Woke or Broke?

In recent years “Woke” has become THE word with progressives. It originated as a way of expressing how people should “wake up” to the social injustice in our society, especially when it comes to issues of race. It’s now being used to describe the appropriate level of awareness one should have about all social justice issues and just about everything else on the progressive agenda including climate change.

But I have some bad news for the Woke and the Un-Woke….”We Broke”. At this moment in history, when millions of people are “Woke” and demanding that we “make things right” and get about it immediately, we are broke. Just consider:

_Our national debt is over $22 Trillion…that’s more than our annual GDP and it doesn’t include all of the unfunded liabilities which are now approaching or may exceed $200 Trillion !!!

_We are still adding to our debt at the rate of over $1 Trillion per year.

_Federal government spending represents over 20% of our GDP, state and local spending adds an additional 5 to 7 %.

_Household debt is at a record level, $13.3 trillion.

_Our national savings rate is only around 3% of income.

So we have a math problem when the “Woke” demand that we spend:

_$8-10 Trillion per year over the next ten years for a Green New Deal
_$3-4 Trillion per year for universal healthcare
_$5-10 Trillion for slavery reparations
_$1.5 Trillion to pay off student loans
_$75 Billion per year for free college

And, oh by the way, this is before we even talk about something most all of us can agree on which is fixing our infrastructure. Depending on how “Green” we go and what sort of commitments we were to make toward mass transit systems, upgrading our infrastructure could be the most expensive endeavor of all; perhaps $5-10 trillion per year over the next 20 years. And that doesn't include what we need to spend just to patch and maintain what we already have.

So how do you pay for it? Where do you come up with this much money in a $21 Trillion dollar economy that is already drowning in debt? Raise taxes? How much and on whom? You could double the taxes on those making over $1M per year and not even come close.

We all better wake up and come to terms with the fact that it will take us at least 50 years to dig out of this hole. And, I'm not even suggesting that we get totally out of debt. A national debt at 50-60% of GDP is manageable. And some level of household debt is to be expected. But remember, we have over $200 Trillion in unfunded liabilities that is not even on the books.

So what do we do? First of all, everyone who can work, needs to get to work. We need production. Secondly, we have to increase taxes and reduce spending wherever possible. (We all know there are government agencies and programs that could vanish tomorrow and no one would notice, other than those people who've been getting paid to ride that gravy train.) And yes, we will have to spend money on infrastructure, healthcare and education. We are at a tipping point in this nation. Too much wealth at the top and too many struggling to make ends meet. We have a lot of angry people on the Left and the Right. History tells us that when you get enough people fed up with the status quo, change will occur. The real question is what will that change looks like and who has the guts and grit to lead us out of this mess?

Disintermediation or Predatory Pricing?

Disintermediation: removal of intermediaries in economics from a supply chain, or cutting out the middlemen in connection with a transaction or a series of transactions.

Amazon recently announced the start up of their digital freight brokerage. They move a lot of freight. They have massive technological capability. So why not get into the truckload brokerage business. Show C.H. Robinson and the rest of them how it’s done. And how serious is Amazon about this venture? They are running blue light specials offering rates 25-30% below average contract rates and even less than the lowest spot market rates.

Transportation Intermediaries meet the Amazon Flywheel and prepare for some “dis-ing” which is just one part of Amazon’s “disintermediation strategy”.

A former Amazon executive summarized the e-commerce giant’s disintermediation strategy:

“The advantages that then come from disintermediation and the monetization of those capabilities are secondary to the immediate need of self-preservation, but then serve to feed very critical needs of Amazon’s ability to continue to succeed. This innovation and growth then manifests as continuously evolving towards the ability to sell everything and anything that is or can be sold. That’s the true Amazon flywheel: disintermediate to survive; monetize to fund innovation; innovate to grow; disintermediate to survive…”

Say what?

I’m just a simple country boy, but I think the Amazon flywheel is spinning some major bullshit. At some point, “disintermediation” crosses a line and becomes predatory pricing which is illegal, although the Federal Trade Commission can’t seem to figure out when or how to enforce the law against it.

I get the concept when it comes to e-commerce retail. Eliminate brick and motar, take out a couple of links in the supply chain, buy in bulk and sell direct to the consumer. Reduce cost, make it convenient and boom. It’s still not very profitable, but I get it. And I use the heck out of it. There are probably other industries that could use a little disintermediation, such as insurance. Maybe even headhunting….gulp.

But I don’t understand how actually becoming an intermediary and a “marginal-less”, (a.k.a. non-profit) one at that, creates long-term value if the strategy is to ultimately “monetize” (a.k.a. increase prices) once you’ve captured a large enough share of the market. Amazon’s entry into truckload freight brokerage does not appear to have much to do with “disintermediation” and a whole lot to do with predatory pricing by a giant company that can afford to lose billions of dollars in order to effectively gain control of the nation’s truckload network to the extent that they can influence pricing and capacity availability to their advantage. How is that not predatory?

Pricing below your own costs is also not a violation of the law unless it is part of a strategy to eliminate competitors, and when that strategy has a dangerous probability of creating a monopoly for the discounting firm so that it can raise prices far into the future and recoup its losses. – www.ftc.gov

The Tiger Bet

Those of you who have read my blog over years know that I always make predictions each December for the coming year. Starting in December 2011, one of my annual predictions was that Tiger Woods would not win another major. After three straight years of being correct, I got bored with the Tiger Woods slam-dunk prediction. It was just too easy. Tiger Woods would never win another major. So I stopped even mentioning him. Predicting that he even had a chance would have been akin to predicting that Donald Trump would become President. And there you have it… always expect the unexpected.

The 2019 Masters was one of the greatest sporting events I’ve ever watched. I recorded it and my wife and I watched it in the evening, going to great lengths to avoid knowing the outcome each day. My wife has always predicted that Tiger would win another major and when he was in contention after two days, I still predicted he would fail. So we made a bet. If Tiger won the 2019 Masters, I would take my wife to Spain this year. She upped the ante and convinced me to throw in Italy. Modesty prevents me from saying what I would get if Tiger failed to win the Masters. I certainly felt that that the odds were in my favor and it was a good bet.

I’ve never been a huge Tiger fan. I certainly respected his game, but he just seemed like someone with whom I’d never want to play a round of golf. The fans thought he was bigger than the game. He seemed to agree with them and acted like it. He was just “that guy” and that’s not the guy I tend to root for. Granted, he was the best golfer I ever saw, period EOD. Better even that Jack Nicklaus. But, I tended to always root for the other guy…even if they weren’t from the good old U.S.A. Anyone but Tiger, #ABT.

Tiger was a golfing machine and, for me, that was the real problem. Golf is too hard for anyone to play that well. However, when his personal life went off the rails and his body started breaking down, he became human. And when Tiger Woods became human, I became a fan. For sure, some people turned on Tiger and ripped him for being such an awful person. The injuries and the collapse of his golf game were just part of Karma coming to collect. Good-bye Tiger and good riddance.

Even though I became a fan, I never thought he would win another major. He might win another tournament or two, maybe. But, to win a major against a field of great young golfers from all over the world, guys who could hit the ball higher and farther than Tiger ever could, even in his prime, much less now? No, Tiger would never win another major. Bad knee, bad back, bad thoughts…too much competition...too much to overcome.

But, on Palm Sunday in April in the year 2019, Tiger Woods found some magic, or maybe it was more a case of the magic finding Tiger. If there was a course where Tiger had a chance of winning another major it was Augusta. Jack did it back in ’86 when most thought his major win days were over. But, it’s a course where experience can be the great equalizer. Tiger hung around while younger, better golfers couldn’t keep the ball out the water on Number 12. Where the pressure cracked everyone but the old Tiger who still found enough game to be one shot better than anyone else when it all ended early on a Sunday as the clouds rolled in and the rain began to fall.

Later that evening my wife and I spent some time joking about the correct way to pronounce Barcelona, concluding with me betting her that my way was the best, most correct. She laughed and said it sounded more like the way Daffy Duck would pronounce it.

I replied, “Bet I’m right and furthermore Tiger Woods has won his last major.”

She just smiled and said, “Wanna bet on it?”

What's The Question?

“How do I achieve success and happiness?”. That was the question asked by one of the students.

My little church is part of a campus ministry at a local junior college. If you’ve seen the Netflix documentary Last Chance U about football players, then think of our little JUCO as First Chance U for these kids. A chance to get a couple of years on the cheap before going off to a nearby state university or maybe just a two-year degree in the culinary arts and then a good job at one of the Indian casinos across the river. Or a nursing degree with a ticket to a better life down in the Metroplex.

Some local churches are part of a Tuesday night rotation where do-gooders and bible-thumpers show up for supper with the students. The churches bring pizza, hamburgers and hotdogs or that holiest of holies, Chick-Fi-Let. The kids consume mass quantities. For some it’s grab and go, some stay and eat while studying their smart phones. A few act as if they are paying attention while someone tries to tell them why their church is cool and just knowing Jesus makes life better. Try it, you’ll like it, that sort of thing.

If I sound cynical about such “ministries” it’s because I am. Kids come for free food and leave. No strings attached. Over the years, churches haven’t seen much fruit from all of this effort. But I am told that a couple of kids have become Christians, making a profession of faith and being baptized. That being the case, then it is worth it.

And if it’s worth it, it’s worth doing better. So I suggested that we ask the kids to submit questions (anonymously). I sort of put our pastor on the spot. So now he has to prepare for these suppers and respond to some tough questions about God, good and evil, heaven and hell or just life in general.

I haven’t been going to these events because I thought they were a waste of time plus I don’t want to be the resident Granddad. I also have a tendency to commit 100% or not at all, and I knew that if I got involved, I would take it all too seriously and too personally. Some of these kids would end up breaking my heart or I would break theirs. Valid excuses or me just being chicken---t?

But since the questions were my idea, I decided that I better show up, at least once, and survey the damage. It was interesting and some of the kids actually listened and responded to the answers. When the pastor got to the “success and happiness” question he gave a solid response including the true joys of being a Christian and what really matters in the grand eternal scheme of things. That’s what he gets paid to say.

However, there is such a thing as giving the right answer to the wrong question. If I had been answering the question I would have started by asking this question: “What do you mean by ‘success and happiness’?” If success and happiness for you means financial success and the happiness money can buy (because money actually can buy happiness of a certain sort for a period of time); then that requires a different answer. If success and happiness means getting to do just what you want to do for a living and having as much personal freedom as possible, even if it means sacrificing wealth and security and perhaps even relationships, then it’s a different answer.

Words have meaning and they mean different things to different people. Success and happiness? What that means to 19 or 20 year olds living on campus at a little old Texas JUCO is a mystery to me and probably a mystery to most of them. And what it means to them today isn’t what it will likely mean a year from now, or five years from now, or twenty-five years from now.

At some point in life, if one is lucky enough or blessed enough, one learns that success and happiness are not all they are cracked up to be. We are all going to die and someone else will end up playing with our toys. There’s nothing wrong with success and happiness as long as you know what those words truly mean. And if you know what they mean, live like it. I’ve always known that true success and happiness had more to do with the soul and eternity than ones net worth. But, that never stopped me from counting my chips and figuring that “more” was better than “less”. These days I’m not so sure.

As we draw near the end of the Lenten season and prepare for Easter, I think about the questions Jesus asked. He always asked the right questions and often answered a question with a question. If He were asked “How do I achieve success and happiness?”, I think His response would have been something like this:

“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” –Mark 8:36

It’s Like a Driver Shortage…Only Different

A recent report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics concludes that there really isn’t a shortage of truck drivers, at least as long as we give the labor market time to adjust.

From the report:
"As a whole, the market for truck drivers appears to work as well as any other blue-collar labor market, and while it tends to be 'tight,' it imposes no constraints on entry into (or exit from) the occupation," the report said. "There is thus no reason to think that, given sufficient time, driver supply should fail to respond to price signals in the standard way."

"Economists would not regard high turnover rates and the associated problems of recruiting and retaining drivers in this part of trucking as a long-term shortage. Nor would they call these conditions a 'broken market,' except to the extent that one might use that term for a secondary labor market segment, since the high turnover that marks such a segment is an indicator that the jobs in it are unattractive to many potential employees."


The American Trucking Association (ATA) has taken exception to this report noting that other than during the 2008-09 recession, the industry is facing an on-going, severe and increasing shortage of drivers, especially in the over-the-road, long-haul segment.

I tend to think that both positions are correct depending on your assumptions and perspectives. The BLS economists are correct when they say “given sufficient time” the driver supply should respond to price signals in the standard way. Likewise, the industry is correct when they say the real world has been experiencing a shortage of truck drivers for years and it is getting worse. The real questions are how much time is sufficient for the driver supply to respond to price signals and what do those signals need to be in order to have the desired effect?

The problem is that NO ONE KNOWS THE ANSWERS because, like most things in life, it’s complicated. We like to tell ourselves that the best answers are simple ones. That problems can be broken down into a few root causes and addressed in a systematic fashion. And, often this is the correct approach. Sometimes we do make things more complicated than necessary. Most of us would agree, if there is a simple answer that works, that’s usually the best one, or at least the best one to start with. The trucking industry has been taking this approach for years. Increase pay. Provide better equipment. Get drivers home more often. Be nicer to drivers, have a cook-out and tell them how important they are. Essentially, do a better job of recruiting and retaining drivers than your competition. But don’t expect to solve the problem because the job is what it is and there’s only so much money in moving a load of freight from point A to point B.

There is money and then there is a thing called utility. And this is where it gets complicated. When the economist says that the driver supply “should respond to price signals” they are absolutely correct. And so will the demand for services. Both buyer and seller have their price signals. And it doesn’t have much to do with what those signals used to be or what someone thinks they should be. It has to do with value (utility) relative to other alternatives. Am I willing to drive a truck, under a given set of circumstances, for a certain amount of money? Or would I prefer to exchange my labor, under a different set of circumstances for the same money, or more, or even less. And as a buyer of that labor, whether I’m making something, distributing it or just selling it; what are my alternatives given that the ultimate consumer is only willing to pay so much for the final product?

Thousands of decisions and transactions go into everything we purchase and everything we get paid to do in order to have the economic wherewithal to make those purchases. And everyone, on both sides of every decision and transaction is asking the same question…WHAT’S IT WORTH TO ME. Everyone is living on their own utility curve.

It would appear that labor has decided that driving a truck for the market price, even a rapidly increasing market price, is not a rational choice. And, in a world where quality labor is in demand and has plenty of options, I think it’s unlikely that we will reach a “price signal” within the next decade which will trigger an increase in the supply of truck drivers. The more likely pathway to supply and demand equilibrium will be reducing the demand for truck drivers. Some combination of technological innovation (autonomous vehicles), regulatory changes (longer/heavier vehicles) and redesigned supply chains could ultimately reduce the number of “driver miles” required by our economy. In the meantime, truck drivers are in a seller’s market.

Considering that we’ve been playing around with the wheel for almost 10,000 years, what’s another decade or two? “Given sufficient time” this “tight” driver market will be corrected. Not to worry. You see, it’s like a driver shortage…only different.

The "IT" Factor

I must confess that I watch shows like American Idol, The Voice and America’s Got Talent. I record them and then fast forward through commercials and the inane banter that goes on between the judges. It’s always interesting how certain contestants, who are at best marginally talented, emerge as contenders simply because they have “IT”. One talent show even alludes to “IT” as the “X” factor. Same thing. And if those who have “IT” also have talent, they are likely to win, even if they are not actually the most talented.

“IT” is difficult to define, but we know “IT” when we see “IT”. Paul Newman had “IT”. Robert Redford not so much. Johnny Cash had “IT”. Roy Orbison and Buddy Holly had “IT”. Perry Como, Andy Williams…great singers, popular and successful…but they didn’t have” IT”. Buck Owens…No. Willie Nelson…Yes. Marilyn Monroe had “IT”. Lady Gaga has “IT” Tom Brokaw has, or once had “IT”. Brian Williams never did and we knew it. Walter Cronkite had “IT”. Dan Rather, not really. Joe Namath had “IT”. Bart Starr didn’t have “IT” and didn’t need it. Brett Favre had IT. Troy Aikman did not, but that’s ok. I’m not convinced that Tom Brady, as great as he is, has “IT”. Patrick Mahomes definitely has “IT”. Michael Jordan had IT. LeBron James just as good a ballplayer, maybe better, does not have “ IT”.

When it comes to Presidential races “IT” matters. Even when neither candidate has much of “IT”, the one who has less of “IT” generally loses. Hillary are you listening? God gave Bill Clinton all of “IT”, Hillary almost none. And Trump had just enough of “IT” to pull a few more electoral votes over the finish line.

“IT” matters even more when the country is divided and restless, especially when the divide isn’t clear in the middle. Those on the far left and far right are going to vote their respective parties. That’s probably 30 percent on both ends or 60% of the total which could represent 75-80% of those who actually turn out to vote. It’s those in the middle who make the difference and that’s where “IT” matters. “IT” brings out those who would not take the time to vote otherwise. “IT “ can move those who are truly “independent” to vote one way or the other. There aren’t that many true independents who can be swayed. But at the margin every vote counts and “IT” can make the difference.

Ronald Reagan had “IT”. As already noted, Bill Clinton has “IT”. Barack Obama has “IT” and got an extra boost from his wife Michelle, who also has “IT”. JFK had “IT”. FDR had “IT”. Teddy Roosevelt might have been the first President with the ”IT” factor and the media coverage for “IT” to make a difference. Lincoln only had “IT “ in retrospect. At the time, no one much thought he had “ IT” Andrew Jackson probably had “ IT”, but in those days the impact of “IT” was limited.

You want to know who’s going to be the next President of the United States. Watch for “ IT”. If the Democrats put up a candidate who doesn’t have “IT”, Trump has a chance to win. It they put someone like Beto O’Rourke out there, Trump loses. Policy positions and experience don’t mean much when “ IT” becomes the deciding factor. And in today’s world, “IT” wins the close races more often than not.

Gonna use my arms
Gonna use my legs
Gonna use my style
Gonna use my sidestep
Gonna use my fingers
Gonna use my, my, my imagination

'Cause I'm gonna make you see
There's nobody else here
No one like me
I'm special, so special
I gotta have some of your attention give it to me.

-Lyrics from the song Brass In Pocket by the Pretenders

Money Changes Everything…Almost

Money changes everything
I said money, money changes everything
You think you know what you're doin'
We don't pull the strings
It's all in the past now
Money changes everything.
-Lyrics from the song ‘Money Changes Everything’ by Cyndi Lauper


By now you’ve heard about the college admissions scandal. Rich people paying college administrators, testing services and coaches in order to get their little darlings into the elite school of their choice. The list of bribe paying parents includes notable entertainers and business leaders.

This is bad and it is big, but it’s not new. People with money get special treatment. That’s just how it works. And people with money get used to it. Eventually it becomes an entitlement. I am rich, I deserve it. Whether it’s flying around in a private jet, staying in a suite on the top floor where price line peasants dare not to tread or just getting a grand table with a view in the hottest new restaurant while everyone else has to wait for over a year to get a bad table in a small space by the kitchen door. Or making a big donation to a university to insure that a child or grandchild gains admission. Not a bribe, just a generous gesture of support for higher education.

And when your child wants to go to a certain school, there has to be a way to make that happen. It only takes money. Money along with some people who are willing to bend and, if need be, break the rules in order to accomplish outcomes for which the wealthy are willing to pay handsomely. Thus, we have the Great College Admissions Scandal of 2019.

Wealth means power and power can be used for the greater good or just the greater good of me and mine. So whether it’s their child, their political party, their business or just their alma mater's football team; people tend to use their wealth and power to gain advantage. What the Great College Admissions Scandal reveals is just how desperate and audacious some people have become in order to get what they want. It also demonstrates what happens in a society when the classical virtues of prudence, justice, temperance and courage are no longer taught.

The scale of this abuse of wealth and power is striking. A business was created that catered to this growing demand for ways to game the college admissions process. The silver lining around the Great College Admissions Scandal of 2019 is that it may just force universities to consider their real purpose and to establish admission standards that are not for sale. Lux et Veritas.


A bribe is seen as a charm by the one who gives it;
they think success will come at every turn. - Proverbs 17:8