a silly new holiday tradition...

Hi and Happy Holidays! 

 

Please take this in the spirit intended.  I'm in the mood to do something a little silly and outrageous, and possibly do some good for you professionally for the new year.  With that in mind, I'm dubbing myself the New Year's Genie, and I'm opening up shop for trying to grant your professional wishes for 2005.

 

Keep in mind that I'm brand new at this, so there are no guarantees.  But at least I'm including free shipping.  So what will it be?  If I can grant you one wish, would it be that special customer or client you've been trying to land, new investors, a board member or new talent for your team?  What one thing would make the biggest difference for your business this year? 

 

(My wife wants something to do with Tom Cruise, but I confess I'm a little conflicted on that one.)

 

So come sit on the old New Year's Genie's knee and tell him your wish.  (Boy, is that ever confusing story lines!)  And here's my best wishes for a safe and prosperous New Year!

 

Nick

 

This is not an assertion about the spiritual nature of the universe, the existence of genies or other mythological beings.  This is not an offer for investment and there is no relevant prospectus.  I could make more small print disclaimers, but why hurt your eyes and keep you from enjoying the Holidays?  Get off the computer and go get 'em!

Everything About Something

Looking at yesterday's post, something struck me. I mentioned that I took the step of reading the text of the proposed ballot measures on the election that I was uncertain about. One might well ask, shouldn't we read every word of the new law that we are being asked to vote for? It's kind of like a contract. But that would be unreasonable others might say. There isn't enough time in the day to go through all that. So how do we make our decisions?

My own process isn't very complicated. I look at what's being proposed, and first ask myself whether it's something I'd like to see happen. "Vote for Measure A - Apple pie for everyone." So I'll ask myself, "Is voting for apple pie for everyone a good thing." Well, of course it is. And if I stopped there, I might just vote for the measure. But silly, over analytical person that I am, I take another step. I ask myself, "Will this measure actually accomplish apple pie for everyone?" Sometimes I can see that despite the promises of those who proposed the measure, it just has no chance of actually delivering, or delivers in an unreasonable way (one apple pie for everyone at the price of two.) (Hmmm, delivering apple pie - next million dollar idea? But I digress.)

If I'm not sure, I like to take a look at the arguments against, for, and rebutting each other about the measure. I like to look at the arguments against and the rebuttal first, because I have a natural bias against new laws to begin with. And then, If I'm still not sure about whether it's a good thing, and can do what it promises, I'll read the text itself.

Now that's all a long winded way of demonstrating that I try to make decisions about important things with the least information necessary to do the job. But how do I know that I have enough information? I suspect for many of us, we have an intuitive sense that we've reach a sort of logical critical mass and the bell goes off to say the decision's done. And I suspect that we are all often wrong.

So strolling into the office this morning, I wondered, if I really did have complete and perfect information about something (as though that were possible) would I make better decisions? Of course not, because in the process of gathering all the complete, perfect information, the decision is generally not relevant anymore (Oh, I'm sorry! The judges say we're out of time!) Assuming that the "correct" decision was to do something other than wait, I would have just blown it.

As a complete side note, would it even be possible to try to know everything about something? Try to think of the simplest item you can; a paperclip, a shoelace, a thumb tack, a button. What is everything that can be known about it? Who made it? What is it made of? Where did those things come from? How was it made? Who sold it to whom before it got to me? What were the financial terms? Was the process of it becoming what it is one that benefited the people involved with it? Were any animals, plants or people harmed in the making of my paperclip? Good lord! There's a lot I don't know!

What's the utility in all this meandering thought. Perhaps a little comfort in the notion that we all try do our best with the information we have, and we might be just a little more humble if we knew a little more.

Have a great day!

Delegislation

Does anyone think that we don't have enough laws these days? Not whether or not they are the right laws; Is there enough sheer volume of law to go around? During my preparation for the recent election, as I was reviewing the various local and state ballot measures, there were a few that I was sufficiently uncertain about that I took the step of reading the actual text of the proposition. I think the last time I read anything so riveting was when I re-financed. This is mighty dry stuff, no matter the merits of how it's supposed to impact society. But there was one little highlight in doing that reading. In the midst of the big blocks of boring legalese, there would be sections that were struck out. As an example, "there would be sections that were struck out."

What a refreshing change! How would it be if we elected some delegislators instead of legislators. These would be people who would peruse the existing laws and come to the conclusion that we are better served by eliminating this one and that. You've probably seen articles over the years that talk about arcane local laws such as not hanging men's and women's clothes on the same clothes line, or don't parade your alligator down main street after dark. We all get a kick out of such irrelevancies. But I'm willing to bet that there are a lot of laws that are a lot more consequential that could be removed as well.

I understand that various legislators such as California State Assemblyman Steve Samuelian from Clovis, and Pennsylvania Representative Douglas Reichley have contests for school children to write essays called, "There Ought To Be A Law." Let's send a few legislators some ideas about, "This shouldn't be a law anymore."

Even better, next election, would you vote for someone who ran, not to be a legislator, but a delegislator?