Men, ask yourself, are you still a sexist pig?

This is a cross post. Please comment on “Men, ask yourself, are you still a sexist pig?” on Chron.com.

Yup, I’m calling the men out on subtle sexism. A lot of men, probably me too when I was younger, have a problem with their women making more than them. Rachel, my wife, made more than me for YEARS after we first got married. This was in the early 90s and I would argue that we have made a lot of progress reducing sexism over the last 20 years, although certainly it still exists.

So here we are in 2011. And if you ask a guy “would it bother you if your significant other made more money than you?” they will, based on my small sample survey, still say “YES!” It bugs them. They feel that men SHOULD make more than women. No particular reason, just because. If you follow the first question up with “Do you consider yourself sexist?” They say “NO!” – but they are. And I’ve wanted to say this to them, but I just didn’t have the data and really I have other battles to fight. Then I saw this editorial in Sunday’s Houston Chronicle.

Scott Burns: A bad decade for jobs — especially for men

Hey, guys, I’ve got to confirm some tough news: Women have become the new men. While the Atlantic Monthly went a bit overboard last year in an article titled “The End of Men,” the economic statistics aren’t encouraging.

Truth is, the gals we like to impress so much with our manliness have wiped us out when it comes to the game of Bringing Home the Bacon. That’s not hyperbole. In the first decade of this century, U.S. Labor Department figures show that women have gained 2,119,000 jobs. During the same period, men gained a piddling 54,000 jobs.

This is the kind of score you’d have if the Yankees played against a Little League team, or the Dallas Mavericks played against a very small high school.

Basically, we guys never had the ball. Women got 97.5 percent of all the new jobs created between 2000 and 2010.

versus

In the 1990s, men won 46 percent of the 18.4 million new jobs created. In the 1980s, men won 41 percent of the 19.5 million jobs created.

and apparently this is particularly true for cities like Houston.

One group of women out-earns their male competition. Researcher James Chung of Reach Advisors found that unmarried women under age 30 and without children who lived in large cities made more money than their male counterparts. Specifically, he found that this group of women earned more in 147 of 150 major cities, with the premium reaching as high as 17 percent in New York

and this one has gotta sting a bit if you still think “he-man-caveman-should-make-more-money-than-girl”

“One way in which college-educated married men have gained financially is that they increasingly are likely to be married to the highest-income wives.” Now men can go to college in hopes their B.A. or B.S. degree will lead to a coveted “MR.” degree.

At my son’s recent High School graduation honors ceremony, there were probably 20 women to 3 guys who achieved the highest honors in the senior class. The guys have checked out. But somehow they don’t think this is going to relate to the real world when they get a job later. And the men are really insecure about this, and I have written about insecurity and the dangers that go with it in the past.

If America is a meritocracy, if business works like it should, then women SHOULD be making more than men. Because they are EARNING it. And if men have issues with this, let’s call it what it is; insecurity and sexism. So ask yourself, are you still a sexist pig?

This is a cross post. Please comment on “Men, ask yourself, are you still a sexist pig?” on Chron.com.

 

Boomers and Millennials – 3 Reasons the USA Will Recover Our Sanity

A few things to consider when observing the needs of benefit programs (Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment, etc) for Americans. I believe the current strain on the system may be particularly bad at the moment, which means it will improve for future generations. The added stress is temporary. Here’s why.

Three one-time events have occurred over the last 70 years that have led to American families being more spread out than ever before. And more politically polarized. So instead of Social Security being supplemental income for our parents who move back into the house when they retire, it is now expected to support two households. One in Connecticut or wherever your parents live. And another household must pay its way entirely, hopefully through employment, in a different city. This is just a theory, but here goes:

First – The American Interstate Highway System

The Interstate System has been called the Greatest Public Works Project in History.  From the day President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, the Interstate System has been a part of our culture—as construction projects, as transportation in our daily lives, and as an integral part of the American way of life.  Every citizen has been touched by it, if not directly as motorists, then indirectly because every item we buy has been on the Interstate System at some point.  President Eisenhower considered it one of the most important achievements of his two terms in office, and historians agree.

And for the PR people out there, don’t forget that Edward Bernays’ work with Mack Trucks was a precursor. Bernays, always humble, states ”One single idea changed the economics of a country.”

Second – Indoor Air Conditioning

Air conditioning is largely credited with the migration of Americans from the North to the South. From a book review Salon on AC. Note – some of the article is behind a pay-wall but this OTB review of the salon article on air conditioning has more quotes from the book “Losing Our Cool: Uncomfortable Truths About Our Air-Conditioned World”

But as science writer Stan Cox argues in his new book, “Losing Our Cool: Uncomfortable Truths About Our Air-Conditioned World (and Finding New Ways to Get Through the Summer),” the dizzying rise of air conditioning comes at a steep personal and societal price. We stay inside longer, exercise less, and get sick more often — and the electricity used to power all that A.C. is helping push the fast-forward button on global warming. The invention has also changed American politics: Love it or hate it, refrigerated cooling has been a major boon to the Republican Party. The advent of A.C. helped launch the massive Southern and Western population growth that’s transformed our electoral map in the last half century.

It was only in 1947 that “Mass-produced, low-cost window air conditioners become possible.” Figure 10 years for adoption and you’re looking at late 50s and 60s for things to be livable in a city like Houston. And another source on the role of AC in the South. Basically New Yorkers invented air conditioning and then used it to get the heck out of Dodge.

The Interstate Highway system and AC making the South livable created a virtual land rush with youth moving south and families spreading out across the country. And the migration, like the Sooners, was largely a one-time-event. Sure people will continue to move around, but not like they did over the last 50 years. It just makes more sense for humans to stay near our support network. It takes a gold-rush to lure us to new territories. Then we settle down.

Third – The Baby Boomers in Power

They have brought us many great things. Boomers invented the Web, DNA fingerprinting, lithium-ion batteries, the artificial heart and much more. Yet this is also a generation that has been fighting with itself for as long as I have been alive. Even the Wikipedia page on baby boomers is covered with conditional statements because they can’t agree. From Wikipedia:

In general, baby boomers are associated with a rejection or redefinition of traditional values; however, many commentators have disputed the extent of that rejection, noting the widespread continuity of values with older and younger generations. In Europe and North America boomers are widely associated with privilege, as many grew up in a time of affluence.^[2] As a group, they were the healthiest, and wealthiest generation to that time, and amongst the first to grow up genuinely expecting the world to improve with time.^[3]

So they are known for rejection but the commentators on the Boomer wikipedia article reject that they are known for rejection. Very meta. My point here is at this moment in time the baby boomers are running the country. And they grew up in a time of great social change.

Boomers grew up at a time of dramatic social change. In the United States, that social change marked the generation with a strong cultural cleavage, between the proponents of social change and the more conservative. Some analysts believe this cleavage played out politically since the time of the Vietnam War to the mid-2000s, to some extent defining the political landscape and division in the country. – NABBW

Boomers are in charge and they don’t like each other. Period. They are polarized. Is America becoming more polarized right and left and screaming at each other? Or is it just this one group? I believe the divisions in our country are not as great as portrayed in the media and it is more an inner-generational rift than an inter-generational rift. I just don’t hear the vitriol when two Gen-X-ers are talking. Their beliefs on most issues simply aren’t anywhere near the country-is-being-torn-apart feeling of the 60s and 70s.

The Boomers have made what we have in this country today possible. I appreciate that as I type this on the laptop they invented for me. But they have also buried us in debt and polarized the two party system George Washington, our only Independent President, hated. Like a good coach I am saying I loved seeing the points on the board, but you are fouling out. This is a generation that needs to do better. But they can’t because people don’t think and act as generations. They do so on beliefs and it is unlikely, possible but unlikely, people in their 50+ years will change their ideology. Rather than agree they will take their ball and go home, the future be damned. Thus we literally have to wait them out to save the country.

The Good News is the Future Will Be Better

The ramifications of these three one-time events is that we are spread out across the country without immediate family nearby. And we are screaming at each other because of ideological differences. Yet give it 20 years, yes I realize that is a long time, but when time goes by I predict it will get better. Specifically:

1. Stabilization of the American extended family. Humans naturally stay with their tribe. Fewer children will move to far off states which means more family in the same location. We need this support network. When you lose your job, as so many have these last few years, it is much easier to move into the guest room if your extended family is in the same state, or (gasp!) the same part of town.
2. Reduced costs to society for entitlement programs – when family is nearby, Social Security and Medicaid aren’t expected to fully support an entire household. They are needed to supplement the income of an elderly parent who is supported by their nearby family as well.
3. Reduced political rhetoric and infighting among Americans. As the boomers age out, the Millennial generation will move into power. The Millennials are a diverse group, but they are not divided like the boomers. Diversity does not equal divisiveness and I am quite optimistic about the Millennials long term. Perhaps “entitled” and “soft” like the doughboys currently, but the Millennials will emerge strong leaders as they enter the real world and mature past the overly-protective cocoons they grew up in. I have seen this growth in our employees. They can and will step up. And we as a country will be saved by these kids.

That’s my two cents anyway. It gets better. It’ll just take a while. Hang in there y’all.

 

“Fear the Boom and Bust”

via Benito.

Jason Calacanis on Scurvy

“Hey wait. You’re the captain of the ship. We can talk about what direction we’re going. But we’re going in a direction. And if there’s a debate about what direction we’re going, it’s my ship, I’m gonna pick at the end of the day. I’m gonna take everyone’s input. But there’s gonna come a point when the ship has to go. Because there’s only a certain number of lemons. And you’re gonna get scurvy and we’re all gonna lose our teeth. And it’s gonna get f*cking crazy. And people are gonna lose their minds. We need to keep the ship moving. You can get your own ship.” - Jason Calacanis

and

“What gets you out of bed in the morning to win? You have to have some love for the game.” - Jason Calacanis

 

So ya, I respect the dude. Passionate? Yes. Overly honest? Yes. Respect? Yes.

2011 tech bLubble & developers as your audience.

No tech bubble this time? Arrington’s thoughts on 2011 versus 2010 in Silicon Valley. Then a few comments of my own after the jump.

From techcrunch blubble:

A perfectly reasonable 2000 tech startup business decision – spend $10 million on a massive advertising campaign that may bring in $500k in revenue. The “branding” value makes up the difference, and those few new customers will continue to spend money and tell their friends! Grab territory while it’s there to be grabbed, the thinking went. We’ll figure out the business later. Money was so easy to come by, it made sense to some.

and

In the most innocent cases Company A would buy a bunch of ads or whatever from Company B. Maybe a $5 million deal over 24 months. Company B would then buy a bunch of stuff from Company A. Say $4 million over 18 months. As long as the deals weren’t mirrors and they were separate and binding contracts the accountants were high fiving everyone.

versus the 2011 Blubble:

2011 Blubble: Drag blubbering angel investors into Series A rounds valuing your company at $6 million instead of $4 million. Hire engineers, lots of them, as many as you can. Don’t hire non-engineers or other overhead people unless you absolutely have to (thus the dearth of VP Biz Devs around). Your APIs are your sales team!

I’m not in Silicon Valley today, although we have an office there, I am not the one in the coffee shops on a daily basis and I don’t understand “the game.” I do think the author makes a good point about 2011 not being the same type of tech bubble as 2010. The investors have matured to the point that triangular deals aren’t a source of revenue and people actually care about revenue. As a small business I care much more about profit than revenue. Profit is your future cash which controls your growth. If you aren’t profitable you die in short order. Thus we grew 12% last year profitably. Not an easy task in this economy.

The post also highlights one of the biggest challenges with tech companies. Salaries will KILL YOU. It’s not the rent. It’s not the insurance, although health insurance is approaching the deathly-expensive-zone. It is salaries. You can’t cut billable employees as they generate profit. Programmers build your product. Sales hunts and drives profit. The one thing you generally don’t want to be is admin as that is the first thing that gets cut. But if you can automate any of it, you are better off.

Two common methods of automating and outsourcing something that historically has been done in house.

1. APIs. As Arrington says, if other companies program to your API you don’t need sales. But you need to convince those developers to spend their valuable time working with your API and that isn’t easy.
2. Open Source. If programmers on the Internet extend your product to meet the needs of more customers then you are more likely to sell more. But you need to convince those developers to spend their valuable time adding new modules to your products.

Think about that. If you are going to automate to increase profits you have to change your business model to include remote developers as a primary audience. Or at least one strong constituency that your messaging goes to. Maybe all of those events we have sponsored in the past will pay off as I have thought of them mostly as “supporting the community” rather than seeking an ROI from a sponsorship. Hmmm.

Hopefully we can explore that more at SchipulCon with a few leaders in the open source community. More on that as it approaches.

 

 

buy gold – thanks t.u. – pay more for electonics – higher interest rates – oh my

Turns out Glenn Beck was right; buy gold. Because Gold is now over $1500/ounce!

Radio and TV host Glenn Beck likes to talk about the potential collapse of the American economy. He also likes to talk about buying gold as a hedge against the unknown.

Thanks in part to UT Austin buying 1 billion dollars worth of physical gold bars.

In one of the most remarkable turn of events in Gold history, the University of Texas endowment fund managers announced they have taken delivery of $1 Billion Dollars worth of physical Gold!

UT took delivery of 6,643 actual bars of Gold Bullion, or 664,300 ounces– a quite unusual transaction for any university, one that may set a trend for soaring physical Gold demand in 2011. Note that the investment was not in a Gold ETF or individual Gold mining shares or in Gold futures– but in real, physical Gold Bars.

And expect to pay more for electronics.

The most important industrial use of gold is in the manufacture of electronics. Solid state electronic devices use very low voltages and currents which are easily interrupted by corrosion or tarnish at the contact points. Gold is the highly efficient conductor that can carry these tiny currents and remain free of corrosion… Gold is used in many places in the standard desktop or laptop computer. The rapid and accurate transmission of digital information through the computer and from one component to another requires an efficient and reliable conductor. Gold meets these requirements better than any other metal.

And all of it timed at the same time S&P received an open letter to downgrade US debt.

He acknowledges the turmoil it would create, punishing Treasury bonds and causing interest rates to spike. In Weiss’s view, however, leaving the AAA-rating untouched could ultimately prove far worse. It gives Congress a free pass to add to the public debt and encourages investors to buy Treasury notes and bonds, whose low yields, he believes, don’t compensate for the dangers.

“Worst of all,” Weiss writes, “by continuing to reaffirm America’s triple-A rating, you help create a false sense of security overall–the recipe for a possible meltdown in the market for U.S. sovereign debts.”

which S&P then did

The closing bell on the New York Stock Exchange sounded at the end of a jittery day of trading. Stocks had plunged at the outset, when one of the nation’s largest bond-rating agencies, Standard & Poor’s, downgraded its long-term outlook on U.S. Treasury debt from stable to negative.

S&P said there’s a — quote — “significant risk that Democrats and Republicans cannot agree on spending and deficits until after the 2012 election.” The agency said, “We see the path to agreement as challenging, because the gap between the parties remains wide.”

OK, for those following at home. Your elected officials are squabbling and trying to get reelected instead of running the country. And that raises interest rates. Which makes it even LESS LIKELY that people will be able to sell or buy homes, start businesses, etc, etc. Or that a lot of my unemployed friends will get jobs. Which just sucks.

Not sure what happens next. But I am pretty sure this isn’t good for our business or for job creation. Keep on keepin on I guess…