Follow the Money, not the Polls

The latest polls show McCain with a slight lead over Obama.  Yet intrade.com, which offers betting on the race, shows Obama well ahead. 

Especially because what people say to pollsters inaccurately reflects what they'll do in the voting booth, I believe it's smart to ignore the polls and follow the money.

Obama will win. I'm taking bets.

My Favorite Stress Reducers

My clients and I find these helpful:

• Remember that it's just not that important. And even if it is, stressing about it is more likely to hurt than help. Just work slow and steady, doing the best you reasonably can. 
• Remember that all you can control is your effort, not the outcome of that effort. Once you've done your part, let it go. Even if it doesn't work out, unless you have stage 5 cancer, you can survive. (And even if you have stage 5 cancer, soon you'll be at peace, just as though you were sleeping soundly.)
• Listen to soft instrumental music while working. If that's not permitted (even with headphones),  on the way to work, listen, again and again, to the easiest-to-hum relaxing, short piece of music. It will become an "ear worm," rolling around in your brain, meditatively, as you work.
• As soon as you start feeling stressed, get up, stretch, and take three deep breaths.
• Take a five-minute walk, ideally in nature, but down the hall will do.
• Help someone.

Wake-up Call to the Media

The loudest and longest reactions during Sarah Palin's acceptance speech occurred when she said:

I’ve learned quickly these last few days that, if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. (AUDIENCE BOOS)

But now, here’s a little newsflash for those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this great country. (APPLAUSE)

Perhaps I'm imagining this, but since that speech, I've noticed the media being a bit more even-handed in covering the campaign. I can imagine many media members thinking or even saying something like, "Sure we want Obama to win, but we'd better tone down the bias for a while. Our bias has been so obvious that it's created a big backlash, which ironically may give McCain-Palin votes. Obama's so great, even though he's down now by a few points, he'll win without our help. So, at least until the election's over, we better do what C-SPAN has always done: be fair and balanced. That will restore our credibility, and then we can go back to injecting our liberal bias (subtly) and have the influence we want."

Whatever the media's motivation, I do hope it does its best to be fair and balanced in covering this campaign. And to that end, my #1 recommendation is that the media vets Obama's core policy recommendations as fully as it is vetting Palin's.

For example, in his acceptance speech, Obama said:

• If you have health care, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don't, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves..."I will cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families." In addition, Obama has long said that he wants a path to legalization for the estimated 13 million illegals in the U.S.

I would like to understand how Obama will provide Congressperson-level health care for everyone while giving 95% of families a tax cut, especially because the 45.5 million Americans who do not have health insurance as well as the current 13 million illegals have above-average health care needs. Obama will, for example, need to explain how American's already overtaxed doctors, nurses, etc, will provide decent care for all those additional patients (at lower cost,) when already, every year, 100,000 people die and countless more suffer unnecessary pain and suffering because of medical errors.

The media should be taking as hard a look at that as it is at the GOP's statements that Palin was against earmarks and the Bridge to Nowhere.

• "I'll pay them (teachers) higher salaries."
  

Despite having a Ph.D. from Berkeley specializing in evaluation of education and, for decades, reading studies on what improves student learning, I have not seen data that shows it's worth taking the huge sums from taxpayers that would be required to fund that.

Can we look working- and middle-class people in the eye and say, "Forcing you to give the government money to pay for higher teacher salaries is a better use of your money than to allow your family to use it to pay for expenses or save for your family's future?"

The media should be taking as hard a look at that as it is at Palin's (totally wrongheaded in my view) belief that abortion should be prohibited even in cases of rape or incest.

• "I'll invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy."
  

The working and middle class is having a tough time paying the rent, let alone a mortgage. Should they be forced to hand over $150 billion to the government to pay for projects that the private sector rejected as unworthy to invest in? If a project was worth investing in, the private sector would have invested in it. For example, the private sector often rejects projects that take 10 or more years to complete, because by then, the available technology or world needs might well have changed enough to make the project's goal obsolete. Think, for example, what has already happened to the government's plan to make ethanol the solution to our energy problems.

The media should be taking as hard a look at Obama's $150 billion alternative energy proposal as it is at Palin's (again, wrongheaded in my opinion) view that creationism should be taught in schools.

• "Now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day's work, because I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons."
  

Per the extensive evidence I've cited in previous posts and articles, the research is clear that for the same work, women and men are, on average, paid equally. The media has chosen to report terribly misleading broadbrush statistics such as "women earn 80 cents on dollar." Or they uncritically report the results of studies (all conducted or sponsored by biased entities such as the American Association of University Women,) when in fact, a decent undergraduate could rip apart those studies' validity. For example, their most recent study claims as evidence of bias against women the fact that "full-time-working" women in the computer industry earn less than full-time working men in the industry. It fails to report, for example, that full-time working men work many more hours per week than full-time-working women, and that men are much more likely to hold very technical programming jobs requiring a rarely-held skillset, which, therefore pay more than, for example, human resources jobs in the computer industry, which are much more likely to be held by women.

The media should be taking as hard a look at this as it is in reporting that as governor, Palin is usually not fully engaged in the issues.

Let us--liberals, conservatives, and libertarian-leaning sorts like me alike--continue to boo the media until they--now and long after Obama's election--return to their critical role as truly fair investigators and reporters of the issues important to our lives.

Bond Builders

These will likely help you bond with someone:

• What have you been thinking about lately?
  
• That's interesting. Tell me more.
• Could you help me out? (Most people, if they're not too busy, like to help, and their doing so creates an investment in you, making them feel a bond with you.)
  
• Great shoes! (works only with women)
  

The Parasite Syndrome

Most of the women and men I know are hardworking. For example, my wife, Dr. Barbara Nemko, Napa County Superintendent of Schools, works 60 hours a week while being a good wife and mother.

However, over my 29 years and 4,500 clients in my career counseling practice, in my out-of-work conversations, and in reading trend pieces in the media, I've observed a dramatic increase in the number of people, capable people, afflicted with what I call the Parasite Syndrome.

Here's how the Parasite Syndrome prototypically plays out:

1. After graduating from a brand-name college, the parasites in-training go abroad, for example to India or France, to "find themselves." They return a month or year later, no clearer, although perhaps more desirous of a pleasant and fulfilling life.

2. They take a pleasant and/or fulfilling but low-paying job. (Most pleasant and fulfilling jobs pay poorly--supply and demand.) But because of a desire to live a middle-class lifestyle, the person mooches off parents or romantic partner.

3. At this point, many of the female parasites-in-training think that potential long-term romantic partners who don't make good money are losers. Most males don't think that way of educated low-income women, and so are more willing to marry them. And so, many more female than male would-be-parasites find a host.

4. Sometimes, the income-generating spouse prefers that his spouse not work but that's now uncommon except among the wealthy. More often, the income generator (or his or her parent) asks the spouse to try harder to land a professional-level job so she can contribute to the family income she's good at spending.

So, the non-earner makes a half-hearted failed effort after which she or he rails, for example, "You don't understand how tough the job market is, especially for a woman, and especially with a liberal arts degree."

Few husbands or parents have the guts to tell the non-earner, "Then why did you major in art history?! (or French literature, sociology, women's studies, etc.)" They fear the onslaught of fury, tears, or retaliatory accusations likely to follow.

5. Soon after, if a woman, she gets pregnant. Sometimes, the husband subtly or not subtly asks her if she wants to have an abortion, for example, "Do you think we're ready?" Because he can't force her to have an abortion, the baby comes, even if he doesn't want to be a father nor financially support it, let alone become the sole source of income so she can be a stay-at-home mother.

Men, unless you are ready to be a father or have absolute trust that your partner, without fail, uses reliable birth control, you must wear a condom every time or, if you're sure you never want children, have a vasectomy. Why? Because if she gets pregnant, you have no power: No matter how fervently you plead that you don't want a baby, if she decides she wants it, you're stuck with at least 18 years of enormous commitment of time, energy, and money.

Ah, relationships: They can be so rewarding yet so fraught.

5. She (or occasionally, her husband) insists it's important for her to stay home at least until the child is five, although, as I've documented in earlier posts, the research does not support the validity of that assertion. See, for example, the review of the literature I present in the third-from-the-last comment on this post.

6. When the baby reaches school-age, the brand-name-U-grad mother knows it's unseemly to remain a stay-at-home mother, so she gets pregnant again or goes to graduate school.

7. After taking a long time to finish graduate school and after another desultory job search, she fails to find more than an easy, ill-paying, part-time job, claiming, for example, that the job market is tough for stay-at-home moms.

8. The stay-at-home woman or man creates make-work to seem busy, taking longer to do things than necessary: for example, cooking unnecessarily time-consuming meals ("I had to stop at the Indian market for this spice,") searching for the perfect bathroom accessories, and getting overinvolved/overprotective with the kids, often inhibiting the child's self-confidence and self-efficacy.

Here's a less obvious example. After booking a teenager onto my show to talk about the book he wrote, his stay-at-home mother sent me a dozen emails filled with more information about him than I could use in five shows. Despite my saying, "I have more than I need," she kept sending more stuff. That enables her to tell her husband and friends that it takes a lot of time to support her son's efforts to promote his book.

9. If our reluctant worker lands a job, he or she doesn't work hard at it. She or he invokes excuses she's heard from her friends, pop psych or women'smagazines, or therapist, such as "I'm so afraid of failure that I don't try." or "I'm a perfectionist, which is painful, so I avoid tasks."

10. So this person continues as a mediocre worker, or quits, complaining that the boss is a jerk, work is too stressful, that corporate America (or government, or nonprofit employment) sucks, and/or that the workplace isn't family-friendly, or that "It really would be better if I stayed home with our child."

11. Women live much longer than men, in part because of the stress of an out-of-home job, so it is likely that women non-earners will bury a beast-of-burden husband or two and go to her grave having taken far more from family and society than she has given. She has been a parasite.

The saddest part is that these people--both the women and men--who are afflicted with the Parasite Syndrome are so capable; they could so abet society.

Alas, they choose to have hurt the society they could have helped. They take up slots at prestigious colleges.,  having written application essays asserting that they want to do important things to improve society. (I've never known of a successful application essay to Brand-Name U whose admission essay said, "I aspire to be a stay-at-home parent.")  They then freeload off parents and spouse, and later, often squander yet more societal resources by going back for another degree without ever making much use of it. They certainly never come close to living up to their potential. You don't need a brand-name degree or two to be a good stay-at-home parent, let alone a stay-at-home childless wife, which, as reported in a recent study, is a growing group.

Medical school is a particularly unethical example. Many people go to medical school knowing they'd like to work part-time and take some years off for parenting--Given the shortage of physicians, especially in urban and rural areas, that is unethical.

If you know someone, male or female, who is afflicted with the Parasite Syndrome, consider emailing or showing the person this article. True, their first reaction will likely be defensiveness at being called a parasite, but if their behavior, in fact, fits the syndrome and they are reasonably well-adjusted, their desire to not be thought of as a parasite is more likely to motivate them to change than would a tactful request to put more effort into their career. Why? Because a tactful request rarely disturbs complacency, let alone a parasite.

Will the Everyone-to-College Fad Finally Fade?

I've long argued that, for many people, a degree is not worth the time and money: too little of value is learned, for example, in improved thinking skills. And the long-advertised income advantage of getting a degree is withering in our global economy.

As former Federal Reserve Vice-Chair Alan Blinder says, soon, any job whose work product can be shipped over the Internet, will be. That means that mainly jobs such as plumber, electrician, and chef will be offshore-proof. The good news is that those careers don't require the time and cost of a college degree.

I've long written that we send too many students to college, and now, my position is gaining support, for example, the just published book, Real Education and an op-ed in today's Christian Science Monitor

I believe it's worth pursuing a bachelor's degree only if you meet these requirements:
1. You love academic learning or want to pursue a career that definitely requires a college degree, for example, nursing.
2. Without the structure of school, you'd be too undisciplined to do a thorough job search or start a business.
3. Are rich enough to afford a four-year college's sticker price or poor enough to get a lot of CASH financial aid. (Community colleges are often the smartest choice--the best teaching for the lowest price.)

One of these alternatives may, for you or someone you love, be a wiser choice:

• An apprenticeship. This site will help you find the right one.
• Learn how to run your own small business by taking a job, any job, at the elbow of a successful small business owner who is willing to mentor you. You'll also learn a lot about starting a small business at www.sba.gov.
  
• A short NON-degree career-prep program at a community college.
• The military, which offers quality training for a surprisingly large number of careers.
  

The Conveyer Belt

As Hurricane Gustav appears to not be another Katrina, I am reminded of life's fragility. You're planning your Labor Day holiday when suddenly you're ordered by your mayor to evacuate your home because of "The Mother of All Storms," when you've already experienced the previous mother of all storms.

Alas, quiescent life is much more often instantly disrupted by other things: you lose your job, you get a middle-of-the-night call that your aging parent has an emergency, your annual checkup yields a diagnosis of cancer.

We're all on life's conveyer belt. If we're lucky, we slowly move along until, finally, at the end of the assembly line, we're taken off. But many of us fall off the line prematurely.

Let us take this opportunity to ask ourselves, "What's something I want to do more and less of in whatever time I have on the conveyer belt?"