Category Archives: Wondering - Page 2

Look At What You Can’t Have

Posted by anachostic on May 18, 2021 No comments

Every once in a while, I do a little "worst-case" scenario and determine how little I need to get by in case of, you know, the worst case scenario happening. It’s not overly complex, it’s basically reviewing my budget and seeing how things have changed for better or worse since the last exercise.

One of the line items is the mortgage. Almost 5 years ago, I refi’d into a 15-yr loan with a better rate and I’ve been paying a minimal extra amount on the loan each month. So one of the things if shit really hit the fan is I would attempt to refi it back into a 30-yr so I could reclaim some of the money I’d budgeted to that bill. I suppose some people might consider pulling out the equity in the house and surviving on that until things got better, but this is just the way I think. Don’t give up ground, even if your progress has been slowed.

So anyway, I brought up a mortgage calculator and like a lot of nice, friendly forms, this one had nice sliders to adjust the values. The page loaded like this.

Well, I’m not getting a 330k loan, now or ever. So I dragged the slider down. And when I did, something crazy happened. The house picture changed.

Fucking ouch. What a punch in the gut. When you load the page, the site is setting your expectations with "this is what your house will probably be like" and when you eventually say, "I can’t afford that payment," you move the slider and the site says, "Well, now you’re looking at this kind of house." No stairs. No ornamental shrubs. Even the tree is wimpier, suggesting you’re just a beginner. And while that may be true, it’s not as encouraging as it should be. Don’t focus on where you will be, focus on where you are right now – smallsville.

But I’m not looking for a loan even in that area. The calculator doesn’t go where I need it to go, but I tried.

Jesus. 100k and this is all you get for it. Well, at least it’s a two story place, which I suppose might be better than what I have. But the point still stands, getting two sad reminders of where you are, not where you’re going. Of course, once you are faced with the reality, who isn’t going to dream a little and peek over the fence to see the greener grass? It’s human nature. If you feel bad, feeling worse is the easiest thing to accomplish. Drag, drag, drag.

Nice. Bigger garage, columns, bigger tree, fireplace. But I really want to feel bad.

Sigh. Ok. That’s enough.

No Problems, Only Opportunities

Posted by anachostic on April 18, 2021 No comments

What Millennials Can Learn From Gen X’s Money Mistakes

You can consider me a sucker for any article on generational warfare, especially one that involves mine. So when an article immediately says I’m making mistakes with my money, I’m doubly interested.

I feel I’ve made this clear in other posts, but I really do feel sorry for generations after mine. While the generation preceding me couldn’t care much about anything other than itself, I am embarrassed at what has been left for the younger ones to clean up, fix, or just try to survive through. My whole generation is too small to have made any political impression or enact any meaningful change, but I’ve been waiting for the next major cohort to flex its muscle, and I expect we see things the same way.

Anyway…

This article says its a collection of advice from financial experts who want Gen Y to do things differently from Gen X – "Break the chains of financial norms that were enshrined as gospel in the last century." Here’s the truth that overshadows the entire article: The financial norms are not norms anymore because the entire economy and financial markets got fucked. But that’s not a problem. Don’t focus on that problem. Don’t bother trying to solve the problem (as if you could anyway).

The term "gaslight" is used way too frequently and usually inappropriately. I’m not going to use it here, but it feels some would. This article is more of the more traditional, "blowing smoke up your ass" flavor.

Point 1: Gen Y should focus on Roth accounts instead of traditional retirement accounts. I’m not going to argue particulars, this advice can go either way. I just want to point out that Roth IRA’s were created in 1997. It’s not like there was a lot of information on the benefits of a Roth at the time. And now, given time, experience, and income growth, I now contribute 100% to post-tax retirement accounts. Because Gen X makes all the financial mistakes.

Point 2: Gen Y should give up on whatever used to be the idea of financial success. Let me get that exact quote.

"…millennials need to reconsider the entire concept of wealth, success and financial freedom – particularly as it applies to standards that were set in a different time"

It shouldn’t take much cynicism to deduce that "a different time" means "a better time". What example of change was provided?

"Are we sure we want a 30-year mortgage on the largest house we can possibly secure financing for to go along with our student loan debt and auto loan? … Maybe a used RV and a WiFi hotspot are more appealing than a 2,000-square-foot ranch."

And now I want to really punch someone. I’ll give you this much. Buying the biggest house you can get financing for is a financial mistake, worthy of the title of the article. But to suggest that Gen Y should just literally give up on the concept of owning a house to live in a depreciating asset and have them consider that move financially savvy? That is an even bigger financial mistake. One that a future article will use comparing Gen Y and Gen Z.

And there’s a real trigger: "student loan debt". Something my generation didn’t have to worry about, at least not to enslavement levels of debt like today. Maybe a used RV is not so much "more appealing" as it is "the only option". I’m not saying lower your expectations, I’m just saying to refine them.

Point 3: Accept that shit sucks. Deal with it. I would really have to copy the whole text of the two paragraphs to do justice to what is being bullshitted. Remember, the problem the article is hiding is that the economy absolutely sucks. Gen Y started a revolution by creating "the gig economy". You know what the gig economy has done? It has resulted in workers being exploited and cheapened, with no redeeming benefits. And no benefits at all. For every success story on a gig worker, you have a thousand who are working themselves to the bone just to get by.

The Gen X life story? "Get a college degree. Land a job. Buy a house. Invest for retirement someday." Their take on these universal desires? "It’s a flawed model." IT’S A FUCKING FLAWED MODEL. I got my job with a Associates degree in an unrelated field. Gen Y (and Z now) have to have Bachelors degrees to get entry level jobs. They can’t get any job paying well enough to buy a house or to invest for retirement someday. WHOSE MODEL IS FUCKING FLAWED HERE?

So the explanation for being flawed is that it doesn’t align with Gen Y’s priorities: "experiences over possessions, and prioritizing purpose, innovation, and flexibility". And I’m going to say again, these priorities are due to the fact the world is garbage. They are compensation for having nothing else. When your world is so dead that you simply want to experience as much happiness as possible as soon as possible because you don’t expect things to be getting better in your lifetime, that’s a problem. When you demand flexibility because you know you can’t trust any institution for stability, that’s a problem. As far as purpose and innovation, Gen X had that as well, only it wasn’t something we had to demand, it was simply allowed. That’s a problem.

This romanticizing of renting for life and RVing and being mobile and nomadic, that’s a symptom of the times. It’s a necessity to survival. You really don’t think that if circumstances were the same now as they were 20 years ago that a whole generation would behave so differently? If anything the nomadic lifestyle would be taken up for pleasure. If the promise of technology had not been stolen by a few obscenely rich, powerful people, we’d all be living a utopian life.

For the boomers who were flower children until the end and look around with sadness at what they were unable to sustain, I will be a nerd who will die lamenting how the Internet was supposed to bring enlightenment and knowledge and was reduced to conspiracies and trolls. Gen Y, ponder well what legacy you wish to leave unfulfilled to the world.

All Good Things Must

Posted by anachostic on March 2, 2021 No comments

be made more difficult.

To be honest, T-Mobile has been an excellent company for me. I’ve always had decent service and they’ve never really let me down. Some of their promotional offers have been really interesting as well. It was a long time ago that they offered one share of T-Mobile stock for free to all subscribers. I regret not taking the time to claim that offer now. "Free is free" and I didn’t take it. Shame on me.

One of their other excellent offers was a checking account with 4% interest. Absolutely unheard of when it came out and is still unbelievable today. Granted, it’s only 4% on the first $3k in the account and 1% on everything over that. But even so, 1%? How sad is it that their base rate is still higher than everyone else? When I signed up, I had no idea how they could afford to do it and all these years later, I still don’t know how they can keep it up.

Well, that time has come. I’m sure there are a lot of money-wise people out there that are stocking $3k in that account and nothing more. In order to qualify for that 4% max rate, you have to have a $200 deposit every month into the account. Of course, people are going to people, so you can be absolutely assured that lots of people keep $3k in the account, then have an automated $200 deposit in each month and a corresponding $200 withdrawal every month as well. Totally worth it for 4% interest on $3k, I’m sure.

A bank isn’t going to make any money that way, I understand that. And so, it’s come to this. A new change in the way you qualify for the max interest rate. Again, I get it. The alternative is they just stop the offer altogether and then it’s just another nice thing ruined by people.

So anyway, what’s the change? Instead of having the $200/mo required deposit, you now have to make 10 purchases with the check card each month. This is logical as the bank would get a transaction fee for each purchase and those fees would pay for the bonus interest. Makes sense to me. The thing I don’t like is the way they are selling it to their customers. They say:

We understand making a monthly deposit may be tough and we want T‑Mobile MONEY to work for you. So, eligible customers will soon earn 4.00% APY* by using your T‑Mobile MONEY card for daily purchases like groceries, gas, or shopping online.

They understand making a monthly deposit may be tough. But it’s easier to make 10 transactions in a month. If you’re making 10 transactions in a month and not making any deposits, now that’s tough. But that’s where we’re at, I guess. Also, it’s a little irksome that to qualify for a higher interest rate, you have to lower your balance with 10 purchases. But, it’s their game and their rules.

I just wish they would have been honest with the reasons. I thought TMo used to have a slogan, "Straight talk", but it seems that’s another company. Why can’t they just explain it in reality and not need to spin it?

So that’s that. Now, what does this change cost the users? Here’s my plan. I normally get a drink from RaceTrac when I get takeout from certain restaurants. It’s $1.07 each time. So, RaceTrac now gets my TMo transactions. It’ll cost me a little over $10 to earn… wait, what? $18 in interest? Well, it’s not like that, exactly. I would be spending the $10 on another card regardless, so the math actually comes out that I would be losing interest on that $10, or 10 cents. Ugh, wait, not 10 cents. It’s 1%/12 months, so actually .0833%… 0.8 cents a month. I fucking hate math.

Now, if you were below the $3k balance and earning 4% on your whole balance, the numbers are a little worse. So to maximize your money here, you need to keep $3k in your account, plus whatever monthly fluctuations you have to keep you over that threshold. And for the people who automated $200 in and $200 out, now it would be a modification of maybe $20 in and $20 out via purchases each month. Same game, new rules.

Nobody Is Winning

Posted by anachostic on November 17, 2020 No comments

As far as I can tell, this is a shit year for everyone, and I don’t mean that in a blanket sort of way. It seems everyone is getting dinged here and there very specifically. I mean, yeah, there’s this global thing going on that everyone is getting hit by, but some people are getting hit by it in a more direct way, or in an absolute direct way.

But that’s not everything that’s going on. All the other things, whether minor, major, or catastrophic, are happing, too. And some are direct and some are specific. I certainly don’t want to classify whatever things I’ve been having happen to me as the same as someone who’s been through more than one of the, what, 30+ tropical storms this year, or wildfires, or earthquakes, or god knows what else. But with everything that has been happening and we still have a month and half left to go in the year, I’m just out of fucks.

My gripes as of lately, as I’ve implied, are minor. They’re just annoyances, but in a year where all you hear about is shit, it’s enough. A flat tire here, internet going down multiple times after years and years and years of rock-solid stability. It just seems like everything is coming to an end. Maybe I wouldn’t have even given those issues a second thought in another year, but there is no good news to really balance it out. Everything is bad.

And now we have half the country pissed off they can’t be as openly racist as they want and the other half is pissed that the other half exists.

I don’t even know where I was going with this post, but it’s relevant to the times.

The Modern Apartment Life

Posted by anachostic on October 30, 2020 No comments

I had a dream last night which gave me an idea that was very much in the spirit of the times. It’s no secret that the world we live in is the most unfair, inequitable, selfish, and greedy in generations. So, why not capitalize on it? So here’s my idea. Obviously, I couldn’t do anything like this for multiple reasons, not the least of which is morals. But if I was of that exploitive bent, I think this might actually work.

What’s hot right now? Renting. Why? Because no one can afford a house, even though rent is pretty much a house payment anyway, but for lots of other reasons, people can’t get a house. So, being a landlord is good. What’s even better is having high-end apartments, because even if people can’t afford to have a house, they still don’t want to have to live in, ugh, an apartment building. Temporarily displaced millionaires and all.

My design is a high-story building. Not like 30 stories high, just a moderate 10-12. It has a multi-level parking garage enough to house 2.5 cars per unit. 2 cars per unit, some overflow guest parking, and renters can pay for additional spaces. On the top floor of the building is a gym with inspiring views, and a restaurant serving breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Obviously, there is a resort-style pool and small dog park. Library, meeting/conference/party rooms, you know. All the stuff. So we’ve established this is a luxury apartment complex that’s essentially like living at a vacation resort. The rent doesn’t have to be outrageous, just in line with the amenities. The gatekeeping and exclusivity comes from a different source – the deposit.

To have a lease in this complex, you have to make a deposit of $20,000. Jaw-dropping, yes. Believable in this day and age, yes as well. Only the first one to do this will seem weird, then when it works, it will become normal. It’s happened over and over. Who would have thought people would be buying $1,500 phones?

Now obviously, this is a deposit, so you’ll get it back when you leave. I don’t know a lot about the rental industry, but I assume a rental company holds a percentage of the deposits they take in and uses the rest for working capital. It would be unlikely that there would be a mass outflow of tenants that would result in a "run on the bank", so to say. But that sort of working methodology just doesn’t sit right with me. That money is never yours and it’s a one-time boost, unlike the recurring inflow of rent payments. So in my business, the deposits are always 100% off-limits for business use.

So what do you do with that money? 120 units each with a $20k deposit is almost $2.5 million dollars. Well, you invest it! You put it in some safe income-bearing investment and the additional income from that investment is used to operate the business. Investing 2.4M with a 4% return will provide almost $100k a year, without compounding. Let’s consider what rent could be for such a high-end apartment. $1,500/mo? That would be $180k/mo in rental income, then an extra $8k/mo in investment income. That’s like having an extra 5 units paying rent.

And you know, the $20k deposit is still perfectly on point with the times. It keeps the "undesirables" out. So you’d have to have impeccable credit as well as a large hoard of cash to get into this building. And the exploitation of the tenants, even beyond what’s normal for rentals, is that the business gets to use the tenant’s capital for their own use. Shit, they could even sell it as a benefit to their renters, saying, "your deposit will be held securely so when you are ready to graduate to homeownership from renting, you’ll have a great source for your house’s down payment." Obviously ignoring the fact that the deposit is locked in a zero-interest account, while the apartment business is collecting the interest.

That just modern life in these dystopian times.

How That’s Done

Posted by anachostic on October 14, 2020 No comments

I’ve kept my mouth relatively shut for the last few years on this topic, but I’ve been thinking a lot about this specific thing and I felt I should get it out and in writing before I either forget it or it becomes irrelevant. Hopefully the latter happens first.

There’s this guy you have heard of, Donald Trump. Without really saying how I feel about him, I just want to explain this thing he does that is so dangerous. I know it’s way too late to change anyone’s minds for the upcoming election. And I rather doubt anyone under his sway will actually have their eyes opened by this explanation, but it never hurts to try.

There are countless examples of people parodying a Trump response to a question. A lot of them are spot on, usually rather funny, and also sad in their accuracy. I think a lot of people focus on the rambling, delusional aspects of the responses, which is a mistake. I don’t think Trump is stupid, like mentally stupid. He does things very intentionally.

I’ve read some analysis of his verbalisms, but nothing that really focuses on what is really trying to be accomplished with them. The best thing I have read is that he uses a long string of phrases that don’t really form a cohesive statement, but each one has a small nugget of something you want to hear and those pieces are what you focus on and ignore the rest. That way, everyone gets something of what they want out of the spew. That is probably accurate, but I have another observation, and I’ll provide a very simple, commonplace example. It’s believable, for sure, and when you see that technique can be applied to just about any question, hopefully you’ll never listen to his answers the same way again.

Here’s the hypothetical journalist question and Trump’s answer:

"Meteorologists are saying it’s not going to rain tomorrow. Do you think it’s going to rain?"

"Absolutely! 100%! It absolutely will rain. They say it’s not going to rain. They went to school for years and years and have all these degrees and they say it’s not going to rain. It should rain! Don’t you think? That would be beautiful. We need the rain. You know, all that school, all that, they don’t know. They say it won’t rain. Maybe it won’t. But it should rain. I’m sure it will. And that will be great for everyone. It would be a real shame if it didn’t. It would be bad for everyone."

And what do people get out of this babble? If it doesn’t rain, they get mad at the scientists because it should have rained. That was the right answer even though science says it won’t happen. The question was asking for a simple opinion and what we’re given is a statement on how we should feel about it. "It" being one specific viewpoint. In this case and in many cases, the viewpoint is in opposition to the scientific facts.

I have read many times that conservatives are not driven by logic, but by emotion. Not only in political topics, but in their entire lives. If it feels correct, it is correct. The problem with that is it is much easier to make someone feel a certain way than it is to make them think and understand a certain way. And that is what Trump (and many other con men) can exploit.

Let’s break down that long answer to the question.

"Absolutely! 100%! It absolutely will rain." – Start off with complete confidence and speak in absolutes. There is no place for disagreement here.
"They say it’s not going to rain. They went to school for years and years and have all these degrees and they say it’s not going to rain." – Attack the opposition. Even though they are correct, they need to be painted as the bad guys. Vagueness – using They and Other People – is perfectly fine. Be specific if you can, but an unknown enemy has advantages as well.
"It should rain! Don’t you think? That would be beautiful. We need the rain." – Why should we hate the experts? Explain it. Exploit feelings. You need to feel why you should be angry.
"You know, all that school, all that, they don’t know. They say it won’t rain." – While people are agreeing with the good things you said, say something bad about your opponent. Your mind is still saying "yes" and that "yes" will continue into the next statement. This is actually a well-known sales tactic. They get you to agree to anything ("It’s hot out today"), then carry that agreement into further conversation.
"Maybe it won’t." – This has two excellent benefits. You get an out if you’re wrong, because you can say you never said absolutely, and you inject a feeling of disappointment if the experts are right.
"But it should rain. I’m sure it will. And that will be great for everyone. It would be a real shame if it didn’t. It would be bad for everyone." – Don’t focus on your backpedalling, focus on the benefits of your answer, despite the fact you are wrong.

To summarize: Make your claim, attack your opponent, appeal to your audience, use agreement against your opponent, suggest you might be wrong – but that would be bad, restate your claim with the benefits.

If you don’t want to absorb all of these bits, at least take this: If you hear someone making a speech and they ask a question that sounds like it should be rhetorical, go on alert. They are trying to create agreement between something obvious and something you need to be convinced of.

Is Isolationism Spreading?

Posted by anachostic on August 13, 2020 No comments

In any other year, I would have simply rolled my eyes. But in the current sociopolitical climate, the message raised my eyebrows.

I have had a hard time finding an online home. Online forums are full of nothing but toxic and bitter people. Everywhere you go, you run into people who just can’t help themselves from cutting other people down for whatever reason. The anonymity of the Internet gives them the power to do so without recourse. I’ve wondered more and more lately if it was a good thing to make the internet accessible to all.

So, I had been settled into a new forum. It had a very, very strict rule about not bringing up politics or religion in any way. While that boundary was pushed occasionally, it was a line no one stepped over. And the forum seemed to thrive for it. There was some bickering over tastes and preferences, but that goes with my previous observation about general Internet usage.

This particular forum has no advertising and runs an annual donation drive for its expenses. Maybe a little unusual, but it seems to have been working for a long time. I did donate last year, maybe $20. This year, I don’t know. As ironic as it was, a pinned message was posted just above the pinned message for the donation drive with a new order from the owner.

The order was: if you are going to write a review for others to read, you must publish the review in the forum. You may not link to a review posted on your personal blog. If you do, the post will be flagged as spam and removed. If you continue to do it, your account will be closed.

I can’t really express the feelings I got when I read that. Maybe it doesn’t sound as bad here, where I’ve paraphrased it, but the literal words that punched me in the gut were, "directing us away from the forum".

Let me start on the positive. I sort of understand. This is a very popular forum. I suppose the owner would not want people simply joining his site and taking advantage of a large audience to get some ad revenue and traffic to their own site. Maybe that feeling is amplified because the owner doesn’t have advertising of his own, so why should others get the benefits of his site’s popularity? And also, he didn’t specifically say you couldn’t copy your personal work into a post on his forum, because well, that’s what a forum is. He’s not demanding exclusivity (unlike those fuckers at AlbumArtExchange).

So then, where’s my problem with it? It’s that wording. Posting a link isn’t taking any traffic away from you. They have links set up properly where they always open in a new tab – you aren’t losing your place. Second, this is the way of the Internet. It’s how it was conceived and how it should be. You link to related and relevant content. You don’t try to be authoritative for everything. Yahoo and AOL tried that and look how it worked for them. The Internet is meant to be open and free and exploratory. It’s not healthy to stay stuck in one place and get all your information from one site. Some leaders are attempting that now and look how well it’s working for them. Actually, don’t look at how well that’s working. Look at the consequences of how well that’s working.

"Don’t leave" is never a good thing to hear from someone. There’s the pleading, "don’t leave", then there’s the threatening, "don’t leave", and when you can’t tell the difference which one it is, that’s the worst of all. And that’s unfortunately when you really should leave.

Change Comes Quick

Posted by anachostic on August 10, 2020 No comments

It was only a few days ago I had read about a new Postmaster General and the "improvements" he was implementing to mail delivery. And for the first time ever, I see this message on a package I am expecting.

The clarify that image. I had earlier gotten emails saying my package was due to be delivered Aug 7. When it didn’t arrive, I checked the website and saw this message. Ok, I figured it would be delivered the next day, Saturday. Nope. Monday? Nope. The fucking package was only 2 hours away from me 5 days ago! What the hell is happening?

I want to say, I have never seen a message from USPS saying "Arriving Late". I also want to say that my experience with USPS has been rock solid for as long as I can remember. When you read news stories about new management and their plan to improve profitability by reducing service levels, and immediately you are impacted, what kind of impression are you supposed to get?

I’ve tried to keep politics out of my blog for a long time, but I feel this gripe would be fair to make under any administration. It would only seem biased because one party’s beliefs on the topic run counter to my own while the other party would agree. And so goes politics in the black and white era of America.

Many, many years ago I had the belief that the government should be run like a business. remember Ross Perot? That was the era. And I was in support of Perot for president for that very reason. Make the government run efficiently like a business. It was years later that I realized how wrong that perspective is. And I’m sure there are many people now who felt like I did back then. Although Perot didn’t get very far, we’re finally getting to test the idea of having a business-type government. And boy are we going to pay for it.

Here is the reason is a nutshell so you don’t have to read at length: Government is about helping people, business is about making money. Those goals are incompatible. A business will sacrifice anything, especially people, in its goal for profit. Is that wrong? No, it’s just its nature. No hard feelings, it’s just business, ya know?

And at this point, I was going to lay out a bunch of differences, but it also came down to a single reason, one that is overwhelmingly obvious in these times, from the top to the bottom. It’s all selfishness.

The Race Intensifies

Posted by anachostic on June 28, 2020 No comments

Still watching the races, much to my dismay and angst. Last night I had a moment of disbelief. All those people insanely claiming, "this is all a hoax!" and "It’s all fake." For once, those people almost made sense. And the reason for that was the pure incredulous of the numbers I was seeing. I mean, look at this chart:

You see those tiny bars near the beginning around 6/1? That’s 1,000 new cases a day. Back then, that was an unbelievable number. It had me shaking my head at the stupidity of my fellow residents. These last few days, what can I say? Well, we went through multiple 1k days, then multiple 2k days, then 3k days, then 4k days. And then, things changed. There was one 5k day, but there wasn’t a 6k or 7k day. It went straight to 8k. Then 9k.

What are you supposed to think when something like that happens? If you follow the drama and opposing viewpoints, right around that time, it is claimed that the numbers are being inflated so that they can be reported lower later on. But that doesn’t make any sense to me because you still have the record of the shit days. You can say it’s better, but better relative to the worst? The worst still happened!

And it just seems like there’s some sort of disinformation campaign going on, just like everything has been in the last three years or so. But the data is still there and it’s just an argument over how to interpret that data.

While on that topic, in a previous post, I put up an image that I consider misleading. Let’s revisit that.

Now let’s compare that to how things are right now.

In that old post, I said the chart was misleading because there was a delay as to when deaths were reported, so the true numbers were at the beginning of the chart and because of the delay, it would always look like the numbers were falling. Well, look at the chart now. Looks pretty flat, except for the most recent days, where you can expect less reported deaths.

So what’s going to happen is, as the deaths are reported (later), it’s going to make the chart look like it’s climbing, but the chart only has 30 days to work with. As long as there is a 2-week delay in death reporting, that should keep the numbers pretty low. But even if not, it will still look better. It makes you wonder what a chart longer than 30 days would look like.

Is Being Old A Liability?

Posted by anachostic on June 9, 2020 No comments

I’m not actually talking about people getting old and the risk that comes with that. You know there’s plenty of risks for old people, health, financial, mental, and on and on. Everything is dangerous. That’s not what I’m talking about. I am talking about corporations. Is it now a liability to be old?

Traditionally, it has been a great thing to have a business that’s been running for 50+ years. Some running for over 100. Amazing, isn’t it? To be that ingrained the fabric of America, to have that sort of name recognition, to have seen it all and weathered everything that came along. That last point: to have seen it all and weathered it. That is the liability – to have been there.

This train of thought is fairly new for me and is obviously based on current events, but the idea I’m basing it on was actually born quite a while ago. I was at a Dairy Queen, eating lunch one weekend. Dairy Queen is one of those long-standing institutions I’m referring to. I believe them to be generally well-loved, but every business has its detractors for some reason or another. That’s not important for the moment. What is important is having a history and being proud of it.

Yes, so Dairy Queen is an old company. They are quite proud of their early beginnings and how they’ve grown to a massive corporation that is, if not the leader, then the most recognizable company in their field. So, they want to highlight the humble beginnings of their company to, I don’t know, inspire others? And I’m sitting there at lunch eating, and on the wall are old black and white photos of early Dairy Queens with the old cars and crowds of people lining up for ice cream.

And as I studied the pictures, my thought was, "That’s a whole lot of white people, there."

Now at the time, things weren’t as crazy as they are now, but race relations were growing tense. They must have been for me to focus in on that aspect of the pictures. And further studying showed, yes, no black people present.

Let’s not jump to conclusions here. There’s lots of reasons why a bunch of photos just all happened to not show a single black person getting ice cream from an old Dairy Queen. Local demographics is a perfectly valid reason. BUT. Racial tensions are not about reason, they are about emotion. And anything that reinforces a perception… well, it’s not good, regardless of whether the perception can be explained or not.

To cut to the chase, I am wondering if it is worthy of consideration for a company that existed in the less-than-ideal era for black people to simply drop their company, drop their history, and start fresh with a new company. Radical? Yes. Beneficial? Maybe. Harmful if not done? Well, it is leaving an avenue of attack open.

I can foresee the arguments. Attack? That’s not fair. This company did nothing to foster divide or hatred back then and that nonwithstanding, this company is a diverse, fresh, modern company that is committed to blah, blah, blah. Right. And you can see how effective a defense that is. Compare that to: This company was formed and created in 2020, the year of social change, established right from the beginning with equality, inclusiveness, and equal representation in every level of management and policy. Blah blah blah. Both are corporate non-speak, but one has the distinct advantage of no historical baggage.

A company that was around in the 50’s, even if they weren’t actively employing racist policies, was still operating in the norms of the time, which is to say, likely racist. You would have to be considered extremely progressive, even radical, to have a company back then like companies are today. If you want a real eye-opener, watch the old movie 9 to 5, from 1980. At the climax of the movie, the old boss returns to the office and sees handicapped people working there and learns of many employee benefits that have been implemented in his absence. He’s furious, of course, insisting he will undo everything right away. Watching the movie now, those major advancements are like the bare minimum today.

So, if you were operating in the 50’s, you were a part of the problem. Your only excuse is that the social norms at the time didn’t consider it a problem. And that’s a problem for your company. You can say how committed you are and how changed and all that happy stuff your company is, but your company has old bones. And an old brain. And memories, posted in black and white photos on your walls. You can’t escape that past, without completely starting over.

« Previous page | Next page »

Anachostic