communication. community. cognition.
Archive for February, 2009
Social Calendar
Feb 27th
I’ll be seeing quite a few people over the coming weeks. Here’s a quick look at my “small world tour.”
- March 11 – Ragan/PRSA Social Media for Communicators Conference
Las Vegas, NV
My presentation is on “How to be a Social Media Advocate in the most Conservative of Corporate Cultures.” I’m on the same bill as Peter Shankman of Help a Reporter Out. - March 27 – Marketing in a Tough Economy sponsored by Willbanks Elam and Birmingham Chamber of Commerce
Birmingham, AL
I’m leading a breakout session for senior executives called “Social Media from 30,000 feet: The Attitude for your Altitude.” Others there for the day include Wade Kwon, Andre Natta, and Bill Elam. - April 6 – National Hurricane Conference
Austin, TX
Speaking about how companies and organizations not directly involved with disaster recovery can take advantage of Web 2.0 technologies. - April 27 – SMC World Tour Workshop
Birmingham, AL
This day-long event features Scott Schablow, Mack Collier, and Social Media Club founders Chris Heuer and Kristie Wells. As part of the activities, participants get to build their very own tailored social media plan.
By summer, I’ll need a vacation.
Headers and Footers
Feb 25th
“Don’t settle for being a footnote in history, when you can be the header of your own chapter.”
Regional Prejudice
Feb 23rd
It’s really not that funny anymore.
I mean, it used to be funny that the only real “acceptable” prejudice in polite society was against people in the southern United States. It was a triumph that we still had an outlet for humor that did not assault the sensibilities of African-Americans, the Poles, fat people, skinny people, blondes… all once considered the targets for humor, and now not considered polite.
Well, we can still joke about Southerners, right? I mean, anyone who likes Larry the Cable Guy must be an ignoramus (and probably can’t spell it, either.) Those beer-swilling NASCAR fans, if they are entitled to vote should it really count more than 3/5? Do they really count their IQ scores on fingers and barefoot toes, and dream of indoor plumbing?
It’s all well and good, until you start to wonder what people really believe about the South and the people who live here.
I stumbled across a Freakonomics write-up of an energy efficiency study, and the gist of the study was that some states aren’t producing as much wealth for the amount of electricity they consume. The authors of the study appeared to go out of their way to take economic activity and climate into account, but their results are flawed by the assumptions they made. For instance, Southerners are far more likely to use electricity to heat their homes (which counts against us), while Northeastern residents use natural gas or other means which don’t count against their energy consumption.
Regardless, I found the following comment from “Steve” amusing:
Just sell Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and several other low productivity southern states to Mexico. Their energy use will decline rapidly once the subsidies end. Any auto plants there, will relocate back to the US too, once their ability to gain subsidies to employ low productivity workers stops with the end of federal largess. Once the cretins in these places start to earn Mexican wages, they’ll be plenty of work for them. They may eventually regret their lack of interest in education, but there is no guarantee of that.
Gee Steve, ever get around much? I can only assume the subsidized energy he is talking about is in the Tennessee Valley Authority service area, which is just a small part of “the South.” I can also assume he’s not concerned about the massive amount of subsidy that goes into bringing water to arid regions in the West.
Let’s ignore for a moment the preposterous bits for a moment, and look at the underlying psychology:
- Southerners are, by definition, stupid
- Southerners have auto plants because they cheated economically (as though states aren’t allowed to compete for manufacturing, but entire nations are)
- Southerners deserve “Mexican” wages (do I detect racism there, Steve, or are you just an enlightened xenophobe?)
- Southerners are not interested in education
I thought it might “edjamacate” him to hear from one of the “cretins” that he is so eager to sell off:
Actually, those of us in the South were really considering selling off Michigan. If we do so before all those automotive bailouts are paid, we can really get out from under a bad debt. You guys are costing me boatloads of cash.
Granted, with your surplus of $7,000 homes on the market, now would not be the ideal time to sell, but I’m not sure that you haven’t bottomed out already.
This isn’t the first time I’ve encountered elitist regional snobbery:
(Note: I was very deliberate about linking the New York Times to the anchor word “edjamacate.” If more people do the same, then the New York Times will become the top search result for “edjamacate,” and I learned this without going to any fancy Big 10 state college.)
We can still joke about lawyers, right?
Pie Anxiety
Feb 22nd
The following appeared in today’s Parade Magazine column from Marilyn vos Savant:
Investors recently lost a large amount of money. But if others were not enriched by the same amount, where did the money go? —O. Slavinsky, Kansas City, Mo.
Marilyn did a fine job addressing the notion of how gains on paper aren’t necessarily attached to real value, and how market capitalization numbers are often skewed. Her answer was lacking, however, in denying a fundamental premise to the question: That people only get rich by making others poor.
In this case, the questioner from Kansas City phrases the supposition in the reverse case: one can only lose money if another gets rich. We already know this is not the case, because there is no one celebrating when a house fire wipes out a family’s value and wealth.
It is commonly misunderstood – and to great societal detriment – that rich people get wealthy by making others poor. Wealth is created when people trade.
Let’s say you have a rock that is worth $10 to you, but it is worth $20 to me. I give you $15 for the rock. According to your balance sheet, you just made $5. According to my balance sheet, I just made $5. Wealth is created through trade.
Why is this so?
People in a freely trading society are empowered to do the things they are truly good at, and not waste their time trying to duplicate the efforts of others who are better at that activity. This is how the baker can make biscuits all day long and make a better living than if he tried building his own walls, and the mason can build walls all day and not worry about teaching his son to read, and why the teacher can touch books all day and not worry about starving.
When each of us produces goods and services wanted by others, we can be richer than if we divided the “chores” up evenly. Society has more bread, more bricks, and more brains when people specialize.
Wealth is measured by the increasing value accrued every time we freely trade, buy, barter or purchase. Since both parties are in agreement, they are each getting more value from the trade than before, and society benefits. The Wealth of the State increases. The pie gets bigger. You can have a smaller slice of a bigger pie, and have more than you can eat. Wealth and money are not “zero-sum.”
“Getting rich” does not, by definition, come at the expense of making someone else poor.
Marliyn – you would do us all a greater service if you helped others understand why such fallacies and worldviews are dangerous. Class envy is a tool employed by professional politicians to fuel dreams that “we can all get our fair share,” if we only gang up on the rich. When class envy is invoked, the only people who gain are politicians.
