Marina Keegan had just graduated Yale when she died in a car accident. Her last column in the Yale Daily News is magical in that it captures so eloquently the feeling of infinite possibility that should come with young adulthood. See:

Of course, there are things we wished we did: our readings, that boy across the hall. We’re our own hardest critics and it’s easy to let ourselves down. Sleeping too late. Procrastinating. Cutting corners. More than once I’ve looked back on my High School self and thought: how did I do that? How did I work so hard? Our private insecurities follow us and will always follow us.

But the thing is, we’re all like that. Nobody wakes up when they want to. Nobody did all of their reading (except maybe the crazy people who win the prizes…) We have these impossibly high standards and we’ll probably never live up to our perfect fantasies of our future selves. But I feel like that’s okay.

We’re so young. We’re so young. We’re twenty-two years old. We have so much time. There’s this sentiment I sometimes sense, creeping in our collective conscious as we lay alone after a party, or pack up our books when we give in and go out – that it is somehow too late. That others are somehow ahead. More accomplished, more specialized. More on the path to somehow saving the world, somehow creating or inventing or improving. That it’s too late now to BEGIN a beginning and we must settle for continuance, for commencement.

Those are feelings I can certainly relate to. The fear of not measuring up, not living up to my potential, of falling behind, and then the eventual calm when I realize that there is infinite possibility. I could never ever have predicted the course of events that has come in my life to date. The times when I was most bleak, most self-critical, self-loathing, when I feared that I had blown my “one chance” was usually right before a turning point that opened a fantastic door. You never know. As Marina said, “it’s never too late.”

It was pitch perfect with this quote from Benjamin Button that I’ve always absolutely loved. That resonates so well that I worship it:

it’s never too late…to be whoever you want to be. There’s no time limit, stop whenever you want. You can change or stay the same, there are no rules to this thing. We can make the best or the worst of it. I hope you make the best of it. And I hope you see things that startle you. I hope you feel things you never felt before. I hope you meet people with a different point of view. I hope you live a life you’re proud of. If you find that you’re not, I hope you have the strength to start all over again.

 The quote is just so right to me. So amazing.

It, of course, strikes me as harsh that someone with so much talent, so young, beautiful, and smart would have her life ended so prematurely. It insults this notion of a plan — why national disasters that kills tens of thousands don’t unsettle or move us as much as a terrorist attack — this stuff isn’t supposed to happen. If it could happen to them, couldn’t it happen to me? For Marina, I sense that she lived life to her fullest with each of the too short days that she did have. That comes through in her writing. To those who knew her, it likely did in her daily life. That’s more, unfortunately, than a great many who have lived twice as long can say. That’s a lot.

Let’s remember. It’s never too late. To start. To dwell in infinite possibilities. It’s never too late, because we don’t know how long we have, or what’s in store. So let’s “begin a beginning.”

Groupon has taken the entire ride. From wonder boy CEO and “fastest growing company ever” to becoming the evil company out to defraud merchants/investors. Now that I’m no longer directly affiliated with the company (other than being a locked-up shareholder), I thought it would be nice to provide a little balance. There’s plenty that’s been said on the negative side of the ledger — no doubt inspired by a righteous desire to protect the little-guy merchant and investor and not at all fueled by a desire for twitter followers or endless TV appearances.

Outside of karmic balance, I also care about the company itself and for my friends there. A recent occurrence is that I’m also tired of conveying much of this content in response to questions. Last week alone, I got 5 inbounds from people who could potentially have a relationship to Groupon and who want to know “just how bad it is inside the company.” These conversations don’t scale, and as I dug deeper, I saw just how loud and effective the shrill cries of the critic have become. For the record, I’m not trying to lay out a pro-Groupon case here. That’s because I really don’t care/want you to buy shares, love the company, go work there, or whatever. I just want there to be another signal amongst the litany of noise on the company for intelligent people who want to form their own judgements.

Groupon is a strange company. It just is. Start with Andrew, a very charismatic, quirky CEO. Then take the unusual nature of their first investors (vs just investing, they become co-founders and partner with you) and their past business history. Corporate employee count and revenue base basically multiplied like rabbits. The international growth under the leadership of the infamous Samwer brothers was unprecedented. The massive fundraising rounds with large insider sales by early investors. Turning down a $4-6B acquisition after only 2 years in business. The very model had a simplistic appearance that appeared to lack a defensible element. The newly created accounting terms invented to share key business metrics with the outside world. The incredibly confounding Super Bowl ads that absolutely no one seemed to like. A COO, who in less than six months, made a Google-Groupon sandwich. Any one of these plotlines are interesting enough alone. Together? A strange, fascinating company.

It’s a Rorschach test, really. You could pretty much see anything you want if you look hard enough. Currently the ink-blot looks sinister (much self-inflicted) to pundits, a picture worthy of scorn and suspicion. While not actively seeking to change opinions, I do hope to provide additional context. Since context changes perception, that inkblot might look a little different by the end.

So here are some things that are no less true than the negatives, but get much less attention:

1) Groupon has put together a fantastically well-credentialed, experienced management team. The negative press constructs a narrative of a shortsighted enterprise hell-bent on ripping-off merchants and investors alike. The biggest problem with this contention, though, is the people. They’ve not only knowingly signed up to join the company, but they play also play a direct role in steering it. Groupon isn’t some faceless Borg ship; it’s full of Picard’s and Riker’s. It is gospel in the Valley that people and culture are the most critical component to a company because they mostly determine outcomes. If one accepts this premise, what follows should matter heavily.

Jason Child, CFO: Jason is a veteran of Amazon and basically ran international finance there. His resume (but, really, resumes are dead, I mean LinkedIn profile) speaks for itself, but first-hand he’s one of the smartest, most thoughtful executives I’ve ever worked with. With the recent accounting restatement, there is a lot of, understandable, apprehension over financial controls/situation. Jason is clearly in the spotlight as head of finance*, but for what its worth, I trust the guy completely. He’s got his work cut out for him, but if the job is doable, he’ll get it done.

Rich Williams, SVP Marketing: Rich also worked at Amazon running worldwide customer acquisition, etc. Other than my close friend Gedioen, Rich is the other person I take in a marketing draft to save my life. He got in the weeds of user acquisition/conversion numbers and also was a clear voice on the brand challenges.

David Schellhase, General Counsel: David was Counsel for Benioff at Salesforce for 9 years. Yeah, that pretty much says it all. David’s a badass. A man of few words, but incredible presence he immediately got to work on all things litigation and compliance.

Skipp Schipper, SVP HR: Skipp (or “Brian” as, randomly, I just discovered is his first name according to his LI profile) was the global head of HR at Cisco. Yes, that Cisco Systems. Trying to be an agile Internet company while you have 10K+ employees spread out all over the globe is intense. It kind of helps that Cisco has 70K+ employees all over the globe, and Skipp has been there, done that.

Jeff Holden, SVP Products: Sometimes things are so interesting, that you only need one sentence: Jeff worked with Jeff BEZOS at DE Shaw, then joined Amazon in 1997 (!), and ran all of consumer for Amazon before founding his company, which was eventually acqui-hired by Groupon.

There is, of course, much other great talent. There’s Hoyoung Pak, who is, not just an operations ninja, but literally, an actual ninja. He joined as I was leaving, but I was struck by his thoughtful, calm discipline in turning Groupon’s far-flung (and often undisciplined) operations into something approaching world-class. The list goes on… Aaron, former-roommate Jason, Brian, Mihir… Look at their backgrounds and think about whether they’d join or be party to a willful scam. Or if you were a company that was basically imploding would you hire such smart, powerful, influential people or instead more middling talents who you could hide the truth from?

2) Groupon has been building a ton of lower-margin, high-value tools for merchants. Groupon Scheduler, so merchants can more efficiently schedule their appointments not only from deals, but everyday business. Groupon Rewards, a loyalty program to help drive repeat business from deals and otherwise. Groupon Now! to drive demand during off-peak times. The pattern here is that whether you use Daily Deals or not, these are tools to help your business. Daily Deals is the golden egg with huge margins for Groupon unlikely to be found in future offerings. That clearly doesn’t scare Groupon off from trying to meet merchant needs because being the ecosystem for local business requires massive scale and providing massive value. These are small steps in trying to deliver that. Success here unlocks massive value for Groupon (and its merchant partners), which they are clearly demonstrating they understand. Then there are the massive amounts of talent acquisitions (by Groupon’s incredible Corp Dev staff led by Jason and close friend Tom) that are no doubt building the next generation of great products.

3) Groupon has massive ongoing merchant relationships. If Groupon was such an evil company and so bad for local merchants – why are tens of thousands of  these local businesses still actively working with them? As a national populace, we lionize small business owners. Do we only believe that they don’t know what’s in their best interest when it comes to the “evil Groupon”? That’s a bit insane. In every major city in America, a large number of very prominent local fixtures have repeatedly chosen to feature their businesses on Groupon. Are we really supposed to believe that these businesses are actively working against their self-interest? If you do, then I actively encourage you to embrace President Barack Obama’s radical socialist agenda for America** to help save them from themselves. Or if you believe that these businesses have no choice but to run a Groupon or face insolvency (wait, what?) then by that logic isn’t Groupon doing everyone a favor by helping these businesses bridge this cataclysmic chasm? It’s hard to divine any kind of logic here. The numbers and facts of repeat, free-market choices by local merchants defy all cohesive argument.

Now two myths/misconceptions:

1) Groupon is an awful, easily replicable business that is toast once “the real” competition arrives. This is the meme that refuses to die, but should, if only to give this amazing Hillary Tumblr the room it needs to thrive. But the clear consensus was that Groupon would die shortly from the clones because there was no moat.*** To be honest, when I joined Groupon this was the point that I was most ill at ease about. But when you take a breath, and look at reality, what’s happened? Yelp, probably the strongest brand in local merchant discovery, abandoned the deals business. Facebook, the stickiest web property in history, shut down shop quite quickly. Google has, it seems, gained zero traction. LivingSocial after surging has faded a bit (but still a great company). Amazon is still sorting things out, but clearly hasn’t cracked the nut. The hundreds of local clones have mostly gone quietly into the cold night. Those are facts, not theory. Finally, as critics love to say that the very “daily deal” model with its discounting and revenue splits is disgusting and evil (!). It’s apparently predatory.  That must be why two public companies with valuations in the twelve digits, Amazon and Google, seem to be stumbling all over themselves doing their darndest right now to try and exactly replicate it. Yes, clearly it is intrinsically evil (bad for local merchants!) and has no barriers to entry (will crumble as soon as anyone of substance enters!). Right.

2) Groupon is doomed! – The critics were right, just look at its stock price and all the negative press. GRPN is admittedly trading at a disappointing $13ish. That earnings restatement hurt****, no doubt. Of course those who have made a PR career off Groupon are using all of this to declare victory, repeatedly pat themselves on the back, and let everyone know that they’ve “been right all along.” Unfortunately just looking at the stock price ignores history. I’ve been lucky enough to have worked at two pre-IPO companies. LinkedIn and, obviously, Groupon. LinkedIn traded to a high of 120+ and dropped to the mid-50′s. This meant absolutely nothing about LNKD’s core business. Nothing. My point is just that stock performance doesn’t make any kind of demonstrable point. Signal? Sure. Point? No.

Second, just because the torrent of current herd opinion is against GRPN doesn’t turn it into truth. Why? How about this bit from the WSJ:

“What would you do with a 3-year-old company that has never turned an annual profit, is on track to lose a quarter billion dollars and whose recent SEC filings warn that its services might be used for money laundering and financial fraud?

If you were the managers and venture capitalists…, you’d take it public. And that is what they hope to do in an $80 million offering that will test the limits of investor tolerance and financial market gullibility.

…(Market N)eeds…as much as it does an anthrax epidemic.”

Written about Groupon? Nope. PayPal. 10 years ago. What else? Well, PayPal paid its users $10 to join, $10 to existing members for a referral. This led Reid to once remark that they would actually decrease their burn rate, if they switched to throwing $100 bills from the roof. Yet, as uncomfortable as it was, it was a high-risk, high-reward strategy to winning a massive market. I’m not saying Groupon is PayPal. I’m not saying Groupon is LinkedIn. Those are two phenomenal businesses with the most precious of all advantages: network effects. While being the  plumbing for local merchants seems network-y, ultimately we’ll have to wait and see. Regardless, we need to stop, breathe, and look around. There are clearly parallels.

At this point, you’ve been with me for 4 hours reading this. We’ve exited the part where I’ve tried to help you understand a bit about the company (and now I’ll try to stop typing because my fingers are cramping). If you’ve come this far, you might be wondering about my time with Groupon. I led the merchant group. That was basically everything non-sales that involved a merchant. This meant I worked on merchant marketing programs, new merchant tools and delivered sanctimonious speeches to the entire salesforce about how important our merchants were to us. It was an incredible, great role, surrounded by amazing people at a very important time in the company’s history. I love the people and my time there. Why did I leave? Part of it was that coming off my 18-month congressional sojourn, I wasn’t sure I wanted to commit myself to Chicago/a large company and from the first introduction from Reid to Andrew we structured as temporary/interim leadership. When I joined, neither Rich, Jeff, or Hoyoung (all mentioned above) were a part of Groupon.   All of them quickly grew into invaluable partners and functional mentors once they did join though. They innately grasped the importance of merchants to our long-term success. Late summer, I brought to Andrew the idea of elevating the Merchant role or splintering the group functionally to these various heads, and he chose the latter. It’s hard for me to argue with his choice given how talented the team is. So folks who worked on my team in product, marketing, and operations spun out into these various heads.  Always nursing a certain international wanderlust, I debated a role that was offered to move to Dublin to play (probably not so nicely) with the Samwers. Ultimately, I decided that I had already learned a ridiculous amount and was sliding down the curve of diminishing returns in learning and skills, and wanted to move on to what was next. Today when friends see all the negative news about the company, they expect that I’d be happy I left. On the contrary I often look back wistfully, part of me misses Groupon and wishes I were still there side-by-side with my friends.

Last, this post is sort of intentionally obnoxiously long. Why? Because I’d really rather not write another. I don’t aspire to be the “Groupon guy”. And so, to recap, I’m not trying to sell you on Groupon.***** I just want folks to take a breath and form their own opinion. The innate herd mentality combined with the echo chamber that is Silicon Valley can be a doozy. But after reading this, maybe a few of might think that Groupon has actually, maybe, done one or two things right in their lifetime. You might even think that they, in fact, have some chance at pulling off a veritable moon landing of becoming the plumbing of local commerce. There are lots of worthy companies out there: Square, Google, Amazon, PayPal, LivingSocial, Facebook. They all have some kind of shot at local commerce. But, it’s just not rational — just not fair, not an impartial reading of the facts, to say that Groupon isn’t also in that conversation.

We can spend our time hating on Instagram for selling at a $1B w/14 employees & no revenue, and Groupon for its variety of sins, or we can choose to live up to our individual human potential, and dare to try and be great. It’s much easier (and more fun) to judge people, but I think Roosevelt was on to something:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

—

* The two people most under fire are Jason and Andrew. I understand. I don’t really bring up Andrew in this post. It’s a shame that very few people in the Valley have gotten to know Andrew. He’s one of the most talented people I’ve ever come across. Most impressive? He’s been on a massive up/down ride and he’s always been almost inhumanly even-keeled about it. Equally impressive is how fast he learns. I heard from someone who was there in “The Point” days about how much Andrew still had to learn about business/management then. His instincts, and how fast he learned, was absolutely amazing. He’s not perfect (when he gets a pet project in his teeth, he can’t let it go), but NO ONE is. What he is: ridiculously talented. When I found a company (now or years in the future), I’ll gladly take Andrew’s money and bizarrely creative brain. For all the shit he takes, you should especially worry if Andrew isn’t running Groupon.

**For those of you about to freak out: relax. I ran as a Democrat for Congress in 2010. So: I kid, I kid.

*** Bill Gurley talks about moats in one of the best ever posts by a VC when he calls out that not all revenue is created equal. Though I agree w/his post completely, though we have a general disagreement on Groupon.

****But what does it say about the company? Probably that they went public too soon. This is a totally new category that has no precedent, no history for modeling. As customer cohorts age, and as they experiment with new deal categories and types, refund rates could have pretty large changes. This doesn’t do well for predictability, forecasting, or investor comfort, but that’s part of the deal for new businesses. I don’t believe that has anything to do with accounting shenanigans or other kind of scary stuff. No doubt internal controls need work. It takes time, and for the longest time, Groupon was a rocket ship where the company was just trying to hang on internally and with t he international sprawl, even harder. Internal controls are critical, the company knows that (see management profiles) and now must play catch up.

*****In fact, I told my mom not to buy Groupon. She’s retired, and Groupon is just too high-risk, high-reward. They could win local commerce and have a market cap that’s easily 2-3 times what it is today or end up with one that’s well below where it is. And no doubt, just being public creates more noise and scrutiny (why I’m writing this) and the pressure for short-term profits. Groupon’s success, in my opinion, will be entirely determined by its ability to prioritize building long-term relationships and value for merchants. I’m not the smartest, but I’m guessing that some amount of this comes directly at the expense of short-term revenue. In fact I’m more concerned about the company over-optimizing for short-term at the expense of  long-term — in the forms of focusing on quarterly earnings.The stock market is an awful insane, childish short-term optimizing machine, so just the fact that the company is public is something I dislike.

Special thanks to Ben Casnocha, Avichal Garg, and Andrew Chen for reading and giving feedback.

As is visible in my last post, I’ve been spending a lot of time in my head. It’s probably a good thing. Thinking about what matters and the “why’s” of various stuff. A few weeks ago, John Lilly shared a link of this video of Mo Cheeks, the then coach of the Blazers coming to the aid of a young girl who had stumbled, and then had trouble getting out the words to the national anthem. It’s a pretty remarkable video and it really hits me. At 1:56 in, that look of gratitude and appreciation is amazingly, amazingly powerful. I get choked up every time I see the video, and at 1:56, it’s absolutely overwhelming.

Kindness. It’s what Mo Cheeks showed. And, as I’ve been reflecting on this new decade of my life and what matters, and what I’ve learned, it’s one of the things that I’ve kept coming back to. I don’t know much, but I do know that kindess has been one of the best luxuries in my life. It’s incredibly powerful. It’s potentially one of the most important things about our humanity.

I grabbed lunch with my brother today. I wasn’t especially hungry and since I only nibbled at my food, I had this huge takeaway container. On my way home, off a side street, there was an (apparently) homeless man, sitting on his sleeping bag, hunched over eating some Fritos. I saw him, and as I’m apt to do, I quickly looked away and kept walking. Then I registered that I was holding food. I thought about it for a second and then doubled back and asked him if the kind of food I had was OK/if he wanted the leftovers. He was very gracious and thanked me. As I gave him the food we looked at each other in the eye. I saw this weary, weathered look and the tired gratitude in his face. As I walked away, I found myself with a bit of the same overwhelmed feeling I mentioned above. I felt incredible. Not because I’m some great person for giving away something as trivial as leftovers (in fact, I’m actually pretty callous towards the poverty I see, and resent myself a bit for it). But because I was lucky enough to be able to show a tiny, minuscule act of kindness to someone, I felt so unbelievably unlucky. I was filled with a certain love for that guy. Maybe love isn’t the right word – was it compassion or empathy? Either way, it reminded that *that* feeling is among the happiest that I ever am. That feeling is an absolute high.

When I’ve thought about this, it reminds of the even simpler kindnesses. Just smiling at a stranger. I think that’s a kindness. It’s being gentle with each other. Holding a door open. Helping someone pick up something they spill. Stopping to ask if someone needs directions. Helping a stranger park their car when they’re struggling to back in. Carrying groceries. Or again, even just the simplest of all, smiling at a stranger. I think the world can be a ruthless, rough place sometimes. Or even quite often. We’ve all got so much going on. So many pressures. Obligations. Fears. Hopes. Just so much. And that simple act of smiling, or these other kindnesses, is that incredibly powerful way of being gentle with each other.

So many things in my life go back to my mom. I wonder if this is one of those too. I remember once long ago, my brother said to me that our mom has this face, or this way about her, that makes people want to help her. Now this could just be that everyone thinks that their mom has this his inordinately kind face and demeanor, and if so, add me to the list. But I think my mother is one my personal best examples of that softness and kindness in how you can carry yourself.

Grace is one of my favorite concepts and attributes. I’m sort of obsessed with it. There’s this beautiful grace in kindness.

So there it is. Kindness. The best, most valuable, luxury there is. I hope to indulge a lot more in 2012. I encourage you to do the same.

What’s different now that I’m in my (nascent) 30′s? I think it’s a certain comfort.

There are a bunch of things that over the last 10 years caused me a ton of churn and tumult. Things like leaving/interviewing for a new job or making a career decision. Once I would obsess over details and get caught up in the back and forth that always happens in these things. I’ve recently been having some conversations about joining a company. Then the process seemed to go off the rails. The recruiter sent me an email reassuring me that all was good, etc. I chuckled because I realized that years earlier I would have been hoping to hear this – waiting for this email. Instead, now I sort of shrugged. Things have ups and downs and a bunch of random crap happens. If it was going to come together, after I did my piece, it would. On Friday night I was talking to someone much smarter and more successful than I am and mentioned all this, and he just nodded. It’s just one of those things. Once you’ve been to the rodeo, you eventually know what rodeos look like. So it’s calmer.

It’s not limited to professional stuff either. Whether it’s a moving cross-country or dating a girl. When I first moved from NJ to Cincinnati and then from Cincinnati to SF, those experiences really rattled me. While I was deeply excited about both moves, I was also leaving behind friends and the life that I had carefully built for the unknown. I can so vividly remember that feeling. Now the idea (or act) of moving is just a blip. Whereas I once obsessed about relationship hiccups (or pursuits), there’s no longer an overpowering churn about what she’s thinking or whatever. Though, since this last example is emotional vs logical, its definitely the least developed of all the ones.

I described it as comfort at the top of this. But I guess it’s also just a certain confidence. And that doesn’t mean you only develop this peace/comfort/confidence if you’ve been successful and haven’t made mistakes. I feel like I’ve made more, and greater, mistakes than most people (though, I’ll bet that most self-critical folks think this). While that should wreck my comfort as I approach these things considering all the poor decisions I’ve made professionally and personally, it actually hasn’t. I think that’s because I have recognized those mistakes. So, instead, it gives me solace that since I’ve made the mistake in the past and am aware of it, I’m less likely to make it again. Or, failing that, despite it happening, I survived it. And I mostly likely would again if I needed to.

Other than the occasional grey hair, the growing bags under my eyes, losing the ability to sleep in, the increasing soreness after physical activity, this is what I think I’ve gained with age. With age, I’ve gained the quiet confidence that life most often works out.

In the past few days I came across two must-read articles on the topic.

1) The NY Times dives into the topic through the lens of Apple and the iPhone. How the US lost out on iPhone work; Apple, America and a squeezed middle class. Must Read.

2) The Atlantic Monthly absolutely blows the doors off with a great dissection at the high-level of American manufacturing and weaving in the human face. Making It in America. Phenomenal.

I recommend starting there. There are a slew of topics that every citizen should understand. Manufacturing is one of them. It drives the wealth and stability of nations and the type of society you have. At least until now it has. It was clearly one of the building blocks of a prosperous and triumphant America. Our mercantilist policies and inherent natural advantages largely contributed to the sole superpower position we held.

I want to lay out 3 important things about manufacturing that are not well understood or known. I’ll do a separate post on why manufacturing matters — but the fact that has historically been a primary source of work for the masses should be enough for now. (That shouldn’t be controversial.)

1) Automation. Robert Reich is the one who first drew my attention to this in 2009. Essentially, global competition or not, technology was rapidly cutting into the humans you needed for production. This trend has only accelerated, as robotics and software improve at scale, the costs of automating repetitive tasks are going to continue to sharply decline. We’ll see more automation everywhere in the world. It will literally take a shortage of the natural resources (a whole other post) to cease this inevitability. So, net, automation has cost a good chunk of American jobs. This is also true for Chinese, German, Japanese, South Korean, et al jobs.

2) Training. I blame politicians (shocker) for why this is so little understood. Since Bill Clinton, I feel like this has become one of those safe ubiquitous lines everyone agrees. “Move up the value chain. Education is the key. etc, etc” These lines have been parroted and led us to the “sacred truth” that everyone needed to just go to college and they’d be well on their way. I think this is (and was) total bullshit, though all the reasons why this is true is another post. (Google Thiel “Higher Education Bubble” for an excellent background on the counter to this “truth”). In reality, educated workforce meant a very complex, diverse truth. It meant a great liberal arts education for some, a rigorous math, science/engineering education for others, and the missing one — was a highly valued vocational training. Germany has long known the importance of this and has a variety of vocational training. Both articles linked to above touch on the need for this. Over the past decade we have all but given up on this kind of training. While part of a more complex point, I believe that we should aggressively be retooling our community colleges to focus on this kind of vocational training.

3) Industrial Policy. Automation aside, the Apple story talks about government having targeted industries that they wished to build up and this resulting in an unbeatable combination. This is what’s called industrial policy and is something that is rarely talked about in America. Countries that have heavily used industrial policy? Japan, China, Germany, South Korea. It’s a whose who list of the powerful, triumphant manufacturers of the world. America too once had a very muscular industrial policy starting largely in the 1800′s going through World War II. With Europe in shambles and our industrial and economic might seemingly infinite, foreign policy and political concerns dominated any kind of industrial policy. The result has been that slowly but consistently (with a surge this past decade) built up industrial capability overseas that has led to Ross Perot’s sucking sound of jobs going overseas. Industrial policy can be a combination of tax benefits, cash and natural resource subsidies, calculated currency manipulation, and protectionist trade restrictions to protect a burgeoning industry. While there are examples of America focusing here (agricultural primarily) we’ve sat out this game. Industrial policy matters and while it has its skeptics (can the government really pick the right industries that matter?) — the rise of most of China, Japan, etc is ridiculous proof for a thinking person to ignore.

There are a lot of other important things to join this discussion. The importance of building a cost infrastructure that supports manufacturing vs consumption. On a scale of 1 to 10 — China is a 10 towards supporting jobs (manufacturing, etc). The US is close to a 1 — we have focused on consumerism and the amassing of more and more crap. By the way, lately that crap has been debt. There’s also a philosophical question about what an ideal, fair, and practical society looks like. I find that you have to not think on a national scale to do this exercise, but go back to that of a small village. Unfortunately we’re neither having an abstracted conversation about where we’re headed, what we’ve been doing, and where want to go nor discussing the actual real impact on American’s lives. Both the NYT piece and The Atlantic do both of these things on some level. It’s much needed.

I’ll end by saying that while I loved the articles, I found Davidson’s closing line in The Atlantic to be a bit disingenuous:

For most of U.S. history, most people had a slow and steady wind at their back, a combination of economic forces that didn’t make life easy but gave many of us little pushes forward that allowed us to earn a bit more every year. Over a lifetime, it all added up to a better sort of life than the one we were born into. That wind seems to be dying for a lot of Americans. What the country will be like without it is not quite clear.

It’s become fairly clear. In fact, that’s why his article was so great. He lays out the clear arc:
1) People like Maggie who the article opens with are actually quite rare. A great very many “Maggie’s” across the country don’t even have the opportunity that she has.
2) And even for her, the basic ideal of a middle class life barely escapes her reach on a salary of sub-$30K.
3) And then finally, the writing is on the wall that with automation, even what the lucky one, like Maggie has is likely to be gone in the forseeable future.

The “very lucky” in this story, Luke, is shown as a clear anomaly. In fact the NY Times story on Apple presented the other side of Luke, in the well-trained Eric Sargoza an engineer who can’t find a job and has been replaced by someone in Shenzen who makes nearly what he did.

From Davidson’s own article, the future, by connecting the dots, is even more dark. The variable here is that we live in increasingly chaotic times. You can’t make predictions in times like this because there are too many variables. You’re bound to be wrong if you do. In the absence of that, you have to at least connect the dots and prepare. Because that’s the best you can do. Sadly, the dots have clearly been there since I was born (30+ years). We’ve chosen mostly to ignore them and, I fear, the chickens are coming home to roost.

**This article was written stream of consciousness and is unedited. I’ll remove this once I’ve edited it** Also, a future post will be what I think we need to do now. At a ridiculously high level, it’s this: http://votechili.com/7/#manufacturing

I was heading in to the office. Naturally with my earbuds in. Listening to a podcast or some music. Before I walked downstairs to the train, I walked by two older visibly homeless men asking for money 100 yards apart. You become immune to these requests so quickly. At times you don’t even notice or, if noticed, you don’t even process them anymore — you just unconsciously know to keep walking. On this particular day, last March, it was freezing cold in Chicago. I wanted to get on the train as soon as possible and so I moved along quickly. When I was underground, I checked my phone and saw the train was still a few minutes away. I looked around and saw no less than five folks who also had their white earbuds in. I thought back to the homeless guys I had quickly walked by minutes before.

Then the thought first hit me. Had we become an earbuds society?

It was the division that was the clearest to me. Apple, a company whose products I love, stood out as a clear example. You have millions of people who flock to Apple stores, buy the latest in technology: laptops, phones, tablets. Admittedly, it’s a diverse group. Apple fanboys(girls) are everyone from those who camp out for hours to be the first to buy to the more casual buyer who waits a few months.

These are items that can cost in the thousands of dollars (MacBook’s and iPhone’s with data plans). They’re amazing devices and I find extreme utility in them (I’ve used them for my professional productivity for the past four years). So I’m not calling out any intrinsic issues with them or saying there’s anything wrong with Apple or buying their stuff. My larger point is their roles as a representative of the division between vastly divergent economic lives.

There are a ton of other signs for who belongs to what “economic class” — Audi or Honda?, Coach purse?, designer jeans?, Patagonia jacket?. The most subtle to me, the white earbuds, also in feels like its clearest manifestation. Perhaps because it isn’t an overt display of wealth. It’s not flashy. It’s arguably just a utilitarian device that most who own don’t think twice about. But that’s why it’s the perfect representative. It’s the stuff that you don’t even realize– that you take for granted– that’s often the clearest basis for division.

So, one, the white earbuds are the subtle representation of the split in society. You are either a part of the group that can (fairly) casually drop a few hundred dollars to join or you aren’t.

The second thought was the more resonant one. The earbuds represented the barriers that we put up to avoid engaging and really looking into what’s going on around us.

It’s easier to walk by someone in need on the street if you can pretend you don’t see or hear them. White earbuds allow us to stay in the perfectly manicured universe of our iPhone tuning out all else.

It’s a lot easier for us to do this because the road forks very quickly. A homeless guy asking for money is lazy, looking to buy alcohol, to avoid working — someone who has spent his life shirking his responsibility to himself and society. He’s that. Or… A homeless guy asking for money is a military veteran, who had a sick spouse that led to an eviction, bankruptcy, the loss of a job, the path to battling alcoholism, and every day tries and fails to get back on his feet. Or has a mental illness (innate or from the war like PTSD) that led to estrangement from family, the inability to hold down a job and the downward spiral. The stories I’ve heard go on and on.

The thing is, I don’t know which of these is the case. Maybe the archetype of the lazy, good-for-nothing homeless represents 80%. Or maybe it’s that of the veteran in shitty circumstances that’s 80%. Either way, I’ll save that discussion for another writing. My point is the road forks very quickly. From seeing him begging for money– and us walking by– or to actually stopping and giving them money (or food, whatever) and letting them enter our consciousness. We wish to prevent that fork, whether consciously or not, and white earbuds are our invaluable ally.

So, two, the white earbuds are the subtle way in which on a daily basis we stay within our worlds and the lives and circumstances of others are prevented from seeping into and affecting our paths.

I don’t have a pronouncement here. A solution. A recommendation. I am also not judging or lecturing anyone else. I am a member of the white earbuds society. With all the talk of the Occupy Wall Street & the 99% and 1%, I guess 10 months ago I was wondering if the division is far more distributed a ~80% 20%. Maybe my numbers are way off, but not my point. Is it really just all about the “super-rich” or is the much broader antipathy of people like me (and most of the folks I know) also responsible for the absurd state of everything?

I believe we have a white earbuds society. And almost a year after I first had this thought, I could see it in my nieces and nephews. In the iPhones they had, the presents they got for Christmas. A new generation growing up with white earbuds.

I feel guilty. Not for being part of this white earbud society. I’m not sure where that slippery slope ends and so any guilt at living a very comfortable life is pretty much outside of my daily consciousness. But I do struggle with the latter point of the barrier and the daily separation. That everything that this comfort and privilege that I have (earned?) also forms a barrier and prevents me from having empathy and understanding what is going on in the world around me. That my daily thoughts and reactions are shaped in the absence of others’ lives. Naturally, my experiences from the past few years shapes this fear in a big way. One of my biggest concerns is instability . I see unsustainable in everything: in the use of natural resources, in economic imbalances of currency and trade, and on a micro-basis in our individual societies. The white earbud construct helped highlight one such source of this division and the impact of it. And, maybe, one source of why such large sources of instability/inequity* can exist and grow.

White earbuds. Their presence divides us. Both in who has them and in how they keep our worlds separate.

*”Extreme inequity = instability/unsustainable” in my book.

After months of hard work and intense deliberations [Let’s just hope that you don’t read any of the reports that said that we basically only met a couple of times over the past few months. Though considering the horseshit that’s about to come, let’s address this really early to get it out of the way], we have come to the conclusion today [Today was the soonest we could reach the conclusion because it also happens to be the first time we’ve seen each other in a long time] that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee’s deadline. [For all of you who thought that all of us in Congress are incompetent, we hope you take note. We didn’t miss our deadline. There’s no ‘dog ate my homework’ or ‘my computer crashed.’ You’re welcome.]

Despite our inability to bridge the committee’s significant differences [Those of you who are our supporters, don’t worry! We didn’t miss out on whoring it up with lobbyists because, heck, we just didn’t meet! That’s why we couldn’t bridge differences. But our FEC reports are going to look sweet!], we end this process united in our belief that the nation’s fiscal crisis must be addressed [But not by us…suckers! Though someone should really get on that. We should some find some folks. Oh, wait...] and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve [We try not to let this get out, but we actually understand math. We’re pretty sure this ponzi scheme will be up by then. Remember: Congress – we’re not that stupid]. We remain hopeful that Congress can build on this committee’s work [hahahahahahah!] and can find a way to tackle this issue in a way that works for the American people and our economy [After Congress gets done with that, we can all go out find some unicorns, explain the series finale of Lost to each other, and take our hovercrafts to the moon. We are very sincere in all of this.]

We are deeply disappointed that we have been unable to come to a bipartisan deficit reduction agreement [That’s why you need to vote Republican/Democrat in 2012 so we can solve this for real. We’re serious. Just vote for our party in November, and we really mean it this time.], but as we approach the uniquely American holiday of Thanksgiving [We’re just like you! We celebrate Thanksgiving!], we want to express our appreciation to every member of this committee, each of whom came into the process committed to achieving a solution that has eluded many groups before us [Can you tell that this was the only part of this statement that the entire committee agreed on? The need to praise our hard work, sacrifice, and competence was a no-brainer]. Most importantly, we want to thank the American people for sharing thoughts [Really, we thank you for not paying any attention to this and for probably not holding any of us accountable come election time.] and ideas and for providing support and good will as we worked to accomplish this difficult task. [Thanks. We love you. Especially how rich we’re all going to get from our insider trading and the sweet lobbying jobs we have waiting.]

We would also like to thank our committee staff, in particular Staff Director Mark Prater and Deputy Staff Director Sarah Kuehl, as well as each committee member’s staff for the tremendous work they contributed to this effort. [These people wrote this release, so they get to thank themselves.] We would also like to express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Douglas Elmendorf and Mr. Thomas Barthold and their teams at the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation, respectively, for the technical support they provided to the committee and its members. [But most importantly, again, thank you for continuing to vote for each us no matter how far we have our heads up our asses.]

[Love,
Senate members
Patty Murray, Washington, Co-Chair
Max Baucus, Montana
John Kerry, Massachusetts
Jon Kyl, Arizona
Rob Portman, Ohio
Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania
House members
Xavier Becerra, California
Jim Clyburn, South Carolina
Chris Van Hollen, Maryland
Jeb Hensarling, Texas, Co-Chair
Fred Upton, Michigan
Dave Camp, Michigan

+ the rest of the house & senate]

I saw a quote this week that just floored me. It was so deeply incisive. Here it is:

…David Frum, former George W. Bush speechwriter and once-prominent neoconservative, … “Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us,” he said. “Now we’re discovering that we work for Fox.”

That’s from an article on the media and Sam Zell.

Think about that.

Republicans originally thought that Fox news worked for us
There was this jubilation on the right and this great fear and loathing on the left with the ascendance of Fox News. This incredibly clear, forceful, loud voice was helping to drive the very goals and agenda items that Republicans had seemingly laid out. Essentially Fox was helping to sell the Republican agenda.

Now we’re discovering that we work for Fox.
The above is great when the message is reinforces the very message that Republicans wanted and supported the eventual goal they aimed for. But eventually a crazy thing happened, which is the weird world we live in. Fox at some point (I wonder if we could find the moment?) shifted the line to their ideology. So instead of settling for taking cues and helping to support an agenda, they set the damn agenda. Their narrative fueled what the people demanded, which would in turn become what the Republican party had to deliver. They now work for Fox news.

As an aside, this has corollaries to the tech world where the discussion today is dependence on platforms. Things like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter are platforms on which you build your business on top of. The Republican party, in some ways, has built their business on top of the Fox News platform. And, while there’s a variety of reasons why it’s occurred, their far, and in many ways absurd tilt to the extreme-right, Fox eating the Republican party is some major part of it. Or at least this theory sits right in my gut at this second.

So back to the question I started with and why I brought up the quote. It just affirmed to me this notion that highest impact right now is not necessarily running for an office, but shaping the discussion. Folks like Fox and other pundits and “broadcasters” have, in my opinion, the biggest role to play in what happens. Things are still headed to shit in my opinion. Obama, the magical 2010 Republican congressional class, and everyone else have done nothing to change this. As my irritation and rage smolder, I now think about how I can help shape this narrative. So that’s what where my mind is.

The WSJ gathered the greatest hits of his quotes. So many of them strike me with that powerful feeling of saying something you know to be true, that you feel, that you have been groping around to express but could never put into words. I’ll do another post about various Jobs’ quotes and what they mean to me, but for now I want to talk about this gem from his magnificent ’05 stanford commencement speech:

“Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure — these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.”

I remember the goosebumps I first got when I came across the speech 6 years ago. I watched/read it at least a dozen times in that first day because it spoke to so much that I was going through and thinking about. When I reread it this week, it synced with another piece of writing that I recently enjoyed. It was from a Paul Bucheit blog post called “I am nothing” Here’s my favorite part:

Until we let go of our mental images of who we are or who we should be, our vision remains clouded by expectation. But when we let go of everything, open ourselves to any truth, and see the world without fear or judgement, then we are finally able to begin the process of peeling off the shell of false identity that prevents our true self from growing and shining in to the world. And it starts with nothing

Bucheit echoes Jobs here.

We’re all, ultimately, naked and nothing. We wear our baggage and it prevents us from living the life that we were meant to. From experiencing the amazing promise we each came into the world with.

This week was great to remind me that I am naked. It’s a choice to wear the baggage that the world can effortlessly clothe us in — dogma, judgment, fear, failure, comparisons, etc. I am naked and I am nothing. And now that I’ve reminded myself of this, what should I do? Where should I go? How should I act? What should I pour myself into? These are the thoughts on my mind. Though my answers change depending on when I do the asking, I’m better for having the right foundation.

Anyway. Thanks, Steve Jobs. Not just for my laptop and phone. But for serving as an inspiration. For showing us what it can be like when we live up to our promise in an area of our life. For reminding us to remember that we are naked and nothing, and that being so allows us to be everything we ever hoped to be.

So, I’m declarative here. Obama’s failure.

I’ve wanted to write this for a long time. It really built up over 2010. As my feelings grew stronger, I felt trapped by circumstances. For the first half of the year, I was seeking the Democratic nomination. Probably not the greatest strategy in the world to air your grievances against the leader of the party whose nomination you are seeking. In fact, in reality, the airing of grievances should be probably be kept to Festivus only. But I digress. After winning the nomination, in the second half of the year, I felt paralyzed by cynicism. If I called out the president, I would likely be viewed cynically as just another candidate who would say anything, and throw anyone under the bus, just to get elected. Likewise, I refrained from any Republican-bashing altogether because outside of the unproductive tone, I realized it would be dismissed as standard politics.

So that pretty much meant that I kept my mouth shut in public on the subject of the president. Tonight, the president delivers his third state of the union and I didn’t want him to address the nation until I had my say. I can only imagine his speechwriters’ frustration upon reading this post with so few hours to go and having to do a massive re-write. Such is life.

I am not happy with President Barack Obama. Some would (and have said) that I am being cynical. But it’s the opposite. I am horrified because the president has revealed himself to be the most cynical of all.

In 2006 & 2007 as Barack Obama campaigned across America he spoke of change. Not just any change. Not changing a few policies. Like changing the healthcare system, changing the vacancy sign at Gitmo, or changing DADT (don’t ask, don’t tell). No, he talked about transformational change. Washington was a corrupt, fatally flawed place, that had cease to function for the American people. If the goal of Washington was to advance the cause of the American experiment, it had broken. And Barack Obama had come along to tell…no, to promise us, that he was coming to Washington to destroy it.

There’s a deep sense of hopelessness and cynicism attached to politics. Most of all amongst the youngest of voters. I believe it boils down to a sense that it doesn’t matter which candidate wins, nothing changes but the window dressing. In a campaign of historic proportions, Obama flipped the script. He galvanized young and old. Here, he promised, was your chance to be heard. I’m sick of all this too. The posturing. The petty bickering. The flitting away at the margins, while the glaring disasters are in plain sight. I hear you! Now is not the time to be small, it’s time to go big! Instead of being sick of everything, let’s change the system, he whispered to us.

So we elected him. And, look, I’m actually one of the people who think almost any decent Democratic candidate should have won that election. The conditions were about as primed as humanly possible (Bush fatigue, supreme economic malaise-turned-crisis, a changed McCain, and everything that was ‘Sarah Palin’) for a McCain defeat. But, still, the record dollars raised, largest grassroots effort in American history, electoral landslide. Change had come to America! Game on! Let’s go change Washington! Can’t Wait!

It’s been two years. I’m still waiting.

That’s not to say that a lot hasn’t been accomplished. Far from it. The president has presided over one of the most ambitious legislative agendas in decades. See this site for the laundry list of things he’s gotten passed and signed.. As checklists go, he’s been busy.

But Washington today looks a whole lot like it did 5 years ago. The huge scary problems that were looming over us 3 years ago, are still there. The president promised transformational change, and then once he got there, he got to work right away on transactional change.

Am I being too harsh? Is not realistic to expect big, systemic change? To expect the things that are course-altering? I was just expecting what was promised.

In the end, as much as I dream, at my core, I’m a harsh, realist. And so I as I watched the campaign unfold, I was never sure that Obama would be able to do the things he promised. But I believed that he was angry by these things and that he would at least try.

I do not believe that Barack Obama ever tried to change Washington. This is Obama’s ultimate failure.
Maybe he tried to do it by asking nicely. He went behind the scenes and extended olive branches to everyone and asked for their help in tackling the big problems and reforming the system. In fact let’s just assume that he did these things. And that, shockingly, he was rebuffed by all those with a stake in the status quo and that sought political advantage.

Then what did he do?

He used every old trick in the book to get things done. Nothing changed except the transactions. He got some impressively difficult legislation passed. To do so, he signed bills that had massive pork (when he promised to not do this). He OK’ed backroom deals (when campaigned clearly against them) to horsetrade for votes. He signed a ~$4 trillion tax cut extension when he said that wanted to truly take on the debt (not add a massive amount more over the next decade). Yeah, he sure did get a lot done. But at what cost? The cost was preserving the system, keeping our course (towards the iceberg), and maintaining the destructive status quo of DC.

What did I expect/want him to do? I wanted him to fight. I expected him to take a baseball bat to DC if it wouldn’t change easy. I expected him to expose the corruption, hypocrisy, and ideologues who stood in the way of transformational change. Hold press conferences where you call individual people out. Read the dollars that are flowing in between certain PAC’s and their supplicants and the resulting harm to the American people. Re-engage that army to go to work at the grassroots level to spread the word about what was happening. It would work because he was right. Because he took the moral high ground.

Sure, this would have consequences. Instead of passing all of the legislation he did, Congress would grind to a standstill. No healthcare reform, DADT, etc, etc, etc, etc. Instead he’s going to war with DC. He’s taking a bat to Washington. I’m OK with that. Not because I’m insensitive to the suffering of the people who have benefited from the incremental progress of the new laws. Not because I’m a purist (or idealist) who believes that Perfect is the enemy of Good. But because we are a nation at a pivotal moment, at a time of crisis, and transactional leadership won’t cut it. We need transformational leadership, and Obama was thrilled (during the campaign) to be the vessel in which we believed it would be provided. Why am I so hung up on this? Why am I so repulsed? Because the big problems aren’t close to being addressed:

- $14 trillion in current debt; record deficits; $50 trillion more coming down the pike
- $3 billion spent lobbying and more on its way each day
- A financial system that is still deeply vulnerable but papered over due to the Fed’s printing press
- A ~17% real unemployment rate that has showed substantial evidence of being the ‘new normal’
- A manufacturing sector on its last legs due to failed US trade, tax, and regulatory policies
- Control of our debt by nations who appear to be becoming increasingly aggressive towards us
- The list. Goes. On. And. On. And. On…

We are not capable of taking on these challenges as long as the status quo is permitted to stand. That was the narrative arc of the campaign. It was right then. It’s right now. All that’s changed are the president’s priorities. He chose getting stuff done vs getting stuff right. He chose progress today vs a real, stable foundation for tomorrow.

That’s President Barack Obama’s failure. He failed to do what he told us he would. Worst of all, he didn’t even fight to.

I suspect this post will infuriate many. It will bring out the instinctive need to defend their ‘guy’. I understand your reaction. Politics is horrifically adversarial and combative. It’s worse than sports. When a Steelers fan makes fun of the Bengals (even if they’re right), I pipe up. When a Patriots fan rips on the Jets (even if they’re right), I rush to concoct a tortured defense. But politics, the debate over the direction of the future of our country, should not be so tortured. I believe, to my very core, that we should not defend people or parties. We should defend principles and ideas. Only principles and ideas. For the people and the parties sell out. They change. They compromise. They sell out. Our values, our principles, our ideals and ideas, these are the things that are true. Hold them above all else.

For the first time in a very long time, I sat down to write without fear of if it would be used against me, if it would cost me votes, or if it would be popular. This is what I feel. I say it with a clear heart and no sinister purpose. I know my values and I know what I would like to see done. And so I write.