We live in a very complicated world. At times the problems we face seem so gigantic that it is hard to realize that there are solutions. Our country is divided on almost every issue. Never before have I seen so little confidence in the ability of our elected leaders to solve our problems. We see over and over again that there is almost no one that we can trust. This feeling dominates our attitudes towards all incumbents. After the election of 2008 most of us felt that our President was a man of power, principal, intelligence, and judgment. Our disappointment is about his ability to "get the job done". His attempt at bipartisan solutions has been rejected by the opposing party. In 2008 the Democratic rallying cry was to throw the scoundrels out! The result was a huge victory for the Democratic Party. Now it seems as though these scoundrels have been replaced with other scoundrels. During the last Republican Administration, the Republican Party had to withstand one revelation after another of character disability and acts of dishonesty. Now the headlines are full of Democratic acts of wrongdoing. Just this week, prominent Democrats were accused of taking bribes, gifts of all kinds, pedophilia, and filing dishonest returns with the IRS. Several congressmen and senators are retiring or not seeking reelection due to scandals and their activities. One Senator is retiring because he just does not like the Congress of the United States.

Let's go through an exercise. What would I do if I had the power to do what I think needs to be done to solve all problems. I have in the past delved into politics and have had a lifetime of experience in the business arena. I have witnessed many great minds at work struggling with the dilemmas of their times. The closest to what we face today would be the conditions faced by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933. As I look back, I am most impressed by his power. He not only understood the enormous problems that faced the nation, he understood how demoralized the people were. He gathered around him the brightest minds, people with contrasting capabilities and experience from all avenues of society. He created a rallying cry for the people. "The only thing we have to fear — is fear itself." His words could have been written by great motivators. He put recovery under inspiring language and instructions, N.R.A. — the National Recovery Act. Every business, every movie, every office, displayed the symbol with the words — "we participate". Under this act he instituted the Works Progress Administration — the Civilian Construction Corps. Because there was panic in the money supply he immediately declared a bank holiday, and stopped the withdrawal momentum run on banks. As people went back to work, their spirits soared, and the economy started its long, hard recovery. Armies of men went to work in construction projects, building dams, roads, and bridges. Even the arts got a lift and creativity was allowed to emerge in federally financed theater groups, symphonies, and art museums.

In today's world, if I were given the power, I would use Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt as a model. I would open up all possible facilities to guiding and retraining people who have lost their jobs — and I would train them in the commerce of today. I would encourage anybody with the entrepreneurial spirit to go into his or her own business, and I would find a group of experienced businesspeople to advise these new capitalists from their own experiences. It would not be long before millions of new products and new jobs will have been created. New business should be welcomed and financed by banks after they have done due diligence.

Millions of people would immediately be put to work building roads, bridges, and improving our infrastructure.

This procedure would have to be tweaked in accordance with problems that arose,
but we would be doing a constructive job in building solid companies, a reliable work force, and a population who really believe anything is possible with solid thought and hard work.

JACK

I have often heard the expression, "all politics are local". I am inclined to take this idea further. All reactions are personal, the further away they are mentally or physically, the less impact they have on our own feelings. Most of us feel badly about an earthquake in Haiti that kills hundreds of thousands of people. When a whale kills its trainer 1000 miles away, it hits closer to home, and although we feel badly it has little personal effect on us as individuals. A fatal accident happens down the street to a neighbor that we know; we react with greater feeling and compassion. Something dramatic happens to a member of our immediate family, we feel that tragedy deeply, emotionally, and personally.

When the politicians talk about "loss of jobs" or "healthcare", we are very aware but still not emotionally affected. However, when this general condition causes us to lose our jobs or our health insurance, it becomes a matter of momentous proportions.

When I was in business I was genuinely interested in the state of the economy and the economic health of our country. I am still interested, but, just as all politics are local, our emotions are most deeply involved when it affects us directly. It reminds me of the sarcastic definition of the difference between a recession and a depression. A recession is what happens when the guy down the street loses his job. A depression is what happens when I lose my job. Regardless of how altruistic we may be, we are truly the center of our own universe.

I feel badly about many things that are happening in the world today. I hear very discouraging words. The problems we face in the world today seem to be almost insurmountable. It would seem that intelligent people of goodwill could resolve differences of opinion and come to some conclusion that will make medical care available to all Americans who need it. It is particularly frustrating when you realize the amount of waste that takes place, and the vast sums of money that are spent for bad causes. For many years my thinking has been against the grain on our necessity to leap into action and attack in many corners of the world where we are not directly involved. Perhaps the reason I feel so strongly about American kids facing death in a hostile arena is because I am a combat veteran and can well appreciate what they go through. At 86 I have seen too many noble statements built on false premise. I never questioned the reason for fighting in World War II, but I have questioned early on in every conflict that succeeded World War II, The reason given for Vietnam was that we were attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin. Further events proved that we had never suffered such an attack. We would buy the premise for the war in Iraq because "they had weapons of mass distraction". After hundreds of thousands of people were killed, we found that there were no such weapons. Yet anybody that questioned the wisdom of these wars were called unpatriotic traitors.

The point that I am trying to make is that each of us is the center of his or her own universe. The closer we are to home, the more likely we are to understand each situation. We can also more easily apply to our own judgment and witness the effect of our thoughts on what we do. I do not know how much good my donation did to Haiti relief, or even if the funds got there and were used. I do know that my donation to my local medical clinic was used to benefit my own neighbors. I know that the help I gave to a friend was put to good use and contributed to the welfare and happiness of that person. Our first consideration should be our close friends and family. This does not mean we ignore the needs from around the world. But we can be assured that time and money spent personally on projects and people we know is a recognizable and gratifying reward. The satisfaction is more immediate and the good feelings generated are felt and magnified the closer we are to the problem we help to solve.

I feel there is no such thing as a truly unselfish act. Any act of kindness is like "radar". The act bounces off the recipient and comes right back to the individual who made it happen. We certainly feel much better when those close to us are feeling good. Just as we are ultimately responsible for our own health and happiness, the world is improved if we help somebody or something that we know and can touch.

JACK: It seems that the major topic of conversation and of concern is the jobs problem. As a matter of fact, the pundits are telling us that the next elections will hinge on the success or failure in regaining the millions of jobs that have been lost. If you question 10 recognized economists you will get 11 different opinions. I prefer to think of it as an individual problem that can be solved by individual Americans.

SCOTT: First, thank you Jack for letting me have guest appearance #2. I couldn’t agree more that the jobs issue is on the forefront of all of our minds. I have been fortunate to find and keep work during this difficult time, but as you noted, millions of people have been less fortunate than myself. Just this week, we saw some conflicting and confusing numbers. On the one hand, the overall unemployment rate fell under 10%. At the same time, new jobless claims rose far more than expected. Numbers and statistics mean less to me than this question — how can all of the people who are out of work find something to do?

JACK: Your good fortune, to say nothing of your personal planning, places you in a specialty that is not only in demand, but is greatly needed. The business of compliance law is really a must for all businesses. Witness the dilemma of Toyota, and the questionable actions of major banks in awarding hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses while they are still in debt to the taxpayers. Addressing the business of finding a job, I was interviewed last week on The Enrichment Hour with Mike Schwager on this very subject.

Over the course of my 60 years in business, I have hired thousands of people and can give direct advice to people who are looking for a direction. I do believe, just as all politics is local – all problems are local as well. There are a number of ways that people can go. One is to start their own business, and the other is to truly understand how employment is administered. My question, and solution, is in finding a way to make yourself extremely attractive to a prospective employer.

SCOTT: This sounds like great advice. Can you tell me a bit more? For example, for every job opportunity that may be out there, particularly in a tough economic climate like this one, there are many qualified applicants. What are some things that people can do to stand out among the throngs of people who are angling for every open position? On a related note, is there something people can do to try and gain employment with a company who may not even be hiring?

JACK: My first recommendation is that the applicant choose companies for whom he or she would like to work. Learn all that is possible about the company, and particularly, its problems. A great deal of this information is immediately available on the company’s website. Then, present yourself not simply as an applicant for a position, but as a qualified solution seeker that will directly go after both the problems and the ambition of the corporation itself. I think you can best get the idea by my imbedding the interview on careers directly into this posting. This is a 30-minute interview on "The Enrichment Hour with Mike Schwager" on Sedona Talk Radio — pictures will be furnished upon request! Please find the link below.

Scott: Hi Jack, it's Scott, Hillary‘s husband. Hillary is feeling a little under the weather this morning, so I thought I would pinch-hit for her today. Also, I have a few ideas of my own, which I would love to discuss with you.

Let‘s start with a question: President Obama gave his state of the Union address this week, and he also had what I consider to be an unprecedented Q & A session with Republican Congress members. While I think he served himself very well in both situations, my question is this: how can policy achievements match his rhetoric?

JACK: Scott, I am delighted to have you participate. You bring another point of view to the party and I am sure you have some insight in your capacity as a Compliance lawyer working for a major mortgage lender. I watched with interest President Obama confronting the Republican Congress people. The revolutionary part was that it was televised, so that we, the public, could get some insight on the direct exchange and form our own conclusions. I think this is a superb idea because we are getting the information directly from all the horses' mouths, rather than an interpretation from pundits on television.

I am much impressed with the President‘s ability to keep an even temper while faced with blatant campaigning masquerading as questions. I was also impressed with the fact that he suggested with some tact that the rhetoric be abandoned, so that a real discussion and possible solutions can emerge. Like many people, I have been watching the confrontations, accusations, and pointed suggestions. It was refreshing to hear it directly and I was pleased that the exchange was starting to heat up as the President pointed out that much of the disastrous economy was inherited and could not be attributed to anything he did. While admitting that he was less than perfect, he did correct the record and gave a very good account of himself and his activities. I was still left wondering whether we can really expect something positive to emerge in the way of bipartisan legislation that would benefit the American population.

SCOTT: Jack, I could not agree more. I was left wondering the same thing myself. The question is – where do we go from here? As the President pointed out himself several times during the Q&A, Republicans have painted themselves into such a corner that if they support Obama, or even work with him on any issue, they would cripple themselves politically, and risk losing their next election. So — is it even possible for the parties to work together in such an environment, or should the Democrats use the majorities that they have, and push through the agenda that they feel would be best for the country?

JACK: While the Republicans have remained solid in their opposition to anything that the Democrats put forth, the Democrats have been dancing timidly around the idea of direct confrontation. Somehow they succumbed to the myth that then cannot accomplish anything unless they have 60 votes (the majority needed to prevent a filibuster) and lost sight of the fact that despite that, they are a huge majority. In fact they have the largest majority in Congress that either party has enjoyed. So I wondered how the Republicans, particularly in the past 8 years, enacted all kinds of legislation (tax cuts, declarations of war, business incentives) in the face of not having as much of a majority as the Democrats enjoy today. What am I missing?

SCOTT: In my view, Obama has spent much of the past year trying to please everybody. But, I feel that when you try to please everybody, you often end up pleasing nobody. Further, I would sum up 2009 as a year of MISSED OPPORTUNITY. For example, Obama walked into office in the face of two extremely costly wars. It seemed to me that he felt we had to stay there because we had been there for years. My question is – why? Why can‘t he change the game? What if we could take all that money to improve the lives of Americans here at home. What could we do then?

JACK: Once more, I believe that perception has overcome reality. Somewhere along the line (probably starting with Vietnam) we have believed that by changing course we were being less than patriotic, and we were short-changing all the wonderful service people who had already sacrificed their health and their lives. As a former combat veteran of World War II, and as a card-carrying capitalist, I am a great believer that you don‘t throw good money after bad, or try to justify past actions by killing more people. Aside from the financial consequences, I get physically ill when I see what tremendous hardship our armed forces have had to endure. My opinion is that the logic for going in was bad, and the logic for getting out should not justify the original action. In this real world, we must face the real facts.

Every so often, it makes sense to stand back, look at where we have gone, and re-adjust our position to being ourselves in step with the reality of the situation. So far, as the economics are concerned, I do believe it‘s the first time in history that we went to war and lowered taxes at the same time. Aside from the terrible casualties in people, someone has to somehow pay for these huge costs that are part of a wartime economy. So, getting back to the recent exchange between the President and the Republican opposition, I welcome an honest debate based on the facts, and not wild accusations.

SCOTT: I agree Jack, and here is a fact. Unemployment is currently at 10%. And, if you add to that the number of people who have given up looking for work, or who are only working part time, the number grows closer to 20%. I would imagine that most people in America would say that the #1 issue on their mind is the economy – how can I get a job? Will I be able to keep my job? How can I afford heath care, education for my children, etc.? So – this ought to be our #1 priority. How can we improve our situation here, while faced with 2 costly wars abroad, combined with a tumultuous political system here at home?

JACK: This is not the first time we have had this problem. During the great depression of the 1930s, the unemployment rate shot over 25% and we also had an enormous loss of jobs some twenty years ago, after appropriate downsizing in the Reagan administration. I recently was interviewed on internet radio about how to get jobs, and other places that the unemployed can turn. It is a half-hour interview that I will link to a future blog. In summary, there are answers that are very American and are once more a tribute to our capitalist Democracy‘s ability to recoup and to go forward. People have to face their own responsibility, and should be made aware of the many opportunities that are open to them, even in a tough economic market in the United States.

SCOTT: I have one more question for you, Jack. I admire President Obama in several ways. He is extremely intelligent, and has had a varied career, full of achievements. One thing he has never done, however, is run a business. You, Jack, have run a very successful business for decades, and among other things, have created thousands of jobs all over America (and abroad). What advice would you give President Obama, as he goes forward with efforts to put people back to work?

JACK: I agree with you on the President‘s intelligence. I would however, qualify success as having two major ingredients. The first is the concept and the second is the execution. I think the President‘s inexperience in business has him falling short on how he executes his ideas. I certainly would advise him to put on his staff an individual with broad experience both in business and in politics, so that he could map a course that will face the second part of the equation. In the business world, particularly in sales, we value THE CLOSER more than the individual who doesn‘t know how to finalize a deal. I feel the same applies in politics and I think that President Obama needs a CLOSER on whom he can rely.

JACK
Much of it is common knowledge, but there are several roads that I have traveled that I think make for a very fulfilling and happy life. I have had a heartwarming influence on a number of younger people, and their success makes me feel good. I have a feeling that some of my concepts should be spread to a wider audience. I really do not crave fame or notoriety, but I don’t dislike it either.

HILLARY
So what is it about leaving your mark on a place, or a person, that satisfies you?

JACK
More than ever, I realize that at the end of life there is nothing more that you can say. By writing, advising, and coaching, my ideas will live on. The satisfaction of committing acts of philanthropy is primarily in the results that are achieved. In most cases I have put my own stamp on it, with conception, execution and financing. I have for the past several years shared this with my wife, Julie, who has applied impeccable taste and enormous empathy for people. Why do we attach our name to it? Perhaps, because it makes us proud and gives us a feeling of perpetuation.

HILLARY
You like the idea that once you are gone that your name is still part of the community?

JACK
Absolutely.

HILLARY
You also mentioned pride. Is it vanity?

JACK
I’m sure there is some ego attached to this, but it’s really a secondary thrill. My pride is that I am using part of the money that I’ve earned throughout my life for good causes. Over the past year our major contributions have been to refurbishing the lobby of our local clinic, where our medical needs have been handled with skill and compassion. The old lobby did not reflect properly on the great work that the Sansum Clinic of Santa Barbara does and we are proud to put our name to it.

We also created the Elly Nadel Music Therapy Program at Visiting Nurses and Hospice in Santa Barbara. Music was of great importance to my late wife as it is to most of us. This program now furnishes personalized music for all patients. The memory of losing my wife of 54 years has been tempered by the musical memories that she left. Now as part of the same program, we will be providing patients with the opportunity to do their own musical memoir. This will make them feel good while it passes on a legacy to friends and family.

HILLARY
It’s interesting that one of the comforts you are offering those in hospice is legacy, which is clearly important to you, but not anything I think about. Is this a product of age?

JACK
You are 34 years old. At your age, I felt immortal and had no need to pass on a legacy because I could never think of not being there.

HILLARY
Perhaps because I’ve had a chronic illness since my teens, or because the modern media has kept me readily aware of the random catastrophes that could befall me, I know for certain that I’m going to die. Yet, I still don’t feel the need to carve my name into the world. In fact, I very often take my name off of contributions that I make. So what made, and continues to make you, want to have a legacy?

JACK
I don’t need any of it. I want to create programs that will help people in a way that I can see it happen and witness the results. At the same time, I have no problem taking the credit for the funding, for the concept and for the execution. The difference between you and me is both age and fulfillment. There is no need to justify putting my name to it, just as there is no need to justify your anonymity. We are simply proud of what we do and are happy acknowledge the source.

HILLARY
There is no question that you have a great deal to be proud of, and that your community will remember your involvement.

JACK
Having the community remember my involvement is fine, but it is not the most important element. You have often heard me say, “there is no such thing as a completely unselfish act”. A great part of my reward is actually seeing the results of a program that I helped to create and finance. There is a thrill in bringing a project to its successful completion and actually experiencing the gratification of seeing it work and witnessing the benefits.