Home » People & Culture » The Only Issue that Counts

The Only Issue that Counts

This election year, like any, has a large number of issues that politicians use to distinguish themselves from each other.  Budget deficits, immigration, gay marriage, jobs, and corporate misdeeds are all big hits.  But what is less obvious is that these issues that appear in the press in long scorecards and lists as if they are important are nothing more than pointless noise.  A big bundle of issues, however eagerly they are debated, is no substitute for a genuine strategy – and the real leadership that shapes and executes that strategy.  But this point is utterly lost in what pathetically passes for “debate” in our politics.

One of the big debates rolling through the gab shows right now is whether it makes sense for the US government to continue spending money on “stimulus” or if we would be better off reducing the deficit.  What rarely, if ever, comes up in this debate is the plan for stimulus that we supposedly should fund.  There is an assumption unsaid that spending money somehow is how we start the economy without any care as to how it can best be done.  The possibility of carefully designed stimulus, targeted for greatest effect or at least a solid investment, is lost in the noize.

There are many ways we could get the economy moving, of course.  The most important is to reduce the overhead per employee and make it much cheaper for employers to hire people.  That would take some action on the part of government to reduce or clarify regulation and could reasonably include reductions in payroll taxes – but the main effort is going to come from the private sector.  What government can provide on this issue more than anything is leadership.  That is, apparently, the one thing it is completely lacking.

It’s not as though this is the only issue that is crying out for leadership and strategic focus, however.  Arizona stepped into what is clearly a Federal issue by passing a draconian immigration law.  Blurring the lines between state and federal has been a feature of the last few decades, possibly culminating in the “No Child Left Behind” federal takeover of education policy.  The result is that it is very unclear who is in charge of what – which means that no one is in charge.  Without any identifiable leadership there can be no strategic thinking.

This is the kind of situation that causes bridges to fall down, among other things.

How do we create an effective strategy?  More than just leadership, it takes a firm understanding of what your goals are.  We, as a people, have to be very clear as to where we are going before we can lay out the roadmap for getting there (a strategy) that is mindful of what we have to move us along that road (the logistics).  The leader that will move us along that path is only one of many missing elements.  What we are demanding from that leader is the entirety of our strategic plan – which is something no one person can reasonably deliver.

What we are left with are bundles of disconnected issues that make no sense on their own.

How can we get started if there is no set of goals and clear strategy plus no leadership to  get the process started?  This is where Connections Theory comes into play.  I think that if people can first get a firm grip on how we are connected and have a deep need for some kind of strategic focus we may demand more from our leaders than we currently get.  Paying attention to our connections might even identify people who are well connected and therefore natural leaders that others rely on – creating a more organic politics.

What this calls for is the meta-strategy – the strategy for making us more strategic.  It’s a topic that is on my mind constantly as I watch politicians dance to the tune set up by dozens of talking heads that bob up and down to the rhythm of nooze cycles.  It’s not going to get us anywhere it hasn’t already taken us over the last 20 years – and that should be obvious by now.  Our government has to be more deliberate, and in a Democratic Republic that means that our politics has to be more deliberate, too.

How do we get there?  You’ve read my spiel, now I’d like to know what you think.

5 thoughts on “The Only Issue that Counts

  1. I don’t think that anyone has a clue where we should be going or what we should do. There was an excellent analysis on the Daily Show recently with Newt Gingerich literally calling for us to avoid socialism by repealing capital gains taxes as they do in China, a communist nation. He said it in a way that it seemed to make sense to him, too.

    With this kind of garbage going on among our self appointed ‘leaders’ we aren’t going to get anywhere soon.

  2. I think the recently passed health care legislation was/is an attempt to press for less inexpensive payroll taxes. Some of those who have generous employer paid health insurance plans don’t realize how good they have it. There are probably over 75 million Americans who have prohibitly high health insurance costs or high deductibles.

  3. I agree with Dan, the reform of healthcare could go a long way to reducing the costs of employment, but the costs of hiring have increased in many other ways – likely due to the current employers’ market. New employees must assert their right to work in the U.S. and this must be validated and paperwork processed (an I-9); drug screening is standard practice for a high percentage of jobs; and most hiring involves multiple interviews.

    It may seem great for employers to reduce the risks of getting bad apples, but it creates a financial disincentive to hire and fire (and thus go through the whole expensive process all over again). The nature of employment evolved and demanded change. A few generations ago, a single career in a lifetime was the norm. Now multiple careers in a lifetime is the norm, but the current circumstances inhibit individual career changes.

  4. Pingback: Dark Issues | Barataria – The work of Erik Hare

  5. “Stimulus” is wasted. It is done for PR purposes, not to get anything useful accomplished. I used to manage federal contracts. and at best 60% of the money that goes to a company goes for the actual work. The rest is overhead.

    We just saw a $10B package passed with the ostensible purpose of keeping teachers and other public servants from being laid off. Odds are that the cities and towns that get the money will simply reprogram money that would have gone to pay teachers and spend it on something else, or just pocket the money and lay the teachers off anyway. As Michael Bloomberg noted, “The federal aid had already been taken into account.” It’s a bear to get money back once the federal government has disbursed it.

    As one who used to live in Arizona, I didn’t find the new law draconian, but then I work in places where I have to show ID just to enter my place of work. I am also subject to background investigation and have had positions where I had to pee in a cup on demand. (Good luck with that one!) The requirement to file an I-9 and multiple interviews is nothing new. Lately I’ve been getting hired for jobs over the phone because companies don’t want to pay for a site visit.

Like this Post? Hate it? Tell us!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s