There is nothing worse than money troubles, when they are too prominent

That is how it seems, anyway, when money issues play too large a part in life. In reality, there ARE worse things, and I have experienced them, in the past. The problem is that they aggravate other issues, and act as a magnifier.

I can only imagine what other people are experiencing, but I imagine that there is a great deal of common experience among people affected by the economic downturn that started in 2000. In our case, we didn't really notice the effects until late spring of 2001. Even then, we were able to continue, not unscathed, but "making it". By the spring of 2003, the job market, near home, was in collapse (at least in the IT field as well as in telecom). Wage deflation hit a critical level.

We are hearing horror stories of people reduced to panhandling to meet their basic needs. What is the cause? What is the cure? The surface cause is the collapse of the IT job market, to the point that wages have fallen to early 1990's levels or below. What has that happened?

One thing that has transpired is that even though companies need more people to do the work, they refuse to hire, leaving the work undone. In really competitive industries, such as telecom, the regional Bell companies have pressures. One, in particular, which created problems for itself, under previous management, would seem to have cash flow issues that are requiring them to save money, rather than get the job done.

The problem is, they still want to get the job done, so they are pushing full-time employees past the limits of what are reasonable and ethical (maybe even past what is legally possible). What is the result? People are quitting, rather than have this sort of pressure and what seems like abuse.

What can be done? As long as there are companies from India (for example), that are bringing in people on L1 visas, and paying them at Indian scale, but paying their expenses, there will be pressure on pay rates. We used to see Indians on H1B visas, but that is a thing of the past. The new reality is the L1, as the people are tied to the companies, and can't jump, like they could with the H1B.

People can say that people in the IT field should stop "whining", but IT is just one of the affected professions. Another is anything to do with telecom, although there, it was the massive layoffs and overcapacity that did in the job market, in that industry. The effects are starting to be felt. One real danger is the collapse of the real estate market.

I'm not sure when the full effects will be seen, but people laid off or who have suffered massive wage deflation are being affected by threatened foreclosures, or have already been foreclosed. That can't be good for the real estate market.

My guess at the culprit for what we are seeing is the massive, anti-business political pressure from the Democratic party. The Republicans feel like they have to join in, to avoid being tarred by the issue. That, and the high-profile prosecutions of business figures (again, driven by politics), are causing comapanies to be so risk-adverse, that they are not hiring, when they would like to be.

What is the solution? Find a way to hammer the Democrats over their destroying the job market, by their anti-business demagoguing. The Democratic politicians, and their buddies, the trial lawyers, have put us in this spot. How we get out is hard to see. It would help if President Bush and the Republicans could win in the fall, but that is very uncertain. Right now, the Democratic weasels seem to be winning. Not all Democrats are weasels. Many are good people, and I would debate them. The weasels are the John Kerrys and Theresa Heinz Kerrys of the world. For the good of the country and civilization, they need to be defeated.

Being an Enabler

An open issue is whether once you have been an "enabler", is that a fixed behavior pattern? Based on experience and "close observation" (being inside the situation), that is a continuous concern. Could we have traded an alcoholic for what Julia Cameron calls a "Money Drunk"?

Characteristics of an enabler are that they are always trying to "fix" the situation. They are always there to rescue the addicted person. The enabler is also trying to "please" the addict. That is a thankless position, as those needs can never be met.

The enabler starts thinking that they are crazy, but the craziness is in the addict. Unless the addict can be put into "recovery", there will only be a "downward spiral", until the addict "crashes". Those who love the addict, and are trapped into enabling them (by our thinking processes) can only hope that the crash is not too severe.

This probably sounds unbelievable to people not involved in such a situation. However, this is all too real, and is being repeated, daily.

I want to tell a story

This is a story about living with a wife who is abusing prescription drugs and alcohol. As is commonly the case, the husband is in denial, and has enough of his own issues, that he feels guilty even thinking bad thoughts about his wife. As a added feature, the wife smokes (the husband doesn't). The husband had tried to become a smoker and to be an alcoholic, but failed. You can abuse alcohol (that had been the basis for the relationship), but that can't necessarily convert you to being an alcoholic (thankfully).

Abusing alcohol together had been a good deal of the original rationale for their relationship. There was that, and what seemed to be common interests in art. The wife, as a young woman gave up on her art, as she felt like she had to compete, and couldn't.

I have trouble crediting this as the reason, but the young wife read Robert J. Ringers book about Winning Through Intimidation. That book struck a responsive chord with her, and she followed the practices, from then, onward. The husband didn't really understand, but he came to be very dismayed and angry about the result.

There had, fairly early, been a difficult period, early on, when the husband had decided to split, and had even found someone else (who had a great deal of good sense, and had kept the relationship just at an emotional level). In retrospect, not splitting at that point was for the best, although that was a difficult decision.

Time progressed, and the couple worked at developing some common interests. To all appearances, the relationship was improving (as far as the husband could tell). He encouraged the wife to be educated and to grow. They even attended a meditation seminar, taught be a professor from their university. The husband set a goal that he achieved three years later.

When the time came for a major career move and location change, the wife and child moved home with parents for a semester. The husband was left to wrap up and then move to the new job and location.

The husband started talking to himself. You might not think that this is possible, but you can talk yourself into doing all sorts of odd things. The husband had a crush on a young woman for the last two years. She had been friendly, but had a fiance. The husband had convinced himself to tell the young woman how he felt, right before he left. He had some photographs of her, and he made some drawings of her, had them framed, and presented them to her.

Quite naturally, all this attention was unwelcome, as any sane person could have known. However, when you have talked yourself into an "altered state", you lose touch with reality. The bottom line had been that the husband did not want to leave, without saying something, on the off chance that the young woman might not take offense.

She was kind, at first, but not interested. After a while, she was irritated, and told him so. After leaving, he finally gave up on the attempt. The whole episode seemed like a bad dream.

In the new location and new job, the husband tried very hard to make his marriage work. The husband ran every morning with his wife, as that is what she wanted to do. The husband sort of liked the idea, at first, but he really was only running to try and please his wife. He encouraged her, when she decided to get a master's degree. He started in a PhD program.

The husband kept hoping that things would go well. There were some things happening, however. They were drinking a six-pack a night or a bottle of wine, per night. The wife kept on smoking, despite her running. She started seeing a therapist and got a Valium prescription. Soon, she was abusing Valium as well as beer and wine.

There were episodes in stores where the husband felt like he wanted to sink through the floor, as the wife would deliver some undelivered tirade against a store clerk.

There were other times when the wife showed great wisdom, such as raising their child. When the child got in trouble, she helped guide them out.

A common thread, for both the child and the husband, is that the wife did everything she could to control their lives. Only later, did the husband learn more their child's experience.

When the husband got a job offer, far away, that they "couldn't refuse" (the offer of a lifetime), he husband went on ahead, while the wife and child stayed behind, so the child could finish school.

Within six months, the wife was telling her husband that she was going to ask for a divorce, unless the husband could rekindle their love. He spent the next year doing his best, but things came to a head.

The husband expressed his dismay and anger at the unfairness. Something smapped for him, at that point. He also had something of a "wandering eye", which only made him more ready to split. There already was an intention to split. At that point, "he moved out". Oddly enough, things got better.

Over time, the former husband came to grips with the fact that he had been denying that his wife had a problem with anger, alcohol, and later, Valium. Much later, she was able to become clean and sober. We can imagine that wouldn't have happened, without the split, and the husband might not have been able to deal with his personal issues, either.

The former husband and admirer of the young woman had some interest in knowing what had happened to the young woman. He remembered two things about her: her name and the college from which she graduated. Thanks to the Internet, you can find all sorts of things (with the right search engine and search criteria). She seemed to be off in a slightly familiar region (seemingly not married) and working for a prominent company.

Obviously, any effort to reconnect or communicate would be a bad idea, as in this day, such a thing would be considered "stalking". You just never know many things, and how your life will play out. Only later, do can you come to understand your illusions (and delusions). All this may be part of living, but that doesn't ease the pain involved. All that anyone ever wanted, at the core, was to have a happy, "normal life". Other people seemed to have them. Why couldn't they?

John Kerry's remarks today that he thought were not taped

In an informal setting, when John Kerry thought that he was not being recorded, he made off-hand remarks that seemed very much like he was talking about President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. John Kerry said "These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group of people I've ever seen". Later, his aides were spinning this saying that the he was talking about the Republican "smear machine". I heard the remarks on the radio, and I took the same way that the host did (Hugh Hewitt), that he was talking about Bush and Cheney.

I found the whole tone offensive, the way John Kerry was talking. It is similar to the tone used by his wife, Theresa Heinz. They are for the little people, but they are privileged rich, and they are elitists. They know nothing of ordinary people's plight. Their approach is to slander, not present useful ideas. The Kerry and the Democrats, along with the rest of the radical left-wing fringe people in their movement, only know how to smear, not to lead.

Open political warfare

There are issues on which significant groups of Americans are deeply divided:

The War on terrorism

President Bush

The War in Iraq

"Social issues (i.e., Gay Marriage)

"Decency in broadcasting"

My sense is that the majority of Americans are both more conservative than the Democrats would like to believe, but also more "libertarian" than the "Right" would like to believe.

The next year will be more interesting than I would like, as the "Left" has "pulled out all the stops" and will stop at nothing, to win (i.e., lie, cheat, steal). They "have" to win, while the "Right" really would like to win. For the countries sake, we need someone who will fight a "war on terrorism" to win the election. Anything else would be a long-term disaster.

I am starting to think that business is starting to think that John Kerry could win

At this stage, this is wildly conjectural, but I suspect that business and the stock market are starting to react negatively to the fear that John Kerry and the Democrats might actually win this election. I agree that it would be disastrous, as John Kerry has demonstrated that he is clueless about how to govern the country and how we might encourage businesses to hire.

Technology stocks seem to be in the process of tanking. That would be very bad for the economy, if it continues. Technology is the engine that drives the economy, and if that is depressed, the economic prospects are depressed. The election prospects, and the anti-business witch hunt by Elliot Spitzer and people like Martha Stewart's prosecutors, are all part of what is scaring business into not hiring.

John Kerry seems shameless

When I read about what John Kerry and his wife have been saying about President Bush and the Republicans, it really made a strong, negative statement about their character. "A**es of Evil", indeed!.

The Democratic presidential campaign

I was interested to hear Britt Hume characterize the Democrats as playing hardball, in the Presidential campaign. How I would characterize what he said (in my words, not Britt's) is that the Democrats are perfectly ready to fight "dirty". They are willing to hit below the belt, or wherever there is an opening. The gentlemanly Republicans want to be able to follow the "Marquis of Queensberry rules".

I have thought that the Democrats were ready to lie, cheat, or steal, if needed, as they want to win, and they will do anything to do so. They are not bound by ethics or morality.

Business is cautious about hiring

The largest factor holding back job growth, in the US, is that business received such a massive shock, when the latter 1990's bubble burst, starting in 2000, that they are extremely reluctant to hire. Even though the economy shows signs of growing strength, the trauma of 2001-2002 is still ever present.

The business I am currently serving, as a consultant, desperately needs more IT staff, but management is extremely resistent to either hiring full time employees or to retain, much less expand, consulting staff.

There is reason to believe that this situation is common across the economy. The job numbers seem to reflect that sentiment. There was a flurry of activity on the IT consulting job market in early December, and after the new year, that has vanished.

The Met Council, in Minneapolis-St. Paul

The latest adventure in the on-going saga of the "Met Council", in the Twin Cities, is the bus driver strike. I have no insight into who is right or wrong, but the Met Council is a bloated bureacracy that has nasty effects. They are the cause for the lack of "affordable housing" that is bemoaned by the Democratic Farm Labor Party. Their "anti-growth", "anti-sprawl" measures are responsible for inflating real estate values above where they should be (by a huge percentage).

They are also responsible for the traffic jams on the local highways. They refuse to spend money on roads, because they want us to either ride buses or, even better, light rail. Their pet light rail project is way over budget and schedule. Adding to the problem are the Twin Cities version of HOV lanes (what they are called in Texas), "Smart Lanes" (I believe). They decry the governor's attempt to get these converted so that you can pay to drive in them.

With the bus drivers strike, if anything, I had a faster commute in to work, today (there were no large, almost empty buses blocking traffic).