Clive Bundy and my grandchildren

Clive Bundy, the southern Nevada rancher and self-styled, mouse that roared, is a classic example of a beneficiary of regulatory capture (see definition below). Years ago someone in the Las Vegas District office or Nevada State Office of the BLM was seduced into being an active participant, as a regulator, in regulatory capture. That person, probably a manager, chose to ignore Bundy's repeated refusal to pay for grazing fees. The fees, fines, and interest grew until Clive owes over a million dollars. He refuses to pay the government. BLM seems to have backed off. Now he and his likewise arrogant and misinformed followers want to pull federal ownership of public lands and put them in the hands of the State. The same movement is occurring in Utah and other western states.

The term public lands implies ownership by all American citizens therefore Clive doesn't have any more right to  lay claim to ownership of public land as do any of my grandchildren. He and they are just joint share-holders in public land ownership. Clearly, leadership in our state does not understand the concept, understand that they must have the other millions of share-holders in the rest of the country, vote yes to the proposal to give federal public land to the states. A part of revenue produced by the federal government (BLM and possibly the USFS) comes back to the states in the form of PILT--Payment in Lieu of Taxes. Millions of dollars, annually, more than could be produced by states managing public lands.

It is easy to point to countless examples of regulatory capture in federal agencies. The most visible are the BLM and the USFS, at least in the west. These agencies have been co-opted by special interests to the point that public participation is an exercise in futility. The agencies follow the regulations as written, including the part about public participation. The time that citizens can participate in the process is almost after the fact. It should be upfront, not after draft documents are prepared. The agencies are puzzled by the lack of participation and the intensity and frequency of adverse legal actions by the public.
But regulatory capture is not just a federal issue, it occurs in all levels of government, including the smallest of communities. The net result is frustration about the waste of public tax dollars, poor products (roads, bridges, etc) produced by contractors, overgrazing, and increased cynicism by the public.


“Regulatory capture” occurs when special interests co-opt policymakers or political bodies — regulatory agencies, in particular — to further their own ends. Technology Liberation Front http://techliberation.com/about/

But before I'm branded as a card carrying libertarian, because I use this site as a reference, it is only because the site has the best definition of Regulatory Capture AKA Capture Theory. 

Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom: A Call For the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People (1913) at 201-202:

“If the government is to tell big business men how to run their business, then don’t you see that big business men have to get closer to the government even than they are now? Don’t you see that they must capture the government, in order not to be restrained too much by it? Must capture the government? They have already captured it. Are you going to invite those inside to stay? They don’t have to get there. They are there.”

Drano showers

I was in Washington DC March 9th through the 13th to attend the National Bike Summit. The Summit itself could have been better organized but I suppose one could say that conferences I've helped put together could have been better organized. The best part of any conference is generally the kibitzing with other attendees between sessions, at meals, and of course at the beer bar!

One of the most interesting breakouts I attended was one about an initiative from Sweden called Vision Zero. It has been implemented in the US in LA, San Fran, Seattle, Portland, NY, and Chicago. In Sweden it is a collaborative plan by government and business leaders to reduce fatalities inside a city's (could be a State or County) infrastructure.
The Salt Lake County Mayor is interested in the concept and I have pulled some information to share with him. Visit:www.visionzeroinitiative.com/  

A part of the trip to DC was to visit the Hill, as conference attendees, and talk with our delegation trying to garner support for funding of TAP and Vision Zero. Having worked on the Hill in the Senate, during a time when Congress was not mired down in partisan crap, I knew how to approach staffers. The chances of actually speaking to a Member is poor unless you have considerable stroke, influence, and of course money. Our delegation staffers were friendly as only members of the Utah Big Business Bureau (religion) can be.

Being in DC brought back memories of living in the area when I worked as a Senate staff (environmental staffer to Bennett), worked at CEQ, and in the Department of the Interior.  Most of my blended family of seven children experienced DC in ways that most families can't. I had recollections of visiting museums, seeing the cherry trees in full bloom, going to civil war sites, peering from the octagonal window in the capital that looks down the mall at the Washington Monument (this is not in the regular tour package), and being inside the Jefferson memorial late at night when it was struck by lightning.

You can't just walk into the Capital to look at the art work anymore. It is in lock down. You have to be a part of a tour group!  Paranoia and capitalism have conspired to take away access by citizens to the symbol of, one could argue, the most powerful building in the world.

Every American should visit the capital and be in the gallery of the Senate or House when they are in session. The capital will inspire you,sitting in the gallery will probably bore you to death, but it will change your perspective of government in action!

But being in DC also brought back memories of late night deal-making (I was successful in getting Bennett to support a wilderness bill for Utah that later got him pooped on by the rest of the Utah delegation), and the sliminess of dealing with the influence peddlers (lobbyists). When I left DC after my Hill job I had serious power withdrawal! No one person should have that kind of power.

So, remembering my own experience in navigating on the hill and the Interior Dept, and how that memory made me feel, this March, I came home and took an hour long metaphorical shower in Drano!

Goggle Cars

Self-driving Google cars are fairly common in Mountain View CA. I assume they are test cars. Other than a revolving thing on top that looks like a spinning 2 pound coffee can, devices on each corner of the car, and cameras, it looks like a small SUV. The car is remarkable in that it drives the speed limit, stops at stop signs and red lights, doesn't poach left turn signals (running the red arrow), and it appears not to be texting or calling on the cell phone or running over bicyclists or pedestrians. And the driver has her/his hands in his lap.
Of course my only reference is drivers in Salt Lake City who routinely speed, run red lights, ignore stop signs, text, phone, and sadly, on occasion, run into or over a pedestrian or bicyclist. Some Utah drivers also don't have their hands on the wheel, usually holding a phone, toothbrush, or a bag of fries. The most remarkable thing about the Goggle car is that it doesn't cut off bicyclists and when a stupid bicyclist cuts off the car, the car doesn't honk and flip off the idiot on the bike.

I'm back!

One of Albert Einstein's greatest insights was realizing that time is relative. It speeds up or slows down depending on how fast one thing is moving relative to something else.

As I get older, time seems to accelerate as my body slows down. My time is no longer infinite or limitless--like it was when I was young--it is not a commodity to squander. A lifetime of squandering is hard to change. But living my life, even the way I did it, has resulted in experiences that are of limitless value to me and usually boring to anyone around me. 

It seems like just last week I posted to this blog but in reality it has been several years since I last posted. A lot has happened to me environmentally, physically, emotionally, and mentally since 2011. We now have eight grand children and one on the way: three girls and five boys. The expected baby is supposed to be a girl. All, of course, are special. And each are individually unique, with their own personalities, preferences, smiles, and temperaments. Three have their own bicycle helmets!

Physically I'm aging like all of us tend to do as we get older. Last December (on December 2, 2014) both knees were replaced. Two weeks before the surgery, the surgeon had me quit analgesics, especially Ibuprofen. My liver, after years of filtering these chemicals out, rejoiced, but I couldn't walk the round trip of thirty meters from the front door of our house to the mail box, without serious pain. It was amazing how much pain those little brown pills were able to mask. But even without chemical assistance, once I got on my bike, I was still able to go on fairly long rides. The day before the surgery I rode about fifteen miles through an oddly sunny, slightly chilly first day of December. On the day of my surgery (the day after) it snowed almost a foot in Salt Lake! I didn't ride again for almost four months but I did do hours of rehab, cursing both to myself and out loud the entire time. The first bike ride after was amazing!

How did my knees get so messed up? The answer is: years of running, hiking, skiing, jumping out of perfectly good airplanes, rock climbing, and falling off of an occasional bar stool. Having a couple of motorcycle wrecks didn't help and living an unforgiving wild and reckless first 45 years of my life just exacerbated the condition of my mind and body. But being in rehab, especially the inpatient rehab, gave me time to think about the changes I had been making prior to the surgery. My will to get back on my bicycle and my desire to continue to make emotional and mental changes drove me.

The rehab and my stubbornness fixed my knees and I have worked hard on my temper, my braggadocio, insecurity, and most of all my penchant for trying to fix everyone around me. This came from a realization that all of this behavior had resulted in losing friends, alienating some family members, appearing to be an unreliable narrator, and worst of all losing what little self-esteem all of the poor behavior seemed to give me. I no longer think for others, try to save them from themselves, nor do I point out their faults or make unsolicited recommendations! I have come to recognize my own limitations, foibles, strengths and weaknesses. Some of this introspection came from mental therapy, both individual and couples, but much of it, after I learned what to look for, came while riding my bicycle.

Riding my bicycle is my idea of a zen experience. It is a time when I can keep my mouth shut and mull things over. My senses sharpen  breathing becomes regulated to the amount of caloric need, and I can find time to forgive myself and to build a different tool kit for living out the rest of my life. Plus I get to see lots of great things. Today for example, I saw rafts of Phalaropes on a salt march east of Palo Alto. I was riding a rental bicycle over the Dumbarton bridge. We are visiting my daughter, the OB-GYN, and her husband who is some sort of mystic for Goggle, and more importantly their five and a half month old daughter.

It was standing at the top of the crest of the bridge looking at down at San Francisco Bay beneath me thinking about the process of aging. Bicycling may not keep me young but it will help me live longer or if not, at least I will have a better quality of life. So this meditation led me to think that I should kick-start my blog. Having two artificial hips (2007?) and two new hips will improve my quality of life but it's my brain pushing my body to stay healthy that will keep me alive long enough to give my grandchildren good memories of a happy, if not eccentric Aguelo.

Getting old should not be memories of past conflict or regret of lost time but rather it should be filled with the laughter of grandchildren, the joy of sharing a bottle of great wine with good friends, and watching the miles unwinding beneath my bicycle tires.

Zero Sum

I've often said as I teach or when I was working with restoration teams that we operate from the reptilian part of our brain well over two thirds of the time. When asked a question we (subconsciously) answer the following question: 'what's in my best interest?" The following essay sums it up.

The Ethical Spectacle September 1995 http://www.spectacle.org

The Scorpion

The story of the frog and the scorpion has been cited everywhere from discussions of mid-east terrorism to the movie The Crying Game. In the story, a scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion says, "Because if I do, I will die too." The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown, but has just enough time to gasp "Why?" Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."
Please note that the story does not portray a prisoner's dilemma. The frog has absolutely nothing to gain by carrying the scorpion across, and is therefore a foolish altruist, proving the truth of the adage, "No good deed goes unpunished." But it is not hard to turn the story into a prisoner's dilemma, as follows.
The frog desires to cross the stream but is afraid of a stork on the other side. The scorpion has no means to cross the stream but is capable of scaring the stork. If the frog carries the scorpion across, the scorpion will reciprocate by frightening away the stork; the scorpion will have crossed the stream and the frog will be safe. The apparent sucker's payoff for the frog is that the scorpion will slip away without scaring the stork once the frog has gone to all the trouble of carrying him across. There is no apparent sucker's payoff for the scorpion--the frog's major opportunity for defection is not to carry the scorpion, but, since the scorpion will not yet have had the opportunity to extend its cooperation it will not have lost anything (the moves are not simultaneous). Perhaps the frog's defection may consist of eating the scorpion, once it has scared off the stork.
In any event, the scorpion's unexpected and selfdestructive defection raises the issue of how to counter a player who defects first, and defects in a way that prevents you from retaliating on the next move (your life has ended in the meantime.) All assassins and terrorists play the game this way. Because they are willing to die--it is their nature--the future has no shadow for them. This madness is not unique to humans--the bee that stings to defend the hive, then dies, is a suicidal defector in nature.
Gandhi succeeded in his variation on the prisoner's dilemma because the British were not willing to resort to the ultimate defection. A player, like the Nazis, willing to stop at nothing, creates an illogical loop much like the one that results when two players play a series for a known number of moves. Since, on the last move, the future has no shadow, I might as well defect. Since the other player will certainly be smart enough to defect on that move as well, I may as well defect on the move before, when he may still be cooperating. But, since he is smart enough to reason this through the way I did, he will probably defect on that move too. So again I will consider defecting a move earlier. But so will he. The result: we both defect on the first move and each move afterwards.
Because the scorpion will kill you as soon as it is given a chance, you must find a way to defect earlier than the scorpion, and decisively. But the scorpion will study the situation, looking for a way to defect earlier than you can; so you must assume he will do so, and seek to defect earlier still. Like gunfighters in a Western movie who run down the street at each other, howling and shooting as soon as they catch sight of each other, the prisoner's dilemma escalates into an immediate duel to the death. The concept of a pre-emptive strike expresses nothing other than a strategy based on defecting early and decisively. Tarquinian's symbolic cutting of the tops from the tallest flowers, or the massacre of opponents after any coup d'etat in history, are other examples.
It is the scorpion that pulls humanity down. If you are not yourself a scorpion, you still are unable to play every move of every game in the cooperation zone, because sooner or later you will meet a scorpion. Not every scorpion is a suicide bomber; the law partner who made a successful motion to cut my draw, forcing my resignation from a law firm, suffered the symbolic fate of the scorpion when the firm's biggest client (the one I alone knew how to service) left as a result, and the firm folded. Yeats' judgment that "things fall apart, the center cannot hold", because "the worst are full of passionate intensity" is a recognition of the fact that there are scorpions.
Scorpions may know the consequences, and not care, like the suicide bomber, or may, through vanity and denial, refuse to see the consequences, like my ex-partner. In any event, the effect is the same: a player defects when there is no reason to, and something--a life, an enterprise--ends as a result.
Game theory does not really take scorpions into account. It holds that people will defect because that is in their best interest--because the future has no shadow. Game theory fails as a tool when we are dealing with sociopathology or extreme denial. The human dilemma is that all progress ultimately fails or at least slides back, that anything once proven must be proven again a myriad of times, that there is nothing so well established that a fundamentalist (of any religion or stripe) cannot be found to deny it, and suffer the consequences, and then deny that he suffered the consequences.
All rivers begin in the human heart and, as I said recently in my Auschwitz essay, the human heart is infirm. The saddest saying I ever heard, "trees never grow into heaven", will be true for so long as we have scorpions.

Autumn, Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur

 In three days September 28 we celebrate Rosh Hashanah. In early October, the 7th and 8th is Yom Kippur. While the New Year is great I like the idea of Yom Kippur better, especially because it is about atonement and forgiveness --both giving and receiving. I struggled with these ideas until I realized that while they are tied to scripture they do not conflict with my own views about religion. Yom Kippur just makes sense socially, emotionally, and intellectually. It feels good to assess one's contradictions, the mean and nasty things we've done throughout the year and those that have been done against us. It feels good to let these go. Hate and avarice are not good family values and eat at one's being if we practice them. Yom Kippur is about asking and giving forgiveness especially to one's self. This should not be confused with the act of confession. Self-forgiveness does not mean that you do an act of contrition and then after absolution go back out and commit the same act. It is about assessing your weaknesses and launching a course of action to avoid repetition.
Next month go inside of your denial and find a way to start the act of self-forgiveness. Only after you are willing to forgive yourself can you forgive others. Give yourself a break!  In Ladino: le hayim and in Yiddish: l'chaim!!

Hunting a mammoth

Today I will be leading a team building session for an NGO client. I have titled it Hunting a Mammoth to fed the Community. It is about creativity and firing off the creative side of your brain. The irony is that the client works with young people to 19 years of age teaching the kids how to creatively turn multi-media on its head.
So what is creativity? Can just anyone be creative?
The answer to the second question is easy: everyone is creative and functioning creatively on a scale of 1-10 at any given moment.
The answer to the first is more complex. It starts with an exploration of the word "thinking."

• Thinking in formal education emphasizes the skills of analysis--teaching students how to understand claims, follow or create a logical argument, figure out the answer, eliminate the incorrect paths and focus on the correct one.
• Another kind of thinking, one that focuses on exploring ideas, generating possibilities, looking for many right answers rather than just one.The beginning of this kind of learning is under debate: pre-natal, infant, precocious two's? But most assuredly creative thinking is subverted by the formality of school.

NOTE: Both of these kinds of thinking are vital to a successful working life or working environment. And it takes both kinds of thinkers to make a successful team.

but

NOTE: If your mantra, your belief system is: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" then please, don’t spend any more time reading today!

Creativity is:

An Ability. A simple definition is that creativity is the ability to imagine or invent something new by combining, changing, or reapplying existing ideas.

An Attitude. Creativity is also an attitude: the ability to accept change and newness, a willingness to play with ideas and possibilities, a flexibility of outlook, the habit of enjoying the good, while looking for ways to improve it.

A Process. Creative people work hard and continually to improve ideas and solutions, by making gradual alterations and refinements to their works. 

     Creative Methods:

Evolution. This is the method of incremental improvement. New ideas stem from other ideas, new solutions from previous ones, the new ones slightly improved over the old ones. Every problem that has been solved can be solved again in a better way.

Synthesis. Two or more existing ideas are combined into a third, new idea. I.E Books on tape

Revolution. Sometimes the best new idea is a completely different one, an marked change from the previous ones.

Reapplication. Look at something old in a new way. Go beyond labels. Unfixate, remove prejudices, expectations and assumptions and discover how something can be reapplied.

Changing Direction. Many creative breakthroughs occur when attention is shifted from one angle of a problem to another. This is sometimes called creative insight. 

Negative Attitudes That Block Creativity

1. Oh no, a problem! The reaction to a problem is often a bigger problem than the problem itself. Many people avoid or deny problems until it's too late, largely because these people have never learned the appropriate emotional, psychological, and practical responses. A problem is an opportunity.

2. It can't be done. This attitude is, in effect, surrendering before the battle. By assuming that something cannot be done or a problem cannot be solved, a person gives the problem a power or strength it didn't have before. And giving up before starting is, of course, a self fulfilling prophesy.

3. I can't do it. Or There's nothing I can do. Some people think, well maybe the problem can be solved by some expert, but not by me because I'm not (a) smart enough, (b) an engineer, or (c) a politician, etc.

4. But I'm not creative. Everyone is creative to some extent. Most people are capable of very high levels of creativity; just look at young children when they play and imagine. The problem is that this creativity has been suppressed by education.

5. What will people think? There is strong social pressure to conform and to be ordinary and not creative. Some peoples' herd instinct is so strong that they make sheep look like radical individualists.

Solutions are often new ideas, and new ideas, being strange, are usually greeted with laughter, contempt, or in the case of Galileo the inquisition.

7. I might fail. Failures along the way should be expected and accepted; they are simply learning tools that help focus the way toward success. Not only is there nothing wrong with failing, but failing is a sign of action and struggle and attempt--much better than inaction. Going-with-the- flow has a low failure, low risk outcome (see sheep above!). Salomon don’t get to spawning grounds and successfully spawn simply by swimming. They must get by the bears first. 

 

Myths about Creative Thinking and Problem Solving

1. Every problem has only one solution (or one right answer). The goal of problem solving is to solve the problem, and most problems can be solved in any number of ways. If you discover a solution that works, it is a good solution. There may be other solutions thought of by other people, but that doesn't make your solution wrong. As a group you decide which solution has the greater application and return on human capital and funding investment.

2. The best answer/solution/method has already been found. Look at the history of any solution set and you'll see that improvements, new solutions, new right answers, are always being found. Pythagoras (6^th century bce) said that the world was a sphere, Copernicus (15^th century) said the earth wasn’t the center of the universe, Galileo’s (mid-16^th century) observations, based on scientific observation, supported Copernicus, and . . . . . .Stephen Hawking. . .has found that. . . . .

3. Creative answers are complex technologically. Only a few problems require complex technological solutions. Most problems you'll meet with require only a thoughtful solution requiring personal action and perhaps a few simple tools. Even many problems that seem to require a technological solution can be addressed in other ways.

4. Ideas either come or they don't. Nothing will help. There are many successful techniques for stimulating idea generation.

Mental Blocks to Creative Thinking and Problem Solving

1. Prejudice/preconcieved ideas. The older we get, the more preconceived ideas we have about things. These preconceptions often prevent us from seeing beyond what we already know or believe to be possible. They inhibit us from accepting change and progress.

2. Functional fixation. Sometimes we begin to see an object only in terms of its name rather in terms of what it can do. And there's a functional fixation of people, too. Stereotyping can even be a form of functional fixation.

3. Learned helplessness. This is the feeling that you don't have the tools, knowledge, materials, ability, to do anything, so you might as well not try. We are trained to rely on other people for almost everything. We think small and limit ourselves.

4. Psychological blocks. Some solutions are not considered or are rejected simply because our reaction to them is "Yuck." But icky solutions themselves may be useful or good if they solve a problem well or save your life. Eating grasshoppers, termites, insects doesn't sound great, but in terms of carbon foot print, caloric intake vs caloric investement these creatures, pound for pound have more energy and use significantly fewer resources than large ungulates. Psychological blocks prevent you from doing something just because it doesn't sound good or right.

Positive Attitudes for Creativity

1. Curiosity. Creative people want to know things--all kinds of things-- just to know them. Why, how, where, who?
2. Challenge. Curious people like to identify and challenge the assumptions behind ideas, proposals, problems, beliefs, and statements. Many assumptions, of course, turn out to be quite necessary and solid, but many others have been assumed unnecessarily, and in breaking out of those assumptions often comes a new idea, a new path, a new solution.
3. Constructive discontent. This is not a whining, griping kind of discontent, but the ability to see a need for improvement and to propose a method of making that improvement. Constructive discontent is a positive, enthusiastic discontent.
4. A belief that most problems are opportunities and can be solved. By faith at first and by experience later on, the creative thinker believes that something can always be done to eliminate or help alleviate almost every problem.
5. The ability to suspend judgment and criticism. Many new ideas, because they are new and unfamiliar, seem strange, odd, bizarre, even repulsive (do I eat beef with its high moral, ethical, and environmental costs or do I start catching and eating grasshoppers?).
The first rule of brainstorming is to suspend judgment so that your idea-generating powers will be free to create without the restraint of fear or criticism. You can always go back later and examine--as critically as you want--what you have thought of.
6. Seeing the good in the bad. Creative thinkers, when faced with poor solutions, don't cast them away. Instead, they ask, "What's good about it?" because there may be something useful even in the worst ideas.
7. Problems lead to improvements. The attitude of constructive discontent searches for problems and possible areas of improvement, but many times problems arrive on their own. But such unexpected and perhaps unwanted problems are not necessarily bad, because they often permit solutions that leave the world better than before the problem arose.
8. A problem can also be a solution. A fact that one person describes as a problem can sometimes be a solution for someone else.
9. Problems are interesting and emotionally acceptable. Many people don't want to admit that a problem exists--with their car, their spouse, their child, their job, their house, whatever. As a result, often the problem persists and drives them crazy or it exacerbates into a crisis and then it hits the fan!

Characteristics of the Creative Person

• curious
• seeks opportunities in problems
• enjoys challenge
• optimistic
• able to suspend judgment
• comfortable with imagination
• sees problems as opportunities
• sees problems as interesting
• problems are emotionally acceptable
• challenges assumptions
• doesn't give up easily: perseveres, works hard