Skin in the Game

 

Of late, I've noticed what appears to be an increasing number of letters-to-the-editor in various papers written by members of the Baby Boom Generation. Many of them decry what they perceive as an almost total lack of energy, involvement -- even anger -- on the part of today's college students -- I call them "Generation Text".

"We were out there on the front lines protesting against the war in Vietnam, the killings at Kent State and American imperialism, and in support of things like the 18-year old vote and the Equal Rights Amendment," one writer noted. "What about the current crop of college students? Why aren't they out there protesting against this endless war in Afghanistan?"

"During the sixties," another letter writer stated, "we took over the administration buildings at Berkeley, Wisconsin and Columbia, and flocked to Washington D.C. by the hundreds of thousands. Today's college students just hang out in their dorm rooms tweeting one another . . ."

Indeed, why is this? Is it because the issues confronting us 40 years ago were so much more cut-and-dried, so relatively black-and-white? Is it because in those long gone pre-social networking days the only way we could express a commonality of concern was face-to-face? Or is it something else?

The answer, I believe, can best be understood by an expression many believe was first coined by mega-investor Warren Buffett: "Skin in the game." In Buffett's world, "skin in the game" refers to a situation in which high-ranking insiders use their own money to buy stock in the companies they run. The idea behind creating this situation was -- and is -- to ensure that corporations are managed by like-minded individuals who share a stake in the company. "Executives can talk all they want," Buffett said, "but the best vote of confidence is putting one's own money on the line just like outside investors." (Upon researching the expression, it is highly likely that Buffett was not its source. Back in September 2006, the late William Safire devoted an entire column to it, and found it to be both quite old and ultimately untraceable.)

Regardless of its origin, "skin in the game" is synonymous with "stake" or "self-interest." A major reason why Baby Boomers protested the war in Vietnam was that they had a stake in it; a stake called the draft, for which a high percentage were eligible. For "Generation Text," the terms "Selective Service" and "the draft" are as antiquated and unknown as ditto machines and party lines. Again, because it was in our self interest, Baby Boomers came out en masse to support passage of the Twenty-sixth Amendment; it was enacted in time to permit 18, 19, and 20 year olds to vote for the anti-war Senator George McGovern. (For all the good that did . . .) One wonders what sort of stake would get "Generation Text" to march, protest or volunteer.

Up until recently, a majority of Americans did not seem to see themselves as having any significant "skin in the game." We are a largely apolitical nation; witness our appallingly low voter turnout. Moreover, it has long been in the best interest of those who do have significant "skin in the game" -- i.e. multi-national corporations, their lobbyists and political puppets, a majority of millionaires and billionaires, much of the communications /entertainment industry -- to keep the public diverted, often by spoon-feeding us a diet of pap which although somewhat filling, lacks sufficient nourishment for what should be a robust citizenry. (I wrote about this phenomena precisely one year ago today in a piece entitled "An Illusion Worthy of David Copperfield." It is just as true -- if not more so -- today as it was 52 articles ago. )

It would seem that perhaps -- just perhaps -- after witnessing that mind-numbing debt-ceiling-vs.-deficit-reduction-debacle on Capitol Hill, we -- average workaday Americans -- are beginning to figure out that we do have skin in the game; that it is in both our individual and collective (oy, such a term!) self interest to recognize how little respect we are being shown by our leaders, representatives and the folks who keep them in campaign gelt. When Standard & Poors downgrades our national credit rating and the financial markets rise and fall as precipitously as Six Flag's "Superman" roller coaster, it matters to each and every one of us -- not just to billionaire investors and titans of industry. When so many of our politicians put their partisan political interests way ahead of America's economic well-being, that is a nightmare that affects us all. When promises of "jobs, jobs, jobs" take a backseat to eviscerating labor unions, shutting down women's health centers, scuttling public education and turning a blind eye to America's crumbling infrastructure, that is a cynically orchestrated turn of events that calls for a united front; a front made up of everyday citizens who, for the first time in perhaps a generation, realize that we all have "skin in the game." When the 2012 presidential election looks like its going to be a replay of the Christian Crusades -- i.e. the "Forces of Light" versus "The Forces of Evil" -- that should get our attention. When our children are transported across dangerously creaky bridges to attend physically substandard schools that are dangerously underfunded, understaffed and overcrowded, that should make us awaken us from our doldrums. When we are told time and again that the "real" causes of our joblessness and economic stagnation are deficits, entitlements, high taxes and too much regulation, it is time to throw off the shackles of "Foxification" and begin acting in our best interest.

Although America is currently teetering on a precipice of contraction, our problems are not insoluble. It doesn't take a genius to understand that the three most important ingredients that go into any first-class recovery are courage, resolve and the ability to compromise. At present, we are lacking all three. But it is not just the fault of the people we elect, for after all, we are the ones who elected them in the first place! For too long, we have abnegated our responsibilities as citizens; given them over to men and women whose names, faces and agendas most Americans cannot identify. And then when they fail us, we complain. And we elect a new batch of men and women whose names, faces and agendas we cannot truly identify.

As if we did not have skin in the game.

But we all have a stake in this glorious compact called America . . . whether we know it or not.

When oh when will we start acting that way?

©2011 Kurt F. Stone

Comments

[Sir Roberto's blog]

This is fascinating how you have contrived to fully reveal the subject that you have chosen for this precise blog entry of yours. By the way did you turn to some similar posts as a base to fully show the entire situation which you published in your post?

[KFS to Myron]

I agree wholeheartedly with you on this one Mike.

What is more, I think there should be some sort of "mandatory service" for everyone in America . . . getting back to the "Ask not what you're country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" mentality. Whether it be teaching in the inner cities, working in national parks, helping rebuild bridges, cleaning beaches or serving in the military -- everyone should participate in this country.

Hope you agree!

[Myron]

There wil be no more Afghanistans once we bring back the draft and REQUIRE all 535 members of congress' progeny perform mandatory service

[Marilyn]

Another excellent article.........i copy and send to my baby boomers

[Al]

My greatest disppointment with Obama and his administration is their having taken the bait, hookline and sinker, thrown out by those on the right, and far too many on the left as well.

They constantly bemoan the alleged catastrophic legacy we are leaving to our children, grandchildren et al.

We have debt and will always have debt, austerity and illusory balanced budget amendments notwithstanding.

But how about the debt we have right now? Millions are out of work, and have been for considerable periods of time; millions can not pay their medical expenses; millions can not pay their paltry living expenses; millions can not pay their mortgages; hundreds of thousands, if not millions, many veterans, are living on the streets.

When do we address the current indebtedness? Why are we sacrificing the lives of those already here? Do we have the right to ignore the needs of those of us who, today, are no less at risk than those who come after us and, given the state of the world, may never come after us?

Who is out there not just fighting, but screaming, about the inequities destroying the middle class, to say nothing of those who, for so long, have been living below the poverty level, and the ever growing number of families who continue to fall below the poverty level?

Why has not this administration taken up the guantlet, rather than preach the unattainable bi-partisonship? Why hasn't the administraion put forward a jobs program, something akin to the WPA?

Where is the rage?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that with the current Congress the chances of enacting legislation to cure the problem are not slim to none; they are none.

But passive rhetoric is not enough; it never has been. Lip service can no longer be tolerated.

Many questions but, alas, no answers.

[KFS to Paul]

Hey Paul:
Thanks, as always, for your trenchant, on-the-money comments. Strangely, yours is the first -- and so far only -- comment I've received. You are absolutely (and sadly) correct in your assessment of what currently passes for our system of "education." I think folks back in the pre-public school era were better educated than 99% of today's high school graduates and certainly a clear majority of our college graduates. It simply blows my mind when I will quote, say Mark Twain, to a teenager, only to see, from the "bridge washed out" look in their eyes, that they have absolute no idea of whom I am speaking! And when I say "Tom Sawyer?" "Huckleberry Finn?" "The Prince and the Pauper?" It may as well be in Esperanto (which they've never heard of either.)

I like your point about our not providing training for "watch-makers, appliance repair, shoe-making . . .” Unfortunately, we've become such a throwaway society, that rather than repair something, we simply consign it to the trash heap. You will be happy to know, however, that Cartier and Rolex continue to employ first-class watch repairmen . . .

So far as seeing the rise of lawless gangs "imported from the UK," we have no need for theirs; we have our own homegrown variety . . . militiamen, survivalists and the NRA. For the masses, they're just too busy texting to give a damn . . .

Sorry to begin your day with such utter pessimism. My spirits will start lifting after a second cuppa tea.

[Paul]

I hope your current comments on the "Skin Game" resonate...

The current apathetic malaise is history repeating itself. Generation Text is being fed the same pap that was fodder for the Roman Republic's "Pane et Panum" (Bread and Circuses). Our current delivery of education and values is a school system that teaches "bubble" responses to formulated, multiple choice answers. Creative thinking albeit "art", "music" and/or philosophy are being murdered in the name of saving money or providing basics. The masses are being sold the value of
"college for all." Few education centers provide training for watch-makers, appliance repair, shoe-making, and a host of "ordinary" skills. The concepts of "value" and "democracy" are foreign to our learners.

Will we see the rise of lawless gangs imported from the UK? Indeed, have we "Turned-on and Tuned-out?"

Are we the T-Rexs just rattling our bones?

[Alan Weiss]

I just feel that the separation of person and state has gotten too big. What can we do?