Michael Kayes's Blog

159th Edition

Enemies

I’ve been giving a lot of thought lately to our enemies. Probably not the healthiest thing to do, but I’m past the point of no return.  My first thought was to recall that someone suggested we might try to make an enemy our friend. So, I did a search on that thought. Not surprisingly, I learned that it was Abraham Lincoln who said, “Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?” I should have known it was Lincoln who said that… 

There are multiple levels to any meaningful discussion about enemies. To begin with, there are, of course, personal enemies and corporate enemies. 

From a personal perspective, anyone who is intent on inflicting harm on you might be considered an enemy. Here are a few examples: A person who tries to convince you to have one more drink before you drive home when you know you have already had one too many is an enemy. A person who lies and cheats you in business is an enemy. A person who encourages you to worship false gods is an enemy. The list is almost endless. The world is full of people who do not have our best interest at heart. 

Then there are corporate enemies. If you work for Lowes, employees at Home Depot are your enemies. If you play for any particular team, the players on your arch-rival’s team are your enemies. More seriously, if you are in the U.S. military, you have enemies all over the world. 

Throughout history, religion has created enemies. Today, if you are Jewish or Christian, you have certain enemies. There are articles nearly every day about the inevitable, existential battle between Christians and Muslims. We try to downplay it by stating that it only involves radicals on either side. We will see how that works out. 

Interestingly, there are people on both sides who view Satan as the real enemy. America, itself has been called the Great Satan. Is all this getting worse today? 

No matter how you slice it, enemies exist. Personal or corporate. What should we do about them? Is Lincoln’s idea useful for today? Have you ever reconciled with a personal enemy and actually created a new friendship or restored an old one? That isn’t easy to do, is it? Both sides have to be willing to reconcile and forgive. 

From a corporate perspective, history has shown that it is possible to make friends of old enemies. Our history with Japan is one example. Germany is another. Could we do the same with Iran? Hard to imagine, maybe, but remember, it was unthinkable that Japan would ever be an ally after their surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. After the war, Japan and Germany were in ruins. Both countries needed our economic and financial help to recover. Despite being mortal enemies for several years, we led the way in the rebuilding process in both countries. Today, we are allies and economic partners with both countries. So, it is possible.           

How could we do the same with Iran? Is their ideology, and their obsession with destroying western civilization and Judeo-Christianity too big of a hurdle to overcome? Is there common ground that can lead to lasting peace? Why has lasting peace been so difficult to establish in that region of the world? 

After WWII, America won the peace. We rebuilt Europe and Japan, helped China, the Philippines, and many other countries, as well. There is no denying that we had to win the war first. Defeating Germany and Japan required the Unconditional Surrender of both combatants. Is that necessary today with Iran? It is hard to see otherwise.

And then there is Communist China. Numerous books have been published claiming that Communist China is our most serious threat. To many of these authors and national security experts, the existential battle is between freedom and state control. Democracy vs. Communism. A zero-sum game. Over the long run, they cannot coexist peacefully.  Most unsettling, the Chinese Communist Party is engaged in unrestricted warfare, in which Americans are being attacked from within; cognitively, physically, economically, and spiritually. The ultimate goal of communism is state control and less individual freedom. Which of these diametrically opposed ideologies is gaining momentum in our country? What are we willing to sacrifice to preserve freedom?

We live in very precarious times.  

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

158th Edition

License plates

I’ve never ordered a vanity license plate, but I think some of them are really cool. My two favorites were both on red sports cars. One was a corvette and the tag said, “Was His.”  Clever.  The second was on a Ferrari.  The license plate read, “I know.  Thanks.”  That one sure made me laugh.  A truly creative phrase on a license plate or bumper sticker is a way to express your identity.  Harmless fun, really.

What gives you your identity?  In what ways are you inspired to share who you are and what really matters to you? Some people would rather remain anonymous. Others feel the need to announce themselves whenever and wherever they arrive. We live in a world overwhelmed with, if not obsessed with, status symbols.  How important are they to you?

Of course, a lot of people express their identity by the clothes they wear.  I choose my clothes solely based on the weather conditions.  I learned that at an early age growing up in the tundra of upstate NY.  Color, style, status, or whether the shirt matches the pants matters little to me, much to the chagrin of my family.  Except when it comes to socks.  I’ve always been a sock guy.  When I was much younger, I often wore several at the same time to play basketball.  Sometimes as many as four or five pairs.  Today, with old legs and battered knees, I wear two pairs just to walk to the mailbox.  From an identity-expressing perspective, socks have an obvious problem. They aren’t visible most of the time.  Shoes, or sneakers as they are properly called, get in the way. Shoes don’t seem to be able to fill the void for people like me that haven’t figured out how to dress for success.  Besides, as Andy DuFresne so astutely said in Shawshank Redemption, “Who looks at a man’s shoes?”

Which brings me to tattoos.  It’s becoming rare to see a younger person without one.  Will they still like them when they are my age?  What if their sense of self-expression changes?

On to automobiles.  A common status symbol, especially for men.  Have you ever driven a car that portrayed the opposite of the status symbol you aspired to?  I did all through high school when I drove my mom’s Ford Pinto to school.  It was embarrassing, compared to the Chevrolet Camaros or the Ford Mustangs some of my friends drove, but it beat walking on a cold winter day.

Watches can be status symbols.  I like watches almost as much as I like socks. Some high-end watches can cost more than a car or even a house. Rather silly isn’t it.  High-end socks cost less than a pizza.  My advice? Stick with socks.

Just about anything can be a status symbol.  Pets, clothes, purses, hats, sports equipment, jewelry, class rings, neighborhoods, club memberships, and travel destinations.  Does any status symbol or outward form of self-expression offer any meaningful insight into what an individual is all about?  Can you tell how honest or trustworthy or kind a person is by their status symbols?  Would there be any advantage to living a life void of, or at least oblivious to, status symbols?  Is that something a person could easily do or would it take a lot of effort?

Well into my golden years, I am starting to think that status symbols are just not that important.  And that none of them, even socks, reveal a single thing about our inner selves.  I imagine that is an unsettling thought to some people, but a comforting thought to others.  

I’m also wondering how much of a person’s legacy will include the status symbols attained during that person’s lifetime?  Will people really remember trappings like a Rolex watch, or a BMW, or a Condo in Aspen?  Or will they remember the special moments when that person said, “I’m proud of you,” or “I love you,” or when you experienced something unforgettable together?

My sense is that the people who leave the most profound legacy are those who spent the least amount of time striving for status symbols.  Perhaps they are aware of what C.S. Lewis meant when he said, “If you read history you will find that the Christians who did the most for the present world were precisely those who thought most of the next.”  Or maybe they just realize the truth in the old Italian proverb – “At the end of the game, the king and the pawn go back in the same box.”

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

157th Edition

WWLS – What Would Lincoln Say?

Abraham Lincoln had a curious habit of writing letters, which he then never signed nor sent. Why?  For Lincoln it was a therapeutic way to vent his anger and frustration without causing irreparable harm to a relationship.  What a novel approach.  His most famous such letter was written to General George Meade after the Battle of Gettysburg. Apparently, General Meade had the opportunity to pursue and defeat General Lee’s army which was in full retreat.  The fact that the overly cautious Meade hesitated and squandered this opportunity to perhaps end the Civil War, infuriated Lincoln.  Hence the letter chastising Meade and expressing Lincoln’s vehement frustration.  At the bottom of the letter, Lincoln wrote these famous words, “Never signed, never sent.”

Lincoln’s communication style was a tribute to his self-discipline.  It stands in stark contrast to much of what transpires today, with pundits and talking heads spewing forth daily diatribes with very little thought and even less discernment or self-control.  This isn’t a recent phenomenon. Even as early as the political battles between many of the Founding Fathers, including John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, plus a host of behind-the-scenes operatives, vitriol and unsubstantiated accusations were commonplace.  Some of these verbal battles ended in duels and needless fatalities . It was custom, in those formative years, for combatants to use surrogates or pseudonyms to do their political dirty work.  I think it is fair to conclude that polarization, insincere hyperbole and downright slander was just as awful back then as it is today.

So, why was Lincoln seemingly able to rise above it to a large extent? And what might be the subject of a letter he would write today and to whom would it be addressed?  And of course, would he sign and send it or file it away in his desk drawer?

To answer these questions, I think we should first ponder what issues today would motivate Lincoln to respond. Lincoln’s primary objective during those turbulent years in our nation’s history was to preserve the union.  In my view, no greater words were ever spoken by any American than those by Lincoln which we know as the Gettysburg Address…

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

“Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

“But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

What words or actions today would be most offensive to the author of such words?  Perhaps we might all contemplate that question as we prioritize and determine what causes and which leaders we support.  And even how we go about our daily lives, as brothers and sisters, contributing to life in God’s amazing kingdom.

What would Lincoln say, today?  Perhaps he would say very little, preferring not to add to the endless posts, tweets, and senseless sound bites.  Still, if we study Lincoln, who was arguably our greatest president, we might realize how much wisdom he has already shared with us.

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

156th Edition

WWHD – What Would Hemingway Do?

It seems that every time some celebrity or politician talks about their childhood, they credit the extraordinary work ethic of a parent or grandparent that helped them climb the ladder of success. It appears they all like to claim some sort of a rags to riches story, all due to the hard work of someone else. On the surface, it makes perfect sense to do this. As Barton Swaim points out in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal – “Vance, Newsom and Tales of Want,” both sides of the political aisle are guilty of what he calls, “the commonest trope in politics.” Swaim makes an interesting statement in his article – “A ferocious work ethic was a virtue among our elders; today it’s evidence of systematic injustice.”

I thought I’d dig into that a little bit in today’s blog. From the Founding Fathers to the Greatest Generation, Americans have long been a nation of hard-working people. Just this past week I had a conversation with a retired police officer, who worked thirty-one years and never took a single day off… in thirty-one years! Stories like this about the Baby Boom generation, of which I am one, are common. It was just a way of life. We lived that way because we wanted to provide a better life for our families. 

Finding ways to do more with less, to build things faster and to make mundane tasks easier to do, so we would have more time for more enjoyable activities, have all been part of the technological revolution. Today, in many ways, status is measured by how many gadgets one has and how little time one spends doing any task manually. Personal robots can clean, vacuum, mow the lawn, clean the pool, wash the windows, while smart phone apps turn lights on and off, control the HAVC system, monitor the alarm system and so much more. Beyond all this we have a plethora of virtual reality applications and experiences. In essence, the more technology can do, the less we have to do.

And then there is AI. It can think for us. Perhaps better than we can, certainly much quicker. In the technological age, we seem obsessed with finding ways to do, well, everything that needs to be done, with the least amount of human effort. 

Last week, I flew to Boston. I was the only person on the plane who did not have a roller bag. I had a green REI duffle bag and a North Face backpack. I felt so out of place hiking through the airports with my duffle bag on one shoulder and my backpack on the other. Still, it served as my workout for the day. Perhaps there is some value in doing things the hard way.

AI can write a report or essay, or even a book in seconds. I wonder if Earnest Hemingway would have used AI if it were available when he wrote To Whom the Bell Tolls or The Old Man and The Sea?

Today you can take a pill to lose weight. Will that make exercise and self-control less important?  I imagine someday soon, there will be a pill I can take to run faster and maybe even jump higher. Will I take them and stop training as hard?

How exactly did a strong work ethic become a sign of injustice? I guess it makes sense to assert that claim if your goal is to have the government redistribute wealth and eliminate income inequality. But as Swaim rightly points out, if the government does this then a strong work ethic isn’t necessary. What will America become without a strong work ethic? Has technology already made one obsolete? Swaim’s concluding point is this: Politicians credit a previous generation’s work ethic, but are bent on making it unnecessary in the current generation. But he doesn’t ask why. I suspect the reason why politicians do this has something to do with their insatiable thirst for power and control. 

In my mind, it comes down to this – Can government provide an effective safety net, help provide opportunities for all, while encouraging a strong work ethic, and preventing destructive cycles of poverty and dependency? Its track record, since the New Deal, is a mixed bag. As government continues to expand, it is unlikely to become less intrusive in our lives. As future versions of AI become more powerful, what will there be left for us to do? If everything we have to do becomes too easy, how will character be forged, how will muscles be developed, and how will perseverance and determination be learned? 

Perhaps someday I’ll use a roller bag. But not just yet.             

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

155th Edition

This is the first in a new series. The WW Series. What Would (someone famous) Think, Do, or Say? Here is the first one:

WWET – What Would Einstein Think?

In addition to his scientific genius, Albert Einstein was noted for making numerous insightful and thought-provoking remarks about various topics. Perhaps his most famous was his comment about the weapons with which he thought World War III would be fought.  He replied, “I have no idea, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

I wonder if he would say the same thing today.  My sense is he would have a revised opinion about WWIII. Today, wars are fought and watched in real time.  Every action is filmed, studied and scrutinized.  We evaluate strategies as they happen, expect immediate results, and demand knowledge of tactics before they are utilized.  How might WWIII be different?  Imagine even more real-time oversight of every action.  Soldiers graded for their accuracy with every bullet.  Every bomb and missile tracked and timed from launch to target.  Objectives would be preannounced, battle maps available online, and the number of ordinances used and held in reserve would be counted and recounted in real time.  There would be no surprises to either side, friend and foe alike.  Accountability would soar to a much higher level.  Combatants on every level could be fired at any moment for faulty decisions or errors in judgment or performance.  And yes, some would still be in harm’s way.

Of course, Einstein would have a lot to say about drones.  Drones will be ubiquitous on every battlefield.  WWIII will be won or lost remotely on livestream TV.  Only when one combatant runs out of drones or loses the ability to direct drone attacks will the war end.  AI may be able to prolong the drone attacks long after human operators have been killed.  Lasting peace will require the destruction of every last drone.

There might be no heroes in WWIII, only victims and endless proficiency reports automatically produced and disseminated daily.  There may be no need for boots on the ground or conquering heroes because drones will have destroyed everything of any use to anyone.  What would be the point of taking over new territory if everything has been destroyed?

Casualties, at least on the winning side, will be comparatively low.  That’s the good news.  Perhaps it is progress that WWIII will not result in nuclear Armageddon.  Still, important unanswered questions remain.  Will the Great Drone War lead to lasting peace?  Do the means used in fighting a war affect the prospects for lasting peace after the war?

Would it ever be possible to have two countries who are seemingly on a collision course for war first go into a safe, state-of-the-art theatre and watch the virtual reality devastation of what an actual war would produce?  Given the vastly superior military capabilities of the U.S., couldn’t they have shown with prophetic accuracy what would happen to Iran once hostilities commenced?  Would Iran have negotiated for peace, avoiding needless destruction and bloodshed?  That’s doubtful, isn’t it?

The U.S. along with its allies and enemies spend billions on building ever-more sophisticated ways to kill people.  It’s mesmerizing to watch a series of pinpoint missile and bomb attacks obliterating a defenseless enemy.  But I don’t see the valor in it.  Maybe someday we will stop fighting and learn how to get along.  Then we can redirect all our resources and creative energy toward technological advancements that will make the world a better place.  That’s doubtful, too, isn’t it?

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

154th Edition

The Greatest Generations

Tom Brokaw, noted author, historian and network television anchor, coined the phrase The Greatest Generation when referring to the generation that fought and won WWII, then returned home and built the most powerful economy in the history of the world. Given those two momentous accomplishments, it is hard to argue with that moniker. 

At the same time, a case can certainly be made that the Greatest Generation came nearly two hundred years earlier at the founding of our nation. Warren G. Harding, the 29th President of the United States, is credited with first using the term “The Founding Fathers” to describe the likes of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin, to name only a few of the courageous men who led the rebellion against the Crown and subsequently led the creation of our Republic. 

My point in this blog is not to make the case that one of these generations was greater than the other. I prefer to think of them as the Greatest Generations. I don’t see how any serious study of history can arrive at any other conclusion. During each of these historic periods, men and women showed incredible bravery and fortitude, sacrificing everything, in many cases even their very lives, for their country. We owe all of them an eternal debt of gratitude. 

Today, we celebrate President’s Day, the 4th of July, and Veterans Day, and well we should. But are we doing enough to honor these men and women? I’m not so sure.

As I interact with young people from middle school to high school, it is increasingly apparent that the knowledge of history, covering both historic periods, is woeful. Why are we not teaching our younger generations the important life lessons from these two pivotal eras in our nation’s history?

When it comes to the Founding Fathers, it is well known that there are certain factions that would like to rewrite history. Others are intent on removing the names of Jefferson and Washington from schools, public parks, and buildings because these men were slave owners. Is this the right thing to do? In doing so, will we still be able to judge each man for his body of work during his lifetime? Or will we allow the stain of slavery to wipe out everything else Jefferson and Washington accomplished, and for every sacrifice each made for our country?

I haven’t come across any coherent argument why the lessons of WWII shouldn’t represent a core of the history curriculum in middle and high schools. The leaders it produced, like Churchill and Eisenhower, the industrial miracles made possible through a partnership between government and big business, and the moral and ethical dilemmas from the Holocaust to Hiroshima, all seem too important not to study and debate. Yet, when I ask students basic questions about WWII, they invariably can’t answer any of them. Their knowledge base is almost nonexistent. In my mind this is a national tragedy. What can we do about it?

Worst of all, what happens to our country if we forget our Greatest Generations? Will we ever produce another one? It would seem highly unlikely. It puzzles me that there seems to be so many people who seem intent on degrading our history and accomplishments, while elevating our shortcomings. In coaching, I’ve always used the philosophy, if you don’t ever praise, you have no right to criticize. What is motivating so many people to do the former but not the latter?

Criticism without praise reeks of bias, if not some lurking evil intent. I’ve never known criticism to result in inspiration, and greatness is seldom strived for, let alone achieved, without it.

At some point in the future, our country will undoubtedly face another defining challenge. At that moment, will that generation become the third Greatest Generation? Without knowledge and understanding of the past, will they want to? If so, will they even know how?

From a civic perspective, there are prerequisites to achieving greatness. Foundationally, one has to embrace a mindset that elevates service to others above self-interests. One must accept the fact that he belongs to something beyond himself. Lastly, one has to understand that to whom much has been given, much is expected.  My sense is that having a strong faith in God would produce each of these essential characteristics in abundance.

Absent a strong faith, our future of producing greatness when it is desperately needed, as we have done throughout our history, is uncertain. The potential repercussions of falling short are downright harrowing.

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

153rd Edition

Never mind I’ll do it myself

At some point we are all going to have to decide what we don’t want AI to do for us. It seems inevitable that the list of tasks that AI will assume will continue to grow. We live in a world that is completely dedicated to, if not obsessed with, automation. Our economy and stock market rely on perpetual improvements in productivity. Even as I type this blog, trying to use only my original thoughts, AI is at work behind the scenes, trying to finish my sentences, compiling algorithms for who knows what future purpose. 

Some people believe AI and other forms of technology should take over all mundane tasks, allowing us to spend time in more creative and meaningful endeavors. Really? Perhaps I am the only person who would prefer less technology in their life rather than more…

For whatever it’s worth, here is a list of tasks that AI can do that I prefer to do myself. First, I prefer to write slowly and thoughtfully. I relish the moments when I can reflect, reread and rephrase early drafts, searching for the exact words to best convey the true essence of what I am trying to say. My vocabulary isn’t as strong as I’d like it to be. I’m certainly no Pat Conroy, whose novels have long inspired me. I’ll never reach his level, although I aspire to get as close as I can. In short, I like to struggle as I write. I want the process to be laborious, even frustrating at times. Finding the right words, after multiple drafts, after chewing on them for a while, is intensely gratifying. Could AI speed up this process? Sure, but it would take all the enjoyment out of it. 

Second, I have no interest in any form of virtual reality. I don’t want to play Pinehurst No. 2 in a simulator, or by wearing some kind of headset. I want to walk that storied golf course, early in the morning when the dew is still on the fairways. I want to feel the subtle undulations in the greens, and I want to feel the shifting winds blowing through the pine trees. I want to stand in the exact spot where tournaments have been won or lost. Try to make the same shot or same putt that great players have attempted. Most of all I want to hear the caddie’s banter, offering advice and a moment of humor to break the inevitable tension that comes with the great expectations of playing one of the world’s greatest golf courses. Virtual reality will never match this.

Third, I want to drive or be a passenger in a car with some other person. I have zero interest in a self-driving car. A drive is so much more than time spent getting from Point A to Point B. It is a time for conversation, for close friends to reconnect and for new friendships to be made. The next time you are going somewhere take somebody along. Instead of concentrating on the destination, focus on the journey.

Fourth, I do not want a remote job. I think it is the most destructive trend to impact corporate America in my lifetime (that just might be an understatement). The massive amount of wisdom, developed over decades by old fogies like me, is not being transferred to the younger generations and in many cases is being completely discarded. At the same time, remote workers often lack the essential interpersonal skills to establish and build trust, the foundation post of every successful organization. Data and metrics will never replace intuition, instincts, and experience, all of which are refined over time and cannot be forced or fabricated. 

Last, but certainly not least, I prefer no role for AI in my spiritual journey. I don’t want to go faster, but I am open to going deeper. For me, a spiritual journey is a heart thing, not a head thing. It’s not so much an exercise to cram more knowledge into my brain as it is to sort through and ingrain God’s truths into my heart and my very being. It is a lifelong journey, never to be completed in this lifetime. AI may be able to quickly summarize passages in the Bible or the writings of theologians like C.S. Lewis and Thomas Merton, but knowledge quickly acquired can be knowledge quickly forgotten. Only a lifetime of study can be transformative. 

The growing fear of the power and potential of AI isn’t surprising. Will it ultimately be a friend or foe of humanity? When the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, which ended WWII, many feared nuclear Armageddon was next. Eighty years later, here we are, still facing the eternal struggle of good vs. evil. God must wonder whether we will ever figure it out.     

What are some of the things you would rather do yourself? Let’s go to lunch and talk about them. Or maybe talk about whatever is on your mind or in your heart. Leave AI at home. In the meantime, you might reflect on this verse, offering comfort to some and a warning to others… Be Still and Know that I am God (Psalm 46:10).

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

152nd Edition

How to know when it’s time to retire

I talk to people all the time who have just retired or are considering it. In most cases, there is a financial aspect to this decision process, but the ultimate decision usually comes down to something else. A good sign that retirement is at hand is when you spend too much of your time thinking about the good old days. When you have thoughts like this… If we could just go back to the way it was everything would be better…

I think Peggy Noonan, acclaimed author and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, has reached the moment where retirement might make sense. While I have tremendous respect and admiration for what she has accomplished in her career, she often misses the critical point in her essays. Let me try to explain.

In her latest essay, “America Needs Restraint – and Facts,” Noonan calls for “a return to the ways of Martin Luther King and the wire services.” She longs for the days of Walter Cronkite. Reflecting on the violence in Minneapolis, she says bluntly, “We aren’t at peace with ourselves.” Really? Is she just figuring this out? Noonan concludes from watching videos that the federal law enforcement officers aren’t sufficiently trained. Has she been through any of their training exercises? Has she interviewed any of the officers away from the crowds and protestors? Perhaps I am wrong, but I doubt it. I would love to ask her these questions, but I know no way to reach her. Maybe if I keep writing about her, she’ll contact me. 

So, what exactly do we make of the violent civil protests in some of our major cities? Are they signs of a nation no longer at peace, and will this escalate? If so, in what fashion? Does remembering the civil-rights movement in the 1950s and ‘60s and the remarkable Martin Luther King help the situation? 

A man of great faith, Martin Luther King, through his commitment to peaceful resistance and nonviolence, made America better. His fortitude, along with the courage of other civil rights leaders, made America better. That is why we celebrate Martin Luther King day, and why people are still inspired by his speeches and his legacy. More on this in a moment…

Who are the people leading the violent protests today? Are they people of great faith? Are they changing America for the better? What exactly are their objectives? 

Noonan encourages us to find the truth. She is calling for widespread discernment as we look for and find the facts. She recalls the great and universally trusted Walter Cronkite, who she knew personally. How many of today’s protesters actually know who Walter Cronkite was? 

Sadly, there is no modern day Walter Cronkite. Truth is what people think it is and everyone feels entitled to their own truth. Perception is reality. Whatever the latest video shows must be reality. Through the Internet, we feel connected to people we have never met and don’t really know. We live in an age of superficial influencers but don’t really trust anyone. 

The solution for our country, no longer at peace with itself, is not to reminisce about the good old days, or long for trustworthy legends like Walter Cronkite. Still, there is something we may be overlooking today that made Martin Luther King transcendent. It was his unshakable faith. We need an unshakable faith today, more than anything else. This kind of faith can be a bridge to grace and forgiveness, foundation posts for reconciliation and peace. I suspect Ms. Noonan believes this, too. I just wish she would say it.            

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

151st Edition

Weather – Fear or Fun?

As I write this blog, the Southeast is bracing for the arrival of a major ice storm. In anticipation, warnings abound about what may happen, and all the potential risks. One particular warning on the Weather Channel cautioned people against trying to shovel snow. According to the health experts, it could present a serious cardiovascular risk. Heart attack snow she called it. I’m guessing any strenuous exercise might be a health risk to a certain demographic. 

Meanwhile, schools, churches and businesses will likely close or reschedule activities. When it comes to severe weather, it’s always better to be safe. I’m not so sure about that…

A couple of stories… 

In 1979, my best friend and I went on a ski trip to Killington, Vermont. The weather was cold when we left on our adventure, but we had no idea what was ahead of us. As it turned out, it was one of the coldest periods in the history of the state. At the bottom of the ski resort, the temperature was 38 degrees below zero. At the top of the mountain, it was more than 40 below. We skied the entire day, suffering a mild case of frostbite by the afternoon. Why did we do such a thing? Partly because we were 18 and 19 years old, respectively, but more so because facing challenges was part of our culture. 

46 years later, four of us, including that same friend from the ski trip, went to Ireland on a golf adventure. The first two days it rained sideways. Wind gusts of 30 to 40 miles per hour and cold, unrelenting rain. We played both days and had a blast. No risk of frostbite, so why not? It was just another challenge to face head on, or maybe sideways, depending on which direction the wind gusts were coming from.

Are we too fearful today? Whether it’s Covid, severe weather, or an endless list of geopolitical risks, we seem to be mired in a fearful state of mind. Fear and distrust are correlated, and our trust in institutions and each other has cratered in recent years. So, it’s no wonder the threat of a few inches of snow can push some of us over the edge. 

So, what can climb a wall of worry?…

There is an old adage that the stock market climbs a wall of worry. Basically, it means that the stock market will likely grind its way higher as long as fear is the overriding investor sentiment. Why? Because our fear produces scenarios that are almost always worse than reality turns out to be. And this eventual sigh of relief produces positive sentiment and higher stock prices. It is one of the stock market rules that has stood the test of time.

But what else can climb a proverbial wall of worry? Can our overall attitude and sense of community do a similar thing? Certain forces are stoking widespread fear for various reasons. First, to keep us watching certain news shows and perhaps motivating us politically. Second, to get us to purchase certain things like security systems, locks, guns, and gold. Even insurance and certain pharmaceuticals are marketed using fear. Fear sells, right?

But what if we decided to face our fears and put them in a different perspective? What if we dedicated the same amount of time we spend being fearful to identifying things for which to be thankful? Could thankfulness allow us to climb that wall of worry? What would this look like? Would a sense of community flourish? Would trust grow and polarization wane? 

When asked about my childhood, which was certainly unremarkable, I usually respond that I spent most of it shoveling snow, raking leaves, or mowing lawns. I don’t remember my parents ever forcing me to, especially when the leaves were plentiful and the snow was deep. But they never discouraged me from facing the challenge that weather or a change in seasons produced. Things seem different today. I think my parents knew that facing challenges, especially strenuous manual labor, was an important aspect of growing up. They were so right, and I am forever thankful.             

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.

150th Edition

What do the smart people think?

During my investment career there was always one comment that routinely surfaced that I always found unsettling. It would include the phrase “smart money.” As if there was this group of investors who knew more than the rest of us. Smart money is investing in such and such…. Smart money has turned negative towards….

Phrases like that. I never understood exactly who this group of smarter-than-the-rest-of-us really was. Early in my career, I suspected they didn’t exist. Eventually, I became certain. In fact, the opposite was actually true. Let me try to explain. The stock market is a discounting mechanism, and it is forward looking. It incorporates all available knowledge and information, as well as all opinions and forecasts regarding the future. In other words, the market combines the wisdom and predictions of the smartest investors with the viewpoints of the rest of us. Over the long term it has generally been a very good predictor of the overall economy. Here is something else to consider. During every bull market over the last one hundred years, there have always been skeptics sharing their bearish prognostications. Not surprisingly, during every bear market, there have been eternal optimists touting bullish predictions. I’ve never known any individual investor or stock market pundit to be correct all the time. Thankfully, even the most foolish among us are not wrong all the time either. Whatever you hear, whoever you listen to regarding the stock market, take it all with a grain of salt. 

In other areas, there may be smart people worth listening to. It does require an ability to identify really smart people within an ever-expanding discourse. Doing so is rather difficult today, with AI, and all the influencers and social media pundits. But I thought I would give it a shot in today’s blog.

I’ve identified three smart individuals. What exactly are they saying?

Thomas Sowell on his experience with AI:

Noted economist, author and social theorist, Thomas Sowell wrote an interesting op ed for the Wall Street Journal stating that “My voice is all over the Internet saying things I have never said and would never say.” AI gives people the ability to create these deceptions and fraud anonymously. He issues a clear warning about AI “undermining the very concept of truth.” Probably a warning we should take seriously. Can we utilize AI properly and responsibly and retain the ability to discern truth? I hope so.     

Nick Saban and his decision to stop coaching college football:

While Coach Saban basically said he stopped coaching due to his age, he also attributed NIL and current player attitudes in his decision to retire. When the best coach, perhaps ever, doesn’t like the direction that the game is heading, there is something wrong. Paying players, the transfer portal, and widespread gambling is ruining college sports. I watch less of it every season. Maybe I’ve just become a curmudgeon. It could be worse, I guess.     

Arthur Herman on America as the sole global superpower:

Noted author, Arthur Herman, wrote an interesting essay in the Wall Street Journal – “America is the Sole Superpower Again.” He contends that China, which was once believed to be destined to surpass the U.S. as the world’s dominate economy, has blown its chance. Could it be that capitalism has won the day over communism? That might be an interesting topic to debate and discuss in high schools and colleges. Understanding the competitive advantages of free-market capitalism, compared to totalitarianism and its state control of the economy, might convince young people to engage in a deeper analysis of the case for socialism. Currently, that doesn’t seem likely, but one can always be hopeful. 

One last thought for today. How can we best determine whether a person knows what they are talking about and are worth listening to? Ask these questions: First, is their agenda self-serving? Second, is their argument comprehensive, logical, and well supported? Lastly, is it one-sided, hyperbolic, and unsupported? 

If you follow this advice and you’re still not sure, talk to the oldest man you know. Better yet, talk to the oldest woman you know. The older I get, the more I miss my grandmother.      

Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!

Michael Kayes 

*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.