Welcome | Unwelcome |
Any red state | Any blue state |
Moscow or Beijing | Canada or Mexico |
North Korea | South Korea |
Elon Musk’s home | Liz Cheney’s home |
Any Club Fed | E. Jean Carroll’s place |
Any Trump Golf Course | Every other golf course |
Mar-a-Logo's Dining room | Any Salvation Army soup kitchen |
NRA | NAACP |
Fox or Newsmax | ABC or PBS |
Robert F. Kennedy’s Jr home | Dr. Anthony Fauci’s home |
They say that you are known by the company you keep...draw your own conclusions!
About this time of year, many of us in North America tune in to watch a Christmas favorite movie, ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’, set in the idyllic town of Bedford Falls. In the town you will find the pharmacy, the dairy, the bakery, the hardware store and all the other small businesses that typified North America in the early post war period. There was a job for everyone, and the town was, in many ways, self-sufficient.
However, in the early 1960’s, an entrepreneurial businessman named Sam Walton came along with a disruptive approach to retailing. He decided that he could operate on higher volumes and lower profit margins and sell for less...sell everything for less. If your home needed it, Sam wanted to supply it.
From a small town in Arkansas, Sam set about perfecting his model and by the 1980’s he had become legendary. His model drove people to his stores, by now the size of warehouses, as he continued to drive down prices. The only problem was that he also drove out his competition. The local stores – the pharmacy, the dairy, the bakery, the hardware store – they all fell under the foot of Sam. And Sam’s pricing structure did not support the wages of those who were left behind, either at the retail locations and often not at the manufacturing level. The Walmart purchasing power pitted one supplier against another in the race to the bottom, and often to bankruptcy. So, Sam looked overseas, routinely to China, to find companies to supply the insatiable demand for low-cost products that Walmart customers demanded. They demanded them in ever increasing numbers because as good paying jobs were being eliminated, Walmart was all they could afford.
And now we want to vilify China for simply being a willing participant in the erosion of the North American manufacturing sector. China didn’t come knocking with an intent to undermine the American way of life. In many ways, they wanted to emulate it; just look at the quantity of iPhones or Teslas that the Chinese have acquired.
So how much does China supply to Walmart. Estimates suggest that 70%-80% of all Walmart sales are from Chinese sourced products. With global sales of $642 billion, that implies that sales of Chinese supplied products are in the range of $450-$520 billion with an estimated cost of $340-$390 billion.
Walmart, with the full and implicit approval of American consumers, has decimated the labor-intensive industries in America. Garments are a prime example, but the with up to 80% of sales being China sourced, very few industries are not impacted.
Other competitors have tried to emulate the Walmart model. Some have succeeded; most have failed. We can cry ‘foul’ on Chinese manufacturers, but the real culprit is in the mirror. Sam made it too easy for us.
Bedford Falls was the dream. Walmart has helped to make it Potter’s Ville.
And the addiction continues...
Merry Christmas? Bah humbug!
There are individuals in our world who must be avoided at all costs. These people are simply incapable of acting in a trustworthy manner as they lack the character upon which a viable relationship can be based. In their eyes, appeasement is to compromise as allegiance is to loyalty. Allow me to expand.
Putin offers a perfect example. When he provoked Ukraine and the world by invading Crimea, he was not looking to find a peaceful resolution to his demands. There was no expectation of compromise over his actions; he wanted only appeasement. In his economy, there should be no response or consequences. That is essentially what transpired. Absent compromise, Putin felt the liberty to expand his ambitions and appeasement got us 2022!
That is a macro example of appeasement. But a more granular example is found in the actions of men like Harvey Weinstein, Frank Stronach, Peter Nygard, Jeffrey Epstein or Mohamed al-Fayed. All of these men have been accused of sexual predation in their respective work places. When they approached female employees, they were not looking for a compromise. They expected, nay demanded, appeasement of their desires. They anticipated that there would be no consequences to their actions. They were prepared to give up NOTHING... they certainly had no dignity to lose.
The same analogy applies to allegiance versus loyalty. The US Pledge of Allegiance states ‘...I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands...’ It is noteworthy that the pledge is not to any person or persons. The allegiance is a one directional commitment because a flag or a republic is incapable of a relationship with or commitment to something else. One offers their allegiance without an expectation in return. Loyalty, on the other hand, is a two-way commitment. One person commits themselves to the support of another on the basis of commitments made by the other. It is a relationship based on mutual goals and understandings and lasts as long as both parties hold to those values. Therein lies the fundamental difference between allegiance and loyalty; one directional commitment versus bi-directional.
At a macro level, I would submit that Donald Trump looks for allegiance, not loyalty. His view seems to be ‘...do as I say, not as I do...’ and he refuses to hold himself accountable for any failures or shortcomings in the relationships he maintains. At a more granular level, you may find yourself in situations in the work place or outside of that environment, in which others look to you for allegiance, a relationship devoid of consequences, versus loyalty, a relationship of mutual care and consideration. The former is unhealthy and cannot last. The latter is a relationship of equals.
Discard those situations that are defined by appeasement and allegiance. Seek out those characterized by compromise and loyalty. You will be safer and healthier to be absent the toxicity.
