and Obama.) We have seen movie stars, rock stars, athletes all come and go, but Queen Elizabeth has always been there.

In a world of instant communication, her death will affect more people than anyone in the history of the world. People will remember where they were and what they were doing the moment the news is announced. If her death coincides with a change in royal leadership, it will magnify the impact on the world.

Queen Elizabeth II in 1953

The event of her death and the passing of the English crown will be seen by some as the perfect opportunity to take advantage of an emotional situation. The majority of the world will pull closer together in grief, but those who seek radical changes in politics, government, the economy, or just seek to hurt the Western world, will use the chaotic feelings of the loss as a way of creating more chaos.

The royal family will be dealing with the loss, and the matters of royal duty at the same time. The coronation of the new King may not happen for a year or more; however, the details of transitioning power from Her Majesty to the His Majesty will involve changes in staff, new protocols, and a thousand other items that have not been done for over six decades. All this will happen at a time when few will be able to focus on anything beyond the loss of woman and icon that has been an unflickering beacon of the Western World.

However, if she reached this milestone in four months and then decided to abdicate sometime in the next year, a calm, undramatic transition would preserve the stability of the royal role the hearts and minds of the world. As the former queen with over sixty years of experience, she would become the most valuable and trusted counsel for the new King.

Her eventual passing will still devastate the emotional state of the world, but with a new King already on the throne, the world will know that England’s royal, non-political leadership will live on.

God Save the Queen.

Free Range Parenting: How to Say I Don’t Love You

03 Sunday May 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Lessons of Life, parenting, Politics, Relationships

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Alexander, Child Development, Danielle, Dvora, free range parents, free-range parenting, Maryland, Meitiv, Rafi

Abandoning a child does teach a lesson: Parent’s don’t care

The parent always correct. That is the basis of free-range parenting. The idea that a parent should be allowed to do whatever they want, including nothing, with their children.

I grew up in rural northwestern Colorado. The idea of ‘free-range’ is common in farming communities where it refers to animals. It means the rancher allows his animals to roam on open land, usually federal land and expends minimal personal resources on the care and maintenance of his or her livestock until it’s time to round them up for sale. The expectation is that some of the animals will be lost to predators, but the money saved by not feeding and watering them is worth the risk.

In parenting, ‘free-range’ is applied to the children of the mother and father. The concept is that children of almost any age will mature faster as unsupervised survivalists than under the care and monitoring of an adult. It is as stupid as it sounds.

Rafi and Dvora Meitiv: Children with a lack of parenting

This idea gained national awareness when Rafi, a ten-year-old boy, and Dvora his six-year-old sister were picked up by law enforcement when they were reported to be unsupervised about a mile from home. They are children of Danielle and Alexander Meitiv who believe that their children should be allowed to roam free on streets and in parks in order to learn the lessons that life offers. The parents have been charged with child neglect.

The real issue with free-range parenting is not one of parenting style. Parenting style requires that you actually take the responsibility to be a parent, which free-range parents don’t. Free-range parenting can be compared to having something of infinite value entrusted to someone, for which they go to the back door and throw it as far away has possible.

The critical issue with free-range parenting is assuming that children are born with an automatic sense of right and wrong. They are not. Children learn good behavior and they learn it from the human examples around them. Left on their own, many children experiment with cruelty and seek to satisfy baser desires, especially when one child is older and/or stronger than another child.

Parents have to constantly guide children to understand the concepts of boundaries, respect, kindness, responsibility, and humility. Often children battle against parents when told that certain behaviors and/or actions are not acceptable, but as a child matures they begin to understand that parents are acting out of love in teaching proper social behavior. They understand this, often because they see other people around them who lacked proper parental supervision and who are social failures as an adult.

A free-range parent is also setting themselves up for failure. The child will soon discover that the more they stay away from the parents, the less hassle they will experience, so the detach themselves emotionally from the parent. Once a child has found the parent to be irrelevant the opportunity for the parent to offer advice and guidance is lost forever.

J. K. Rowling: The Unexpected Author

13 Monday Apr 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Book Review, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Fiction, Generational, Higher Education, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Opinion, parenting, Passionate People, Public Relations, Science Fiction, Traditional Media, Universities, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

books, Harry Potter, J. K. Rowling, Jo Rowling, Joanne Rowling, library, Literaray, readership, reading

jkr-photo_new_debra-hurford-brown-j.k.-rowling

Jo Rowling A.K.A: J. K. Rowling

This week my son’s Elementary school is engaged in a venture into the world of Harry Potter. The teachers of 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades have divided the students into the four Houses of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. This is an opportunity to look back on the single person who created a series of fictional children’s books that revitalized reading for millions of people of all ages.

Any story of great personal success is characterized by being the correct person, in the correct place, at the correct time. That is a requirement. The story of J. K. Rowling is more compelling for why she was the correct person.

Her birth name is Joanne Rowling and she uses “Jo” in casual environments. She has no given middle name but was asked by her publisher to disguise her name so that young boys would not know that Harry Potter was written by a woman. Since she had no middle name she used her grandmother’s name, ‘Kathleen,’ and thus became, “J. K. Rowling (her last name is pronounced, ‘rolling.’)

Rowling accomplished the unthinkable. At a time when reading books was declining and the Internet was blossoming, the idea that one person could ignite a renaissance of book reading was considered absurd. Rowling’s first publisher told her to get a day job because writing children’s books would never provide enough income.

Like William Shakespeare, there is no significant indicator in Rowling’s pre-Potter life of her eventual rise to the top of the literary world. Still, there are earlier experiences that probably contributed to her success. Among them are the following:

Her parents met at King’s Cross Station in London, which became the fictional departure point for the fictional train station departure point to Hogwarts. [Potter influences]
As a child she was known to write out a story and read it to her sister, Dianne. [Early fiction writing]
Her mother, Anne, was a science technician and also taught science at the Secondary school that Rowling attended. [Priority of education]
She speaks English, French and studied German in Secondary school. [Broad-based education]
She read and is an admirer of Jessica Mitford, a British-turned-American journalist, author, and political activist. [Ethics, writing, and honor]
She has a Bachelor’s of Arts degree in French and the Classics from the University of Exeter. [Writing and knowledge]
She studied a year in Paris. [Broad-based education]
She taught English in Portugal [Life experience]
Her mother had multiple sclerosis (MS) and died while she was writing her first Harry Potter book. [Life experience]
Rowling suffered from depression triggered by several life events (Unemployed, her mother’s death, her divorce, etc.) [Life experience]

The idea for Harry Potter apparently came in 1990, during a four-hour train delay to London. She began writing as soon as she reached home and among the first chapters written was the final chapter of the last book. The first book was not finished until 1995. It was submitted and rejected by twelve publishers before it was finally accepted by Bloomsbury Publishing in England the follow year.

She went from living off of State benefits to a millionaire in five years. Since then, she has devoted a large portion of her fortune to philanthropic causes.

Though remarkable, Rowling’s financial success is not as significant as what she did for slowing the decline of children reading for fun during the period her books were published (1996-2007.) According to a study by Common Sense Media, 9-year-olds reading for fun at least one to two per week dropped only one percent from 1984 to 2004; however, by 2012 that dropped by another four percent (76% in 2012.) For 13-year-olds the decline in reading for fun from 1984 to 2004, was six percent, but that decline nearly doubled five years after the last Harry Potter book was published (down an additional eleven percent in 2012 to 53%.)

No one, including possibly Rowling, herself, could have expected anyone to capture a worldwide audience, as did the Harry Potter series. She brought new readers into the literary market that had no interest in reading. Her unexpected achievement is a reminder that what is possible extends beyond the impossible.

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part III

25 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, Internet, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Core, Conservatives, conspiracy, funding, math, parent protests, reading, Republicans, school districts, school funding, teachers, Teaching, writing

PART III: An Answer to the Question: Good? or Bad?

Implementation of Common Core

THE VERDICT
In the past year significant political forces have targeted Common Core. The protests have been at near hysterical levels in many communities around the country. The complaints about Common Core are as follows:

Standards create a factory-like environment that attempt to put all students in one ‘box.’
Teachers focusing on test scores, not educational achievement
Parents don’t understand math methods
United States history under Common Core is un-American because it includes both positive and negative aspects of the history of our country
A belief that parents should define school curriculum, not the school, district, state, or federal government
A belief that President Obama is behind the implementation of Common Core and other conservative conspiracy theories

Many of the issues have been generated by conservative voices after a push by Republicans during the past election cycle to ignite anger and votes against public education. Almost all of the complaints would have occurred from any attempt to improve and refine American educational techniques, especially when those improvements involve standardization for all American schools.

If you believe that setting minimum standards in reading, writing, and math is bad, then Common Core is bad. If you believe that children in your community should graduate with similar skills to other students around the country, then Common Core is good. If you believe that a high school degree should be the end of a person’s education, then Common Core is bad. If you believe that every student should receive an education that would prepare them for college, then Common Core is good.

THE REAL PROBLEM
Despite the politicizing of Common Core, there is a real issue in implementing any change in education. Funding.

Any business that seeks to upgrade or improve their methods knows that there is a real cost to any change. Yet, even smart business people seem to forget that to improve our educational system requires a major funding commitment. It takes money to research and establish new programs. It takes money to train school districts, principals, and teachers. It takes money to create new teaching materials, and it takes money to educate parents.

What Common Core is missing is the funding needed to make it a success. Until we can accept the fact that a commitment to education requires a commitment to funding, then we will continue using 20th educational techniques in a 21st century world. America’s efforts to update our educational system will cost money and Common Core is a victim of a society that has abandon quality education because it costs too much.

THE HYSTERIA OF THE LOUDEST VOICES
Unfortunately, Common Core lost a lot of support in the past twelve months. Much of that was due to the political rhetoric during last year’s campaigns, but some teachers are also pulling back support. This is not surprising. As parents become more vocal in opposition, few teachers are willing to oppose parent sentiment even if they are wrong.

Common Core is not a perfect educational system, but it does attempt to better prepare America’s children for a higher level of achievement. Most of the real issues can be resolved with better funding. Just as a school built in the 1950’s is no longer relevant for 2015, education methods of the pre-information era are not relevant today. Our population is continuing to increase and the skills our children must have to thrive as adults are going to advance. Education is going to be expensive, but if we don’t pay now, we will pay more later.

PREVIOUSLY: Part I: A Primer in American Education
Part II: What is Common Core?

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part II

25 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, parenting, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Asian learning methods, Common Core, K-12, learning, math, mathematics, New Math, No Child Left Behind, parent involvement in school, parent reactions, students

PART TWO: What is Common Core?

Cartoon in Chicago Tribune about parent reaction to Common Core

The Third Generation of Standardized Education
The basic premise of the George W. Bush (43rd President) administration’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandate was that reading, writing, and math are fundamental to all learning. This is a sound concept; however, these basic skills cannot supplant other subjects traditionally taught in K-12 schools, nor can they be isolated from those subjects. Our society, both business and personal interactions, require an adequate understanding of a wide variety skills and knowledge that exceed the basic skills of reading, writing, and math.

Common Core is an attempt to refine the concept of NCLB by creating standards for all schools that focus on reading, writing, and math, but it also folds these skills into other subjects that impact personal success in the 21st century. Common Core emphasizes teaching methods and outcomes, but leaves it to the State, school district, and school on how to incorporate the program into the curriculum.

Why Some Parents Dislike Common Core Math
Some of the methods adopted by Common Core have angered parents and politicians. In particular, the approach to teaching math. The math issue centers on bewildered parents who don’t understand the revised math teaching methods and why equations seem to be more complicated than when they attended school. The assumption by parents is that whatever they were taught is good enough for their children; however, that is not necessarily true.

Almost every adult in this country was taught that the symbol for a number (e.g.; ‘7’) was everything we needed to know about the number that it represents. We were taught to memorize how the symbol ‘7’ multiplied by the symbol ‘9’ equals the symbol ’63.’ That teaching method does not mean that the student understands that ‘7,’ ‘9,’ and ’63’ are symbols representing a group of objects.

This is a subtle, but important understanding in math functions. The equation ‘7 x 9 = 63,’ means that we are taking a group of seven objects, adding eight more groups of seven, and determining the total of objects. That is much more complicated than just memorizing that 7 x 9 = 63, but it helps us realize that multiplication is a shortcut to manually counting out 63 objects individual, rather than grouping them.

The weakness of memorization of relationships between symbols also creates confusion as a student moves into higher mathematical equations. In algebra, geometry, and calculus the numeral symbols become less relevant. For example, X = (X+1) and Y = (X-3) can be confusing because ‘X’ stands for EVERY number.

The Credit Card Example
A man is given ten credit cards, but he is NOT told that each credit card represents an amount of money in the bank and, that if used, the money is replenished the next day. He is told how to use each credit card. One card is to buy gas, one to use at the grocery store, etc. Today, he’s at the gas station and it so happened that two of his friends are already there. He decides to pay for his friend’s fuel, which they appreciate. They go on their way, but when he tries to pay for his fuel, the credit card is declined. He didn’t understand that the card represented a limited amount of money, he just assumed it could be used for any amount of fuel. That is similar to how math has been taught in the past. We may have known what to do with the numbers (symbols,) but we may not have fully understood that numbers are just symbols.

Good News, Bad News
Parents objections to the new math teaching methods are a good sign that our children are gaining a deeper understanding of mathematics than their parents did in school; however, parents need to be able to assist their children with homework.¹ This means parents need to be taught the new methods, but few if any schools have developed programs to teach parents because there is no funding available to accomplish the task.

Who Came Up With the Common Core Math Techniques?
Despite the belief that Common Core math techniques were invented in the past few years, the techniques were modeled off educational programs in certain Asian countries where they have been more successful at preparing students for college. In 2009, a coalition of State Governors and Educators worked together to build an educational program that would serve as a ‘best practices’ guide for American schools, which was the birth of Common Core.

NEXT: Part III: An Answer to the Question – Good? or Bad?
PREVIOUSLY: Part I: A Primer in American Education

¹Most studies indicate that students perform better when parents are involved in their children’s education. At the very least it indicates to the child that their parents place a high value on becoming educated.

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part I

24 Tuesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, Information Technology, Internet, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Taxes, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

classroom, college graduates, Common Core, Education methods, federal mandates, George W. Bush, graduation rates, high school graduates, job standards, K-12, NCLB, No Child Left Behind, President Barack Obama, Race to the Top, school districts, school vouchers, students, teachers, Teaching, Teaching methods, Teaching standards

School’s should welcome diversity of ideas but shouldn’t tolerate political agendas

PART I: A Primer in American Education

Who’s Afraid of Common Core?
Education in America is often the centerpiece of someone’s agenda, and the newest chapter of the how-to-fix-our-schools controversy is called Common Core. Conservatives have apparently decided that Common Core is the path to Satan. Liberals have reservations about Common Core because it smacks of a factory-like environment that assumes every student and school is the same.

The problem is that the most vocal critics of Common Core have no authority to speak on effective educational methods. Common Core is a significant paradigm shift in education, and opinions of untrained, uneducated, unhelpful ‘experts’ do nothing to move forward the debate on how best to prepare our children for Life 3.0.

The Cost of Achievement
In 1950, only one-third of the population in the United States had a high school degree or better, and only six percent had a college degree or better. In 2010, almost ninety percent of Americans had at least a high school degree, and thirty percent had at least a college degree. That increase is impressive, but what is astounding is that in the same sixty year time frame, America’s population doubled.

To accomplish that feat cost money. A lot of money. As the bandwagon to attack government spending gained steam, education loomed large in the sights of conservatives. The real cost of the success of American educational achievement has been to become a target of the post-Reagan agenda.

Public school in Panama: Seeking to achieve the American dream

A Historical Perspective
In the pre-Information age, schools were isolated in their own districts. How well the students of any given school performed was a local issue, not a state or national issue. In addition, a relatively small percentage of students sought out a college degree, and there were few school districts keeping track of college bound students.

The goal for most school districts in the 1960’s, 70’s, and 80’s was graduate as many students as possible, which sometimes opened the door to unethical practices, such as giving diplomas to students who clearly did not meet reasonable expectations (ability to read, write, etc.) to graduate.

However, by the 1990’s, the idea that all schools in the United States should be able to measure academic success through a unified set of academic standards began to take hold. As the Internet became the backbone of our society, the resulting information explosion forced us to accept that adequate math and reading skills were vital for success as an adult in a technologically advanced society.

First Generation of Educational Standards
By the beginning of this century, plans had been put into motion to establish a set of educational standards for all schools and testing of all students to determine a school’s success or failure. Under President George W. Bush, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB,) was mandated and it required States to establish standardized testing, teacher qualifications, and annual academic progress reporting. This was one of the most sweeping federal intrusions into public education. The primary focus of NCLB was to improve reading, writing, and mathematics in schools nationwide, while allowing States to establish the educational standards that would have to be met.

The catch was that rather than investing in those schools that needed help, No Child Left Behind focused on punishing schools that didn’t meet the artificial standards. Almost ever reputable educational review of NCLB has given it a failing grade. Some of the reasons are as follows:

The emphasis on reading, writing, and math during a time when States were cutting funds for kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) created a shearing effect on other programs (language, history, music, arts, etc.) as money had to be reallocated to the studies under the NCLB Act.
Politicians had little understanding of education and the variables in a classroom environment and they attempted to apply factory-like operations to school systems that failed to address the real issues that impact the ability to learn.
NCLB assumed that teachers were mostly at fault for poor educational performance and politicians sought to intervene by imposing punishments for schools rather than actually acting in the best interest of the students.
The education of higher performing students was sacrificed in order to devote more resources for the poorer performing students.
Students with special needs were not excluded from the testing standards creating a population of students that automatically counted as failing against the school.

Educational Standards – Second Generation
Soon after taking office, the Obama administration began to move away from NCLB by introducing “Race to the Top.” This program flipped NCLB by seeking to reward States for adopting standardized programs rather than punishing them for not meeting federal standards. States competed for additional federal education funding; however, not every State rushed to play the game that offered no guarantee of financial carrot at the finish line.

The most searing problem with Obama’s Race to the Top program may have been the requirement that a teacher’s performance had to be linked to the student’s test scores. This concept of Pay For Performance suggests that teaching professionals must be threatened with a financial stick, forcing teachers to teach students to be successful on the tests by sacrificing all other educational values. It also discourages teachers from working with groups of challenging students who will not be able to produce the test results of more privileged and economically stable students.

NEXT: Part II: What is Common Core?
To be published Wednesday, 25 March, 0700 PDT/1400 UTC

NEXT NEXT: Part III: An Answer to the Question – Good? or Bad?
To be published Wednesday, 25 March, 1200 PDT/1900 UTC

Epilogue : The 2010’s

20 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Caucasian, college graduates, Conservatives, Equality, GDP, high school graduates, poor, racism, racists, Reagan agenda, Republicans, Ronald Reagan, The 1%, un-wealthy, wealthy, White politicians

The 2010’s – End of Civility

White Conservatives: “Go F**k Yourselves America”

Population: 308.7 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $47,805
Median Annual Income: $47,793
Life Expectancy: 78.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 28.2, Women 26.1
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 87.0%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 30.0%

REAGAN: The Killer of America’s Prosperity
From 1950 to 2010 the population of the United States of America doubled (+104.0%.) The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) tripled (+218.1%.) The median annual income is eleven times more than 1950 (+1028%.) Life expectancy has increased by over 15% (15.4%.) Men AND women are marrying an average of over five years older in 2010 than they did in 1950 (men +23.7%, women +28.6%.) The percentage of people with at least a high school degree is now almost 90% versus 34% in 1950 (+153.6%.) Today, 30% of our citizens have at least a college degree versus 6% in 1950 (+383.9%.)

Something went right for America in the last 60 years. But that is changing.

Prior to the Great Depression, Republicans controlled the House and Senate for the majority of the previous 70 years. After the Great Depression both the House and Senate was under Democratic control until 1980. In 1980, America began folowing the conservatives agenda (Reagan 1980-1988, Bush 41 1989-1992, Republican control of Congress 1994-2008) of dismantling the government at all levels, start more wars, give more money to the wealthy, and give less help for the un-wealthy. Since 1979, the wealthiest 1% after-tax income has increased by 200%.

U.S._Income_-_Changes_by_Income_Group_1979-2011

The 1% are 200% wealthier since conservatives took control of the government

Since 1980, annual increases in U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has stalled and fallen.

ANNUAL GDP GROWTH: Post World War II, U.S. annual GDP began a steady growth until shortly after Ronald Reagan became President.

GROWTH SACRIFICED FOR GREED
Post-war prosperity was spurred by significant federal government projects and programs. Conservatives derailed that by blaming government for economic issues that were caused by corporate and business greed.

Despite the obvious failure of the Reagan agenda, conservatives have taken a position of complete denial and fantastical thinking. They no longer believe they have any obligation to acknowledge or respect the rest of America. Conservatives are behaving as a child would behave when they are not getting their way, even though their request is completely inappropriate. Rather than accepting that President Obama was elected twice by a majority of Americans, Republicans have blocked all efforts to move forward on measures proven to generate American prosperity because it would make those that have more, give more.

Reagan conservatives have failed and they are backed in a corner of failure. They will not accept reason, nor facts. Civility would force them to accept their failure, so they must be uncivil. They are willing to destroy America, rather than acknowledge failure.

WHY ARE WE HERE?
America has experience massive change in the past 65 years. Most of that change has been good, but the one aspect of the American concept, the idea that we are all created equal, is the one issue in our country that has cast a shadow over us for centuries. White males believe that they are superior to all others and as our demographics have changed Caucasians have worked to obstruct equality rather than accept it.

Segregation was not considered racist until it became obvious it was motivated by whites who were racist. Dismantling government programs that benefit the poor and those in need may not be considered racist, until we realize that these ideas have been pushed forward almost exclusively by white politicians. Telling America that the rich are too burdened to pay a fair share of their taxes is not considered racist until you examine the loop of rich white people giving money to white politicians to pass laws that will reduce taxes on the wealthiest who are almost all white.

America is a country that has yet to commit to everyone being equal. In the 1950’s, white people took their money and ran away to the suburbs. In the 1960’s, the federal government finally stepped in and paid attention to the unequal treatment of African-Americans. In the 1970’s, we became distracted by unethical leaders, war, oil shortages, and inflation. In the 1980’s, we were conned into the idea that our government was to blame for all our problems in the 1970’s, while the Reagan spent money that America didn’t have to spend. In the 1990’s, the conservatives regained control of Congress and began dismantling the federal government and ending ethical business oversight. In the 2000’s, Republicans led America down a path of war and destruction that almost wiped out our economic system.

Why we are here is because we have become weak. We have listened to fools and we know they are fools. They are willing to tear America apart for greed and their own racist ideals. To a racist, compromise is unthinkable, and that is why conservatives will never work towards a unified nation.

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s The 1990’s The 2000’s

This is Why (2015 vs the 2000’s)

19 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2004 Tsunami, 9/11, Afghani, Amazon.com, Anthrax, Assault weapons ban, Conservatives, Election 2000, Facebook, Florida vote counting, George W. Bush, Global Financial Disaster, Global warming, Hurricane Katrina, Iraq, Mars, NASA, Opportunity, Pope John Paul II, President, President Barack Obama, Republicans, Rovers, Saddam Hussein, Smartphone, Space Shuttle Columbia, Spirit, Supreme Court, Texting, Twenty-ohs, Twitter, Virginia Tech Massacre, Wikipedia, YouTube

The 2000’s – The Defeat of America

Decade of Fear: Y2K, 9/11, WMD’s, Katrina, Banking Collapse, Unemployment, Global Warming

Population: 281.4 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $44,492
Median Annual Income: $40,703
Life Expectancy: 76.8
Average Age at Marriage: Men 26.1, Women 23.9
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 80.4%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 24.4%

TWENTY OH’s
If the 1990’s were a seismic event of technological and social change, the twenty-oh’s is when the tsunami of change hit. Had nothing else happened but the advancement of the Internet, the changes by that alone would have drastically remade the world as we knew it; however, the twenty-oh’s were not content in merely redefining society and the way we communicate, the first decade of the new millennium was going to do an extreme makeover of all our expectations in life. Here are twenty things that made us say Oh!

Y2K, the disaster that never came (Jan. 2000)
Elections of 2000
1. Florida election fiasco (Nov./Dec. 2000)
2. Supreme Court appoints George W. Bush as President (Dec. 2000)
Attacks of September 11, 2001
Anthrax letters
Wars of Just Because
1. Afghanistan (2001-2014)
2. Iraq (2003-2011)
Rise of Smaller and Smarter Technology (Entire Decade)
1. Smartphone
2. Texting
Space Shuttle Columbia destroyed on reentry (Feb. 2003)
Mars Rovers bounce to successful landings and missions
1. Spirit (June 2003)
2. Opportunity (July 2003)
Saddam Hussein captured (Dec. 2003)
Assault weapon ban expires (Sept. 2004)
Online Wonders
1. Amazon.com
2. Facebook
3. Twitter
4. Google
5. YouTube
6. Wikipedia
Indian Ocean Earthquake/Tsunami (Dec. 2004)
Pope John Paul dies (Apr. 2005)
Global Warming
Hurricane Katrina (Aug. 2005)
Virginia Tech Massacre (Apr. 2007)
Global Economic Disaster (2007-08)
1. Financial giants collapse
2. Housing market collapses
3. Auto industry collapses
4. Massive unemployment
Price of gas soars, and falls….as a function of conservative politics
Barack Obama elected as President (Nov. 2008)
Nuclear weapons
1. Iraq
2. North Korea

The Twenty-oh’s began with the most bizarre Presidential election in American history, followed by the most shocking attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, followed by two United States initiated wars that would be fought simultaneously, followed by the loss of the Space Shuttle and its crew on reentry to Earth, followed by an earthquake/tsunami that would kill almost a quarter of a million people in 14 countries in one day, followed by a massacre at Virginia Tech, followed by a near meltdown of our global financial system, followed by an African-American being elected as President.

THE GREAT CONSERVATIVE FAILURE
Despite all that happened, it was politics that defined the 2000’s. Keeping with the two-faced Reagan policy of “America Can’t” and money must be taken from the poor and given to the rich, President George Bush took the cost of running two wars off the books so that he could look like he was cutting government spending when he was, in fact, putting the government deeper in debt and running massive deficits.

Behind the scenes, a decade of conservative-driven deregulation in the financial industry created a bad debt bomb that exploded in 2007-08. Almost overnight, America’s economy was devastated by greed and a lack of common sense. People who saw the disaster coming took the attitude that everyone else was unethical, so why should I be the only good person? When the curtain fell on Wall Street, Republicans, who created the environment for the disaster, quietly stepped away and whistling as if they were unaware there was a problem.

Bush 43, was completely out of his league in dealing with the problem. To repair the damage to our economy would require taking actions that was would essentially prove that the Reagan doctrine was the cause of the disaster, and President Bush was not willing to take the necessary actions. Fortunately, Barack Obama had just been elected and, with Bush impotent in action, the 44th President stepped up and began to manage the crisis and establishing a plan of recovery.

The Republican caused disaster did not cause conservatives to humbly acknowledge their failure, but rather pushed them to further deny the facts. As the economy began recovering, conservatives began blaming Democrats for not making the recovery happen faster. As conservative predictions of Democratic policy failure began to be proven wrong, conservatives began raising absurd and meaningless issues to redirect people’s attention (e.g.; Obama was not an American, Obama was a Muslim, Obama had a secret plan to take everyone’s guns away, etc.)

Because the Reagan doctrine was based on white, 1950’s suburban thinking, the hate for President Obama came naturally to the white, male voter. Instead of a political correction for the failed Reagan agenda, conservatives became even more rabid and illogical. By the end of the decade America was heading for defeat at the hands of conservatives who had taken away American prosperity and were unwilling to accept any idea that didn’t match their failed version of the world.

NEXT: Epilogue

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s The 1990’s

This is Why (2015 vs the 1990’s)

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Religion, Respect, Science, Space, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1990's, Americans with disabilities act, Bill Clinton, Congress, Contract With America, George H. W. Bush, healthcare reform, Immigration, immigration laws, Manuel Noriega, NAFTA, World Wide Web

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

An Explosion of Change

Population: 248.7 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $35,145
Median Annual Income: $28,149
Life Expectancy: 75.4
Average Age at Marriage: Men 26.1, Women 23.9
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 77.6%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 21.3%

POLITICS: The Clean Up Man
George H. W. Bush was sworn in as President on January 20, 1989, as the 41st President of the United States. Having served as Vice President under Ronald Reagan, he was loyal and didn’t interfere with President Reagan’s destructive agenda. As President he then was left to clean up the messes created by Reagan and deal with new problems. Despite all that he had to deal with, President Bush managed to restore some of what Reagan had destroyed. This angered extreme conservatives who then refused to support him in his second term election.

Bush dealt with 1) an inflated deficit left by Reagan, 2) a revenue shortfall that required higher taxes, 3) restoring democracy in Panama and capturing Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, and, 4) liberated Kuwait and drove Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi army back in a humiliating defeat. In addition, President Bush pushed through Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the Immigration Act of 1990, that opened the borders for a 40% increase in legal immigrants. He maintained a conservative stance on most issues; however, President Bush did not hesitate to act against Wacko conservatives. When the National Rifle Association (NRA) sent out material slandering Federal Agents as “Thugs,” he ended his lifetime membership to the organization.

POLITICS: Clinton’s Capitulation
From a political standpoint, the Presidency of Bill Clinton was a study in contrasts. His election was considered a victory for Democrats and liberals, yet he constantly compromised his positions to pacify aggressive conservatives. Almost all efforts for additional programs to help Americans in need, including healthcare reform, failed to move forward during the Clinton administration. Conservatives, who were disappointed at Bush 41’s rollback of Reagan’s efforts to dismantle the federal government, were determined to win Congress and reignite the agenda that favored white and wealthy Americans.

In 1994, conservative Republican Newt Gingrich was elected on the basis of his Contract With America. This document (co-authored with Republican Representative Dick Armey) outlined several reasonable goals to bring more accountability to Congress and the government, but was laced with several goals that followed Ronald Reagan’s vision to cut funding and eliminate the government’s role of overseeing fairness in business. President Clinton was faced with vetoing all legislation, or caving in to conservatives. In his 1996 State of the Union address Clinton delighted conservatives when he announced that “the era of big government is over.”

As a result of Clinton’s capitulation, many laws were passed in his second term that continued Reagan’s destruction of good government. The financial disaster in 2007-08 can be directly traced to legislation passed and/or repealed in the 1990’s during the Clinton administration. Congress removed federal government eyes off of key areas of financial interactions. The laws and rules that had set standards on key banking and investor interactions were eviscerated allowing a ‘no questions asked’ environment. The natural evolution of this environment was for greed to take priority over common sense, which is exactly what happened.

THE SEISMIC EVENT IN PERSONAL COMMUNICATION
Outside of the political landscape, the rest of America was becoming comfortable with the concept of owning ‘personal’ computers, and the new World Wide Web offered to interconnect computers creating a digital network of communication. It’s hard to overstate the impact of the marriage of computers and the Internet. It turned everything we knew upside down. Consider the following:

While personal computers increased the efficiency of certain tasks, it was the computer hooked into the Internet that made world-wide instant communication and sharing of information commonplace.
Television, radio, and newspapers shaped the public perception of world events until the Internet gave access to massive numbers of people who often had more timely information than traditional news media sources.
Younger generations adapted quickly to the possible uses of the Internet while older generations scoffed at its impact. As young generations rode the tide of the Internet, Older generations were left aground, looking foolish and ignorant.
Unethical governments and corporations would discover too late that their version of events would be exposed as lies and distortions by citizens who had access to the truth and shared it through the Internet. It literally brought down some governments.

The tsunami of change caused by the Internet wouldn’t hit the world until the next decade, but the earthquake of the Internet was felt in the 1990’s.

NEXT: The 2000’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1980’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1980, 1980's, Afghanistan, American Hostage Crisis, civil war, Cold War, Communism, FBI informant, George Bush, Grenada, Iran, Iran-Contra, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, patriotism, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Soviets, USSR

The 1980’s – Political Con Game

President Ronald Reagan: Actor, Cowboy, FBI Informant

Population: 226.5 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $28,957
Median Annual Income: $16,354
Life Expectancy: 73.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 24.7, Women 22.0
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 66.5%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 16.2%

THE COWBOY PRESIDENT
The Republican leadership had been tainted by President Nixon’s Watergate scandal. In order to move back into power they needed a fresh face, and Ronald Reagan, an experienced actor, became that face. Reagan mostly had played nice guys and cowboys in the movies which formed the basis of his political persona. He was twice elected as Governor of California but twice (1968 and 1976) failed to gain the Republican party nomination in his quest to be President.

Ronald Reagan, who, in 1976, had fallen just short of winning the Republican nomination from incumbent President Gerald Ford, had finally won the party’s nomination and found himself as the beneficiary of the perfect storm of political crisis in 1979, that sunk President Jimmy Carter. As if to emphasize his luck, the American hostages in Iran were released on January 20, 1981, the same day that Ronald Reagan was sworn into office as President.

THE ERA OF WE CAN’T
President Reagan believed that government was to blame for America’s woes. Despite the role of the American corporation in damaging the our public image in the Middle East and their greed in price gouging that spurred inflation, Reagan proposed that it was the government that was at issue, not American business. He sold the idea to the public that America Can’t, meaning that government can’t and shouldn’t help its citizens to a better life. Reagan convinced the public that the wealthy are to be worshiped and the poor are guilty of laziness, so the government shouldn’t interfere with the natural order.

In his first year as President he pushed through tax cuts for those in the upper tax brackets (70% down to 50%) and in the lowest tax bracket (14% down to 11%,) buying him goodwill with all citizens; however, in 1986 he pushed through additional tax reform that cut the upper tax bracket down to 28% and increased the lower tax bracket to 15%, making the lowest wage earners pay more in taxes than they did when he took office. The irony of his tax increase on the lowest tax bracket was that his “Supply Side Economics” depended on people having more money to spend, which they didn’t by the end of his second term.

FALSE PATRIOTISM
Like many conservatives, Reagan’s patriotism was limited to only those who were of the same mindset. He was staunchly against communism and during the late 1940’s, he and his wife served as FBI informants, ratting out anyone in Hollywood they thought to be sympathetic to communists. This hate for communism manifested during his presidency in massive funding of weapon systems that forced the Soviet Union into military spending that they could not afford while they were also in an active war in Afghanistan.

Reagan, like most post-Vietnam war conservatives learned that showy patriotism for the American soldier as a warrior was vital in keeping the younger generation at bay when they were sacrificed to protect American business interests around the world. Reagan involved America in the invasion of Grenada (1983,) Lebanon Civil War (1983, ) and the bombing of Libya (1986.)

Reagan’s administration also defied Congress by secretly selling weapons to Iran, the country that held Americans hostage for over a year, and gave the money to an anti-communist group in Nicaragua. Later investigations could not prove Reagan’s direct involvement in the scandal; however, the reasoning behind the incident matched Reagan’s staunch anti-communist sentiments.

REAGAN’S TOPPLING OF THE CARDBOARD SOVIET UNION
President Reagan biggest con with the American people was his two-faced position on spending. He wailed loudly about the government spending too much and took money out of the hands that needed it the most, but in reality he was the Big Spender when it came to the military. He tripled the deficit during his eight years as President leaving his successor, George Bush, to try to find ways to pay for Reagan’s uncontrolled military spending.

Fortunately, for President Reagan, America was able to survive his addiction for spending, which was not true for the Soviet Union’s effort to keep pace with the United States. After spending too much on the Soviet space program, (that failed to advance technology for the common Russian citizen,) Soviet involvement in a 10-year war in Afghanistan, (that sent the mighty Russian army home without any significant achievement,) and building up the military might to match Reagan’s excessive spending, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic went bankrupt.

The internal economic meltdown in Russia had a chain reaction with all of the Soviet aligned countries. Desperate East Germans sought to flee the economic disaster in their country and rejoin their cousins in West Germany. This eventually forced the East German government to either kill millions of their citizens, or open the borders completely. The fall of the Berlin Wall within a year after Reagan left office was quickly credited to him by conservatives who lauded his prowess in defeating a cardboard empire. The fact that it was self-inflicted wounds that caused the collapse of USSR and the other communist countries was ignored by those who wanted to glorify a cardboard President.

A LEGACY OF DEFEAT
As Reagan passed the conservative baton to George Bush at the end of the decade, America was fading as the world’s economic and technological leader. Government had been the catalyst in bringing America out of the Great Depression, beating the odds in World War II, improving our roads, building dams and power lines, and in countless other projects that no private business would dare attempt. The money spent by our government went directly into the hands of the private contractor, who then used it to pay employees and buy services and equipment from other private businesses.

But President Ronald Reagan ended that by using the government as the scapegoat for the misdeeds of the corporation. Without any proof the public accepted his premise that government was the problem and then he began to dismantle government and give the money to the wealthy. It was a master deception by the actor/cowboy who pulled off one of the greatest political cons since Hitler.

NEXT: The 1990’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 2000’s Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1970’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1973 oil embargo, Afghanistan, American Hostage Crisis, Arab, Conservatives, Democrat, Egypt, fuel, GOP, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Munich Massacre, Munich Olympic Games, OAPEC, oil, oil prices, oil shortages, OPEC, petroleum, President Gerald Ford, President Jimmy Carter, President Richard Nixon, Republican, Russia, Soviets, Syria, USSR, Watergate, Yom Kipper War

The 1970’s – American Implosion

The Decade of Oil Domination

Population: 203.2 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $23,381
Median Annual Income: $7,559
Life Expectancy: 70.8
Average Age at Marriage: Men 23.2, Women 20.6
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 52.3%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 10.7%

ENEMIES DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN
America was rocked by the internal conflicts during the 1960’s, and the 1970’s did little to sooth the hearts and minds of the citizens. Inflation slowed slightly in 1970, only to be followed by recession. Then the White House was rocked in 1972, by an ever-growing scandal called ‘Watergate’ after the place where Republican operatives attempted to break into Democratic headquarters. Over the next year it would be revealed that the Republican party, including President Richard Nixon played dirty politics during the President’s re-election campaign and then used power tactics to cover up their misdeeds.

In the Fall of 1972, the world was shaken by a group of Palestinians that took Israeli athletes hostage in Germany’s Summer Olympic Games. The Palestinians were given logistical assistance by German Neo-Nazis which helped them penetrate the athlete’s living area and capture eleven of the Israel delegation (two of the eleven were killed during the invasion of the Israeli rooms.) As the world watched, the Germans eventually attempted a botched night rescue as the hostages were moved to an airport. The German snipers were untrained and had no night vision equipment. Every aspect of the German rescue plan was flawed and the Palestinians eventually made a decision to kill all hostages during a stalemate in the fighting.

In October of 1973, Israel responded to a surprise attack by Egypt and Syria (the Yom Kipper War) with a counter attack. The United States and Russia quickly began resupplying their allies (US/Israel and USSR/Syria-Egypt) with arms and materials. In response the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC, later OPEC) began a six month oil embargo that created massive fuel shortages in the United States. This caused the price of oil to rise from $3/barrel to $12/barrel and sparked a new round of inflation.

OUTCOME: American Politics
By the late 1974, the Watergate scandal had ended in resignations by the Vice President and President. Gerald Ford, who had just replaced the Vice President, became the President and limped his administration through the end of Nixon’s term. By the 1976 elections people were done with the Republican party and Jimmy Carter was thrust into the job of restoring faith in government.

OUTCOME: Oil, Greed, and the Middle East
The OPEC oil embargo and the Munich Massacre sent a message that America should be focusing on the Middle East, but the Watergate scandal had caused an information overload, so many Americans still saw Russia as the main foreign threat. However, because the Middle East had massive oil reserves it became the most strategic region in the world for oil consuming countries. This caused the governments of Russia and the United States to attempt to secure the region for each country’s own self-interest.

The questionable tactics of unscrupulous American oil companies opened new wounds in the Arab world. Our public image had been defined by U.S. business and political interference in internal matters of many Arab countries. Americans were caught off guard by the festering hate for America in the Middle East.

OUTCOME: Economic Instability
The roller coaster of inflation, recession, inflation left Americans with a sense of fear about the economy. The typical American was caught by surprise in 1973 when the oil embargo practically put the United States on its knees. The pride America had after beating the odds in World War II and putting a man on the Moon were all erased by one unethical President and our country’s economic vulnerabilities.

THE NEW HOPE EXTINGUISHED
Jimmy Carter’s election in 1976, brought a new hope to America. That produced a new fear for Republicans. Nothing could hurt conservatives more than to have a Democratic President restore America’s self-confidence. President Carter focused on peace and humanitarian initiatives that conservatives said made America look weak. Fortunately for conservatives, the Middle East would be what they needed to derail the Democrats and return to power.

In 1979, Russia invaded Afghanistan and students in Iran overran the American Embassy and took hostages. At the same time a mythical oil crisis (world oil supply dropped by only 4%) drove oil prices up to $39.50 per barrel in one year. The events dominated the news and overshadowed Carter’s re-election campaign. Republicans successfully used political ads to paint Democrats as out of touch during the worst political crisis of Carter’s administration. The events of 1979 could not have been more perfect for the resurgence of the disgraced conservatives.

NEXT: The 1980’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1990’s 2000’s Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1960’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Lessons of Life, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

African American, Blacks, Civil Rights, Cold War, Communism, Inner City, JFK, John F. Kennedy, Richard M. Nixon, Riots, Russia, Selma, Soviet Union, space race, Suburban Life, Suburbs, USA, USSR, Vietnam, WIN

Note: This series premise is that we tend to see today’s world based upon what we experienced in the past. Different generations have different experiences, which can lead to different perceptions of what is happening in today’s world.

In this article we look at the 1960’s.

The 1960’s – The Three Americas

The Decade of the Roar

Population: 180.0 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $16,986
Median Annual Income: $5,600
Life Expectancy: 69.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 22.8, Women 20.3
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 41.1%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 7.7%

AMERICA AS THE TECH AND COMMERCE GORILLA
The space race continued technological advancement for both the Soviet Union and the United States; however, USSR kept even the most simple advancements secret from everyone, including their own citizens. The space-related advancements for the United States were often generated by private contractors. The advancements that were not ‘Top Secret’ could be applied in open commerce and available to the private citizen. USSR didn’t lose the Space Race when an American stepped on the Moon, they lost it when millions of Americans were able to buy consumer goods that incorporated technology generated by sending a human to the Moon.

This thrust America into the center of technological advancement in commerce. In addition to space technology, new super highways, power grids, and phone lines increased commerce. The capitalist system of “build only what we know will sell” was replaced with a new space age economy of “solve problems that no one ever thought of before.”

The downside of a growing economy is that when people have more money to spend, then greed steps up to take their money. It’s one thing for a business to raise their prices to cover additional costs, or to pay for improvements to their products or services, but when prices increased for the sake of greed, then worker wages must increase to help them pay for a higher cost of living. That was the root cause for the upward spiral of inflation in the 1960’s.

AMERICA AS THE WORLD’s POLICE
Communist aggression and American pride clashed as China and Russia sought to halt the threat of bottom up government (self determinism) to their model of top down (power to the few.) The space race was fueled by Russian moves to claim the ultimate higher ground. Russia, China, and the United States began winning over developing countries in a blatant attempt to win control of strategic regions around the world. Military might became a primary resource in diplomacy. Those who stood to make money through weapon development and sales were strong proponents of meeting aggression with aggression. Governments found that the concept of small wars as a means to prevent larger wars were more palatable to the public.

With the onset of smaller wars came the utilization of forcing young men into fighting wars, while those who made the decisions to fight went home to their families every night. The gap between those who sacrifice and those who benefit from war became crystal clear. Civil unrest across the nation against the Vietnam war created a split that was widely visible through national television news. America was no longer in a post-war honeymoon.

AMERICA FACING ITS OWN FAILINGS
The Civil War purchased an end to institutionalized slavery, but it didn’t end white domination of African-Americans. Societal tools to humiliate and dominate black people created a divided America based on skin color.

Determined to no longer be oppressed, African-Americans began to challenge white society. This caught many white Americans living in communities outside of the South by surprise. Meanwhile in the South, some white groups committed heinous crimes in an effort to derail any African-American challenge to the dual-class society that protected white supremacy.

Few people fully understood how the United States of America could become so divided in the two decades following the World War II. Small town people sought simplistic solutions to issues for which they had very little understanding. The complexities leading to the chaos of the 1960’s were two much for a ‘Mayberry RFD’ mind.

With the boom in suburban living, the segregation of the races led to a flash point in many major cities. Whites choose to run away from inner city issues to live a sanitized life that sucked taxpayer money out of the neighborhoods that needed it the most. From the comfort of their new recliner in their new subdivision, white people embraced small-town thinking. Nuke Russia, nuke Vietnam, nuke Cuba, war protesters were just drugged out hippies, Blacks were responsible for their own failings, etc. were typical of positions of the 1960’s Caucasian.

NEXT: The 1970’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1980’s The 1990’s The 2000’s Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1950’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Generational, Government, Higher Education, History, Lessons of Life, Politics, Pride, Science, Space, Technology, Traditional Media, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1950, 1950's, post depression, post war, Space, space race, television

Why is the world like it is?

It is an interesting question. Unfortunately it is the wrong question. The world is what we perceive it to be and our perceptions are based largely on our experiences…or at least the experiences we tend to remember. This is why attitudes about the world are vastly different between generations. This doesn’t mean that age determines attitude, just that age contributes to attitude.

So why do different generations tend to see the world differently?

The 1950’s – The Calm After the Storms

Mass Production of New Technology

Population: 151.3 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $15,029
Median Annual Income: $4,237
Life Expectancy: 68.2
Average Age at Marriage: Men 22.8, Women 20.3
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 34.3%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 6.2%

POST DEPRESSION, POST WAR

If you were an adult, you just survived through the most massive conflict in history. Millions died directly or indirectly because of the war. The United States of America was expected to fold after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Instead, Americans pulled off a miracle by sacrificing normal daily life for a united country at war.

With victory in World War II came a fierce pride, but nobody was ready to rush into another war anytime soon. Despite that, a growing fear of Russia’s aggression put everyone on edge that they might be plunged into even a more horrible war than the one they survived.

Children of the 1950’s were witnesses to a traumatized adult population. Their grandparents lived through the Great Depression where the unthinkable financial disaster became everyone’s reality. Both grandparents and parents survived World War II. An event that stopped normal living and put everyone under the shadow of death and fear. Children also became a victim of the Cold War where fear of a global extinction event was a real possibility.

NEW ECONOMY
The massive industrialization for World War II created new jobs, more money, and a sudden burst of growth in the economy. Companies grabbed up anyone with advanced training or knowledge to incorporate advancements in technology created during the crisis of the war. People suddenly could afford luxuries like televisions, phones, cars and new homes. This prosperity was juxtaposed against the horrors that the world had experienced in the previous 20 years. It was truly the best of times and the worst of times.

NEXT: The 1960’s

THE SERIES: The 1970’s The 1980’s The 1990’s The 2000’s Epilogue

The Grade Negotiation Season

21 Wednesday May 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Higher Education, Internet, Opinion, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

college credit, Email, financial aid, grade point average, Grades, negotiation, professors, semester, student loans

Spring brings forth the failures as well as the flowers

Most people don’t realize that we are in a new season. It happens twice a year at the end of a semester when college professors are bombarded with emails from their students trying to beg, borrow, or steal a few points for a higher grade. It should be noted that the majority of these emails are not coming the students who attended class, turned in assignments on time, and studied for the tests. No, these are the students that missed class, turned in assignments late, and had a party to go to rather than study.

The emails are typically as follows:

Hi,

Could u look @my grade. I need 2 have a c n u’re clas or i lose my finansal aide. i was sure i had a c n u’re class.

Rach

The student often assumes that the professor knows in which class the student was enrolled, and writes as if she or he is texting a friend. The student probably knows that they didn’t deserve a “C” in the class; however, they hope that the professor will feel sorry for them and bump them up. Usually, nothing changes, but the student can say to her or his parents that they were sure they had a “C” in the class and that they even complained to the professor, but he or she wouldn’t change it.

For the professor, these emails take pointless hours of time to review the scores, confirm the grade, and respond. It turns the end of the semester into a circus where all the clowns come out of the woodwork after being absent most of the semester.

There is nothing wrong with a student questioning their grade; however, if a student is at the borderline of losing her or his financial aid, and/or falling below the required grade average for enrollment, the problem is not about one grade, but the overall performance in all classes.

Sadly, professors are not allowed to offer an appropriate response such as:

Rachel Smith
Student
ENG 203 – Writing For Business

Dear Rachel:

Thank you for your email. Your grade is based on your participation in my class and reflects the work you performed. The “D’ you received is not only correct, it is generous. I’m pleased to see that a student like yourself will no longer be offered financial aid, so that a better quality of student can now be a recipient.

I wish you well on your future in the world of menial labor for which you may or may not be qualified.

Sincerely,

Edward Terrell
Professor
University of Higher Education

Stop Using the Fahrenheit Scale

19 Monday May 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Communication, Education, Generational, Government, Lessons of Life, Public Relations, Science, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Celsius, Centigrade, comfort, degrees, Fahrenheit, scale, temperature

I know you think it’s hard. We were taught temperature in the Fahrenheit scale. It’s all we know. Now forget it.

The problem in understanding the Celsius scale us that we try to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius, or the other way around and it becomes too confusing. I say it again, forget the Fahrenheit scale. It’s the best way to understand the Celsius scale.

Why? Because most of the time we only care about the temperature to know how to dress, so try this:

-20°C – Why are you outside?
-10°C – It’s really cold. Gloves and a muffler with your winter coat.
0°C – It’s cold. You need a winter coat.
10°C – It’s cool. Jacket weather.
20°C – It’s comfortable. Maybe long sleeves.
30°C – It’s getting hot. Short sleeve and shorts.
40°C – It’s really hot. Find the nearest air-conditioned room.

That’s it. If you can count by 10’s you can understand the Celsius scale. Okay, I’ll let you see the corresponding temperatures in Fahrenheit:

-20°C – Why are you outside? (-4°F)
-10°C – It’s really cold. Gloves and a muffler with that winter coat. (14°F)
0°C – It’s cold. You need a winter coat. (32°F)
10°C – It’s cool. Jacket weather. (50°F)
20°C – It’s comfortable. Maybe long sleeves. (68°F)
30°C – It’s getting hot. Short sleeves and shorts. (86°F)
40°C – It’s really hot. Find the nearest air-conditioned room. (104°F)

If it helps, just remember that 20°C is comfortable if there is no wind. Every 10° up or down from that temperature is going to be a significant change in comfort level. It’s that simple.

Okay, if you’re a cook, the Celsius scale is a little more challenging, but baby steps, baby steps.

Management Study for God

19 Wednesday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Fiction, Generational, Government, History, Human Resources, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Sports, Tom Peters, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

analysis, females, Gender, God, humans, implementation, males, management study, men, recommendations, review, Women

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On March 1, 2014, Kiser and Co. was retained by God to perform a study of the world management. After a thorough review of the processes and effectiveness of the current management practices on Earth we submit the following analysis and make the following recommendations.

ANALYSIS

FINDING ONE: Ineffective World Leadership
Our researchers found the world leadership to be largely ineffective, self-promoting, and in some cases cruel and corrupt. In most advanced civilizations we would expect to see leadership to evolve into higher quality leaders as lessons learned from poor leadership would be applied to avoid repeating past failures. In fact, we have seen the reverse is true in many situations.

Key examples are Russia and North Korea. In both cases, the eventual failures of past leaders who used military force, prisons, politically controlled media, covert police enforcement, and corrupt practices have not deterred the current leadership of these countries to return to, or continue those practices. In addition, religious-based organizations seem to be among the worst offenders in promoting policies and practices that marginalize people and encourage hate and violence.

Immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING TWO: Lack of Vision
There seems to be a lack of concern for the future of the world. Consistently we saw an attitude that can best be described as “What’s in it for me?” Companies focus on next quarter’s profit, not long-term viability. Governments tend to lack any sensitivity toward the underprivileged, tending to blame them for their problems while passing laws that benefit the privileged at the expense of those who cannot afford the basic necessities to survive and prosper.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING THREE: Obstruction of Progress
Many in leadership positions use propaganda and destructive techniques to prevent effective management. By focusing on meaningless, but highly controversial issues, some leaders have been able to keep discussions away from relevant issues and waste time through generating anger on topics among key population groups. The result is wild, pointless discussions on issues that cannot be resolved unless everyone works together. The key element in the obstructive leadership’s tactics is to announce that any compromise is a failure. In this way they create an “all or nothing” situation that effectively stops progress.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING FOUR: Inequality
We were shocked to discover the issues of inequality. The gap between the “haves” and “have-nots” is vast and continues to grow. People are grouped and identified with certain expectations that determine their treatment by the world’s leadership. Slavery has become replaced with subtle tactics of discrimination that tend to become more bold over time. In many cases, the discriminatory practices have become accepted as normal.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Despite the scope of the problem, the solution is surprisingly simple.

PROPOSAL 1: Downsize the Male Gender
Among the four major findings, men were found to be the principal source of the problem. The current ineffective leadership group (Finding One) is overwhelmingly male dominated and they tend to be the people who demonstrate a lack of vision (Finding Two,) an inability to compromise (Finding Three,) and promote inequality (Finding Four.) Without men almost every current issue disappears without any further action.

Eliminating all males will also result in many benefits. The world population will be dramatically reduced, sexual harassment will virtually end, most, if not all, wars will end, and most pay equality issues will cease. Issue after issue becomes smaller, or disappears completely without men on the planet.

COUNTER FINDINGS
It is difficult to find negatives to this solution; however, here are some of the areas that may feel the impact of downsizing the male gender:

Reproduction — A lack of males would seem to create an issue in the propagation of the human species; however, there is believed to be enough frozen sperm available to continue reproduction on a smaller scale and the new males will be raised in a female-dominated environment, which may weed out the personality and behavior issues of the current male gender.

Male-dominated jobs — There are few jobs that truly require a male worker. Just because females have been excluded from many jobs doesn’t mean they can’t be trained to perform the work effectively.

Sports — Without males, most competitive sports will end. We cannot find a downside to this issue.

IMPLEMENTATION

It is believed that a 100% downsizing of the male gender may not be necessary for an effective change in world management. It might be more advisable to put all males on a 30-day Improvement Required Action. At the end of the 30-days those who have not demonstrated a clear reversal of the findings of this study should be downsized. The remaining males could then be re-evaluated at 60 and 90 days to determine if the initial downsize resolved the problem or not. It is suggested that the changes required should be permanent as a condition of continued existence.

We do have recommendations about downsizing certain females; however, those may be handled on a case by case basis in a closed meeting with Human Resources.

The Seduction of Anger

03 Monday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Generational, Health, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Opinion, parenting, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Violence in the Workplace, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Anger, anger addict, anger management, angry, rage, Violence

Anger sucks you in, then eats you up

I have noticed something about people (including myself) and anger. For most of us, anger is seductive. Despite popular belief, it feels really good to get angry. There is pleasure in it. Yelling and screaming, ranting, and losing control is self-satisfying. We let go of the constraints of good behavior as we explore the limits of bad behavior.

Often, our anger follows a logical thread, but anger doesn’t need logic to fan the flames. When we’re angry we choose facts based on how well they support the reasoning we want, not what is reasonable. We also look to find old issues that our compromising or humiliating to the person we are arguing with, in order to verbally attack their vulnerabilities.

In the heat of our anger we feel powerful because we see ourselves as righteous and pure in our cause for perceived injustices. Anger gives us license to ignore anyone else’s viewpoint because they don’t agree with you, therefore, they must be wrong.

How To Respond To Anger
Ignoring someone’s anger is not a solution. Ignoring an angry person enables him or her through a belief that the behavior is appropriate. Direct confrontation with the person is also inappropriate as it is likely he or she is not rationale, nor are they interested in a logical discussion.

If it is appropriate, a person expressing overt anger can be removed from the situation providing they can be paired with a calm, non-threatening person while they de-escalate. If that is not appropriate and the person seems capable of harming themselves or others, another tactic is to become their ally. Agreeing with them and helping them to make a plan of addressing the issues causing the anger may defuse them long enough to disengage from the anger.

This tactic cannot be sarcastic, nor condescending in any way. It may also require lying to the person; however, if physical harm is a possibility, lying is a small price to pay to avoid someone becoming hurt. Once you have lied to a person who is angry, you may have damaged the relationship beyond recovery, so it should not be done unless all other options have been exhausted.

Once out of the situation, the person should be directed to counseling. It may be helpful to see an angry person as an addict who turns to rage for their high, and just like an addict, the person needs expert help to disconnect from the need for a fix.

3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

Category Archives: Generational

Moffat County, Colorado: Story of Two Families (Part II-Destiny Unfolds)

Moffat County, Colorado: Story of Two Families (Part I Pre-Homesteading)

Colorado By Any Other Name

Bashing “Respect For Others” By Calling It “Politically Correctness”

The Day the World Will Stop: Changing of the English Throne

Free Range Parenting: How to Say I Don’t Love You

J. K. Rowling: The Unexpected Author

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part III

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part II

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part I