Month: June 2018

When you have scheduled the world’s longest flight of 19 hours and 9,000 nautical miles, one of your concerns should be passenger comfort. It is a long time to be sitting in a seat. That is why this is good PR. Singapore Airlines is redesigning seats in economy to be roomier and more comfortable. It is something one wishes other airlines would take for a model, but they are more concerned for the bottom line than the person.  Admittedly, if the carrier tried to ferry people in the usual Airbus economy seating, they would probably lose passengers and be dealing with medical problems from people sitting so long in agony. But still, they are making an effort and that might be enough.

The venture capitalist calling for California to be divided into three parts might be serious, but the idea smacks of a publicity stunt that has made it to the ballot. There are so many things wrong with the proposal that it hardly bears discussing. Perhaps the most salient argument is what to do about water. Southern California today depends on water being shipped from the northern part of the state. If it were separate, quarrels would erupt over how much water Los Angeles could get. It wouldn’t be pretty. The next is political power. California today is the most powerful block in the House of Representatives. Divide it into three and its strength will diminish. Then there is the tax base that would be divided unfairly because of population centers in different states. One is waiting for the proponent to declare the tripartite division a joke, but he probably won’t. The idea makes a mockery of initiative voting.

Amazon and Starbucks have just shown their corporate power. They got the Seattle city council to roll back a tax increase that would have cost them tens of millions of dollars. Amazon did it by blunt force. It stopped work on one of two corporate towers it is building there and said it wouldn’t complete the building if the tax went through. It was a naked threat, and council members got the message. They voted to repeal the tax before it took effect. From a PR perspective, it was mixed. The tax was going to shelter and care for the many homeless in the city. On the other hand, it would have greatly increased the cost of doing business in the city and it was punitive. Amazon and Starbucks had a duty to protest. Had either company a bad reputation, there would have been less likelihood the council would have changed its mind.

It seems a CEO can’t say anything without catching some flack. Consider this case. Twitter’s CEO posted a screen shot about his use of a Chik-fil-A’s mobile app and saving 10 percent on his order. The internet erupted in a barrage of criticism. How could he patronize a business that doesn’t recognize gay marriage? Dorsey apologized but he wouldn’t be too far wrong if he considered himself snake-bit. The incident is a lesson.  Everything you say is watched online and if you make a false step you will hear about it. Dorsey said he had forgotten about the company’s stance on gay marriage — a plausible excuse. But, other’s didn’t. To compound his difficulty, he was bashed as well by conservatives for giving a mea culpa. Sometimes you can’t win. He would have been better off keeping silent in the first place.

President Trump is saying he’ll know in the first minute whether North Korea is ready to give up its nuclear missiles. If so, why does he need a summit? Kim Jong Un knows already how far he will go to get back into the good graces of the world community. Does he need a diplomatic show to make his statement? Both men want to be seen on the world stage as competent, dynamic leaders. Hence, they are risking failure to make their entrances. It is hard to believe that anything of merit will come out of the gathering, but both men will have generated international headlines. That appears to be what they want. Trump can boast of his deal-making skills. Kim wants legitimacy. Photos of the two men meeting will be good enough for the two of them. It is hard not to be cynical in times like this.

The media have a bias of a kind. That is heralding the imminent arrival of the flying car. Reporters lap up hype from developers and publish again and again about the evanescent vehicles fated always to be in the future. Not only is the technology of a fly-drive machine difficult, but if an inventor is successful in building one, it will only be a start. Left unanswered is how these vehicles can wing from point to point safely without getting in the way of airplanes, where they can land especially in crowded urban settings, where they can take off without noise complaints from neighbors and fears for their children and animals and more. While the media are careful to note that dozens of attempts have already been made to develop one and they have all so far failed, they are only too willing to give a current inventor a break. Maybe this time.  But envision a world in which hundreds of people are buzzing to and from work in an unregulated sky and you have a case for federal and state action. What an inventor needs to do is to develop along with the vehicle a methodology for safe aerial transport — lanes and stoplights, if you will, that don’t exist now. Only then will the technology that belongs to the future become practical for the present.

A leader can compromise his authority through ignorance. He should know basic facts, but doesn’t. As a result, his subordinates think less of him and his power of persuasion dwindles. Here is a case. Any school child can tell you the British burned Washington and not Canadians who were not even a nation then. This might be dismissed as a one-time faux pas, but President Trump plays fast and loose with facts. He makes them up as he goes along, and he contradicts himself from day to day. It’s a wonder he is able to keep a base of supporters. He has lost many who voted for him the first time. Yet he persists in bending and breaking facts, be they historical or not. No wonder foreign leaders who deal with him are angry, and the Twitter community has a good time schooling him.

It is tragic enough that a business executive takes her own life. It is a crisis for a company that has her brand name. Kate Spade was a celebrity designer of handbags and accessories. Even though she had sold her company and was engaged in a new venture her name remained on the door. Her untimely death gives the owner little time to transition from the image of the founder to a brand unconnected to a person. Kate Spade will now live as a particular type of handbag in a price range. It was trending that way anyway since Spade had changed her name and was pursuing a new line of fashion goods. But, the suicide of the founder dampens the successful image of the products. How could someone who seemingly had everything yet not have enough? If she suffered from depression, why hadn’t she gone for treatment? If she was unhappy, why?  There may be no answers, but anyone who owns and uses her handbags is left with lingering questions.

One way to turn off people is to be seen gaming a system. That’s what is happening in California where two Democratic candidates for governor are boosting Republican rivals in an effort to knock each other out of the two top spots in the primary election. Why? California has a primary system in which the two top vote-getters regardless of party go on to the general election. The Democratic candidates know that running against each other will be difficult in the general election because the state is sure to elect a Democratic governor. It will be much easier if the opponent is a Republican. So, they are running ads supporting Republican candidates in the primary. It is a cynical move but legal. One can easily pardon voters if they don’t like either Democratic candidate as a result of their gaming the system. It would be ironic, if as a result of their chicanery, the two top winners are Republicans.

International relations is the art of making and keeping friends around the world. It is recognition that no matter how powerful a nation might be, there comes a time when it needs allies. Insulting friends isn’t done because one wants to maintain a bond. This is why the President gets a failing grade in international relations. He has imposed tariffs on friend and foe alike in his effort to “Make America Great Again.” How can one beat up on Canada, our loyal neighbor to the north? What possesses one to take a whack at Mexico where so many goods are manufactured?  Trump believes the US is weak and needs protection from predatory neighbors. His way of going about it is ham-handed and self-destructive.  Congress needs to convince him to lift the tariffs and negotiate, but Congress is weak itself with infighting among Republicans. The midterm elections can’t come soon enough. Maybe, just maybe, we will get a Senate and House that will stand up to Trump and make peace with allies.