So every night around 9:00 p.m. a barely audible electronic beep occurs near our master bedroom for about ten minutes. It is driving me CRAZY!
That's all.
I usually don't disagree with Umair Haque, he's a real sharp economic/entrepreneurial thinker. But it drives me crazy when someone, even someone I like, tweets something like: "another publisher breaks with amazon, wants $15 for ebooks. strategic suicide."
Strategic suicide? Uh, no. No it is not. There is an irrefutable economic rule that has been in existence since the beginning of civilization. Here it is: People will pay a fair price for a good product.
Let me repeat that: People will pay a fair price for a good product. A good book is a good product. Is a good book worth $15? Hell yes! Of course it is.
The problem with our economy is that we overpay for products of lesser value and underpay for products of greater value. We will pay $3 for $.25 worth of brown laxative water that we drink once. (Confession: I'm a coffee drinker.) But we gripe if we have to pay $1.29 instead of $.99 for a song that makes us cry every time we listen to it, which we do hundreds of times, because it reminds us of the first time we fell in love.
A good product is worth a fair price whether it is delivered at a store, over the web, or even by owl post. There is a major economic and cultural danger in believing that because a product is digitized, it is worth less money. Such thinking creates an economics of selfishness and a culture of shallowness. It engenders businesses that get us to pay real money for products and services of little-to-no value: like ATM service fees and fake money in virtual games. And it turns thoughtful human beings into mindless consumers: people who will gripe about paying an author $15 for a book that enriched their mind (random pick), but who will pay 50% (or a lot more!) of their yearly income for a sports car that is marketed to make them feel more sexually vigorous (random not very racy example).
A fair price indicates a valuable product. But it does more than that. A fair price indicates an economy which places a reasonable value on a good product. A fair price is the only way for an economy and the humans who participate in it to thrive.
Just a quick post. A few times recently when it's been my turn, I've rushed through our meal-time prayer. Life is so busy. You know, "Good Lord, good meat, good food, let's eat. Amen." But then my kids jump in:
"And we pray for Palavi." (The little girl in India we support through World Vision.)
"And Burundi." (We support a village through Plant with Purpose.)
"And the people who don't have a house." (We've had rain in San Diego.)
"And that Marble doesn't die." (Marble is our beta fish who's on the brink.)
And now...Consumerism Conclusion: When we live the lifestyle of American-style consumerism, we develop habits of low potential. We get in the habit of getting more stuff. Do we really want our children to aspire to...shop at Best Buy?
It is encouraging to me that our children are starting to make high-potential habits their own habits. Sure, they've heard us pray a million times over the years. And some of their prayers simply mimic ours. But now they are starting to internalize those prayers and concerns. They are forming characters that care about others more than stuff. I love it!
It's worth considering what kinds of habits we teach and reinforce in our children. The best kind (I think) are the ones that are habits that help others. They are "high-potential" habits; that is, they are habits that can change the world by blessing other people.
P.S. for tired parents. Lest our family sound too idealistic, as I wrap up the post all the kids are whining and fighting. They're good kids, but kids nonetheless.
I have just a few thoughts regarding the iPad and its relationship to the consumer.
But first a couple of minor points. Can you say, "Lame name?" How did that get through creative? I'm stunned.
As for the technology, it too is lacking. There's more hope in the technology, however, than in the nomenclature. Several folks have pointed out that the iPad is like the earliest iPods. Remember those awkward, monochrome things? The iPad, it is said, is just the first version of an amazing product, two years from now.
A revolutionary technology must be able to do two things: 1. it must conjure possibilities in the end user's imagination and 2. it must be easy to envision how it will develop into an exponentially better technology in the near future.The iPod went from an MP3 player to a mini computer to a mini computer/game console/phone/camera. MacBooks have gone from laptops to laptops. It's clear which one was revolutionary. The iPad might be revolutionary, but it's hard to say.
And there is a motive force called "expectation" that will create resistance to the iPad. When the iPod launched it was unspectacular. No one expected it, and no one put expectations on it. When the iPhone launched it was spectacular, and people were expecting it to be. This week when the iPad launched, the expectation was all or nothing - either better than the iPhone or so-so gadget. Most people seem to think the iPad is a so-so gadget.
Nevertheless, a lot of people are going to buy it. And this is where I'm personally most disappointed. The iPad does little more than offer you and me the chance to, you guessed it, buy one more thing.
The iPod turned us into consumers. With an iPod you could listen to the audio version of the New York Times. The iPhone turned us into contributors. With an iPhone you could produce the pictures and tweets and audio that might contribute to the New York Times. The iPad seems oriented toward putting us all back in our place as buyers of things. It has a nice application that lets us read the New York Times.
With an iPad, it seems to me, the average person can add value to the world, if "value" means playing games, buying media, and looking cooler than the person without the latest gadget. With an iPad there is not much for you and me to contribute, yet. And that's not revolutionary, yet.