GuidoWorld

Horizontal and Vertical Experience and Knowledge

At each moment of our lives we are making a decision of what to do, think and feel. We can choose to do something new or decide to do something we have done for ages. Some of these decisions are highly limited or even decided for us because of our need to make money and survive. Much of our day is routine and we basically function on autopilot as we execute repetitive tasks such as walking, eating and driving. Even more thoughtless repetition goes into chores, tasks and the execution of most people’s jobs.

Yet, despite this inbred repetition there are thousands of moments each day when we have choices in our life. We can either go deeper in an interest or do something new and different. Going deeper into an interest or hobby or gaining furhter mastery of a skill we have is vertical growth. Delighting in a new experience is horizontal growth.

Some individuals have very few interests that they hone and master, while others like to dabble in a multitude of things finding joy in the novelty of new experience. No human being is devoid of new experiences and, likewise, no person’s life is free of some level of repetition.

There is beauty in both mastery and novelty, in depth and variety. Something new today could easily become an  area of interest worthy of discipline and mastery tomorrow. There is beauty, and potential satisfaction in both vertical and horizontal growth. Many people spend countless hours regretting the choices they make either feeling their lives lack depth or diversity. Either tendency can be  rewarding or empty. The important thing is to find what balance  between depth and novelty provides your life with the greatest sense of satisfaction and meaning.

Our society seems to over reward vertical growth and dissuade one from horizontal growth. Very seldom is obsessive/compulsive behavior rewarding and satisfying. Most often compulsive behavior is a feeble attempt at covering up a sense of emptiness or dissatisfaction. Yet, those who do things to an excess end up doing that specific thing better than others and that is often the definition of success in a competitive capitalistic society.

The person who works the most hours or spends each waking moment playing their instrument is most likely to succeed in a society based on competition. People with no variety in their lives, no sense of family, friendship or relaxing reflection have an advantage over those who have  rounded diverse lives.

This is why our society is rather harsh on those who are not driven and compulsive. People who are not driven are often referred to as lazy or lacking direction. They are looked at as being  common and unworthy of attention and respect.

The shame of this is that our society rewards and honors the driven compulsive people whose very natical ure makes them depressed or at least empty.

This is not to imply that there is anything inherently wrong with vertical growth, for each person will find their own blend of the old and the new which they find pleasing and satisfying.  Yet, their does seem to be something wrong with a society that fosters and rewards a style of life which is empty and unsatisfying.

A sense of meaning seems to be most easily gleaned from things mastered and with the longest history. Yet, there is a certain kind of joy only offered by the new and refreshing. Both experiences seem to be necessary for a cocktail promising a satisfying existence. A new love or discovery has us feel competent, alive and young while the familiar and the mastered gives us a sense of accomplishment and self-worth.

Each of us has to find our own mixture of the old and the new, of depth and novelty of vertical and horizontal growth. Like the old song said, “make new friends but keep the old, one is silver and the other is gold”.

Jim Guido

PS My site is currently being updated. In the short term some of my lyrics have disappeared. I hope to have them restored soon.

Obama Nation or Abomination Part 2

Well each appointment by Obama continues to disappoint and shows Obama to be less change oriented than he led us to believe. He has consistently surrounded himself with policy advisors and experts who are profoundly old school and whose policies have created the economic and diplomatic mess we currently find ourselves in. His securities and exchange appointee is only a little better than if he would have named Madoff to ferret out fraud and lead regulatory oversight.

I know I might seem a little hard on Obama before he’s even been sworn in, but I can’t help but feel validated in my belief that no true reformer would be allowed to win either party’s nomination. The corporate/industrial complex with its ownership/influence over the media would not tolerate a true change oriented person to become president.  Anyone can talk change, they just can’t act on it. In fact the better someone is at talking change and deceiving the public into believing that change is actually occuring while the status quo continues is not only electable, but preferred.

The power elite are thrilled when a president is able to convince the citizenry that our government has the noblest of intentions,  is dedicated to insuring the freedom and raising the standard of living of every American, and cares about their happiness and success. Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, even George Bush (you choose) was able to convince the majority of Americans that we are the leaders in positive change and a beacon for the rest of the world. The fact that most American’s still passionately love their party and hate/fear the other shows that most of us still believe the great con and are unwilling to demand the kind of structural change we would need to begin to live up to our beautiful ideals and sentiments.

True change will not come until we demand our leaders actions to match their words.

President Bush has become less and less visible during his two terms. He seldom talks directly to the American people and instead has a steady stream of press handlers speak for him. When he does speak it is usually of the evil intentions of those who are jealous of our freedom, and the importance of the war on terrorism. A war, which is quick to point out, will last for years if not decades.

In this regard Obama will be a breath of fresh air and a partial healer of the US psyche. During hard times or significant events I imagine Obama will speak to the nation with a reassuring tone. He will help all the unemployed and those hardest hit by the coming depression to feel hope. He will offer succor both verbal and through policies which will create jobs. I can picture his confident tone and reassuring words fostering a spirit of charity, understanding and mutual support which will help quell the anger and hatred that can fester during hard times. Unlike Bush, Obama won’t hide from the public or only be able to unite people through fear and hatred.

Yet, despite these positives I still see him continuing the policies of fear and hatred on the international scene. He already has shown this tendency in his hawkish statements towards Iran, Afghanistan and in his status quo empty rhetoric regarding the war on terrorism. I was too young to remember, but I have a hard time imagining that people continued to call everyone a Communist after the downfall of McCarthy.  When will we stop allowing our politicians to get us to hate people by calling them terrorists, or get us to support immoral policies because of their being justified by the war on terrorism?

We are not going to get true change until we stop selling our political system short, or demand more from our candidates. The military/industrial complex is confident we never will. Will we?

Jim Guido

I no longer am willing to vote for the lesser of two evils. Are you?

Obama Nation or Abomination

I must begin by apologizing for the title of this post, but I’ve been chuckling to myself on this word play for months now. I couldn’t resist finally using it.

I want to start by saying I have nothing personally against Obama, in fact, I find him to be an enjoyable and articulate well intentioned person. I also want to say that I don’t want to be lumped into the general crowd who always hate one party or candidate while loving the other.

Those who regularly read my posts know that I see little difference between the two parties and desire structural change in our political system. In a previous post I explained that I felt any candidate expressing true change or promised to rock the status quo would not be allowed to win the nomination of either party. The character assasinations and marginalization of people such as Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Howard Dean are just the three most known  examples over the last two elections.

Now I realize that many of those who voted for Obama feel that he is a true reformer, and even think of him as a political redeemer. Yet, his earliest actions seem to refute that conception and support my view that he must be a status quo kind of guy in reformer clothes (ala Bill Cinton).

A quick look at Obama’s cabinet and inner circle of advisors is all it takes to dispel any serious notion of him being a true breath of fresh air and reformer of the US political system.

His words of change and hope are greatly belied by his choice of cabinet members. While Obama talks of an overhaul of our elitist form of economics and a desire to close the gap between have and have nots, he has surrounded himself with the very policy makers which appear responsible for the current credit and economic crisis.

As a solution to our being viewed as a bully in the middle east incapable of respecting the sovereignty of the regions nations and being a lap dog of Israel Obama retains the current Secretary of Defense and has Ms. Clinton as Secretary of State. In foreign news papers Hillary is often cited as one of the most biased pro-Israel politicians in the US. Add to this Obama’s inflammatory rhetoric towards Iran, and his hawkish comments regarding Afghanistan and you have a hard time exiting the status quo. Even Obama’s hackneyed statements regarding “terrorists” and “the war on terrorism” do little to foster a new culture of change and hope.

The more I see and the more I hear, its just (same ol’, same ol’).

I hear many people defending Obama and saying he had to appoint these people, and had to make those statements in order to get people to work for him. True visionaries don’t have to lower their standards, they raise everyone elses. Am I to believe that these were the only qualified people available? Even if Obama didn’t know of any emerging great minds in economics or middle east politics couldn’t he have gone to any respected university and asked professors if they had any students over the past decade which showed promise to be a gifted thinker?

I can’t think of a single successful reformer who accomplished significant change by surrounding him/herself with in-crowd status quo leaders. I do realize that balance and diversity are important ingredients in good government. I’m not saying that every member of Obama’s inner circle needs to be a visionary, or a liberal or even a democrat. All I’m saying is that if your looking for a new menu, you need to have a few new chefs.

All we appear to be doing is building a house using the same materials we’ve been using for decades. Or a more timely analogy is building new cars with the same old parts.

Jim Guido

The Last Christmas?

The US has long been the center of over consumption. Living beyond one’s means has been a crucial element in the success of modern capitalism. Those living simply or basically buying according to need were a drag on the economic boon of the US. Capitalism needs excess and waste in order to survive and flourish. The following equation may look like word play, but it is more true than one would think at first blush.

Profit = surplus = excess = waste

When people buy only what they need the economy contracts and we have a recession. When it contracts for a length of time we have a depression. The last economic boon lasted some 30 years, much longer than previous growth periods. Yet, the bulk of this growth was gained through debt accumulation and monetary growth, not through wages and industry.

The dominoes have just begun to fall. Mass layoffs are still in their infancy and will have to run their course. House prices still have far to fall to reach the historical mean. Houses have historically cost a person about three years salary, the average salary is under 50,000 a year and the average house is still well over 150,000. Either salaries need to drastically rise or house prices drastically need to fall. Guess which will happen.

Though the credit bubble has popped, it still is above the peak of insanity we reached in 1929. Yes, you read that correctly. What this means is that the amount of debt as compared to a percentage of Gross Domestic Product is still significantly higher than the peak of the roaring twenties.

All previous down markets have lasted three eighths as long as the preceding up phase. This would mean the stock market will be going down till 2016 - 2017. Since stock markets usually rebound before the economy, one can assume the economy will remain weak and contract at least through 2016.

This all leads me to the title of this post. Is this the last Christmas of post WWII over consumption? Or is this a lost Christmas, and last year was the final hurrah?

The media will do its job of being schizophrenic having conflicting stories talking of dismal retail sales while occasionally spouting statistics which depict a surprisingly healthy consumer. Most of these stats and spins will be put out by retailers hoping to convince consumers to go out and spend to avoid the stigma of being the only person not giving every one  top notch presents. Maybe, these misleading stats and stories will work, after all they are experts at advertising and consumptive propaganda.

Already I’ve seen deceptive articles such as one that stated this Thanksgiving weekend was 7.2% higher than the same weekend last year. This article appeared to contradict other articles in the same newspaper which stated that the weekend was less than 3% better than sales of last years Thanksgiving weekend. This apparent conflict is resolved when you realize that the 7.2% rise is comparing Thanksgiving weekend of this year with the week after Thanksgiving of last year. This is because Thanksgiving is relatively late this calendar year.

You can expect to see many deceptive articles and statistics this holiday season. It may help make this the last Christmas as opposed to the lost Christmas. But one thing is for certain this economy has a long contraction in front of it. So if you are not in debt you are becoming wealthier by the day as prices come down and the global money supply goes through a much needed contraction.

Jim Guido