Hear it Here First!

Drawing conclusions using the behavioral model is not difficult.  With a little practice most people can see the behavioral errors of Americans, as reflected in the news or their personal observations, and predict the obvious consequences.  Here are a few examples of past posts confirmed by current news items.

Last November I wrote about how drug companies encourage us to put our doctors on the spot by asking for specific drugs.  They are faced with acceding to the patient's request or risking an argument (and possible lawsuit).  This dynamic leads to higher drug sales, more stress on the healthcare budget and some patients receiving unnecessary treatment.  Now we encounter this article explaining how more advertising has led to an increase in sales of low-testosterone treatments, in some cases with no evidence of a medical condition.  In addition, the article states that we "don’t know all the possible long-term side effects that could be linked to hormone treatment for men."

Almost a year ago the subject was “Caution on Dietary Supplements."  From Consumer Reports we read of the dangers of Viagra-like supplements.  They contain some of the active ingredients of the prescription medicine "or other risky chemicals" without the same oversight, warnings or safety testing of prescription drugs.

Then, early last month my “Death of Retirement” posting anticipated this recent warning from NPR that “retirement as we know it may be consigned to the dustbin of history.”

Finally, I passed along important information in April about myths being spread about the supposed dangers of vaccinating children, how parents ignore scientific evidence while relying on erroneous information from friends, relatives and social networks.   This is confirmed by a story of New Zealand parents who “thought they had made an informed choice not to vaccinate their children, but after their son ended up in intensive care with a tetanus infection they realised they had made a terrible mistake.”

The behavioral model is not complex and it usually leads to the right conclusions.  Too few people pay attention to it, relying on gut instinct, or expecting politicians to solve the problems we create for ourselves.  Just the other day I overheard a young adult make the statement, “I hate hangovers,” as he complained of a headache.  Of course we all know that this person does not really hate hangovers.  If he did, he would do something about it, change his behavior.  It’s the simple behavior–consequence link, but many people just don’t get it.  They make spending, voting and other decisions that keep our country heading in the wrong direction while the rest of us sit by helplessly watching as we must all live with the consequences.


Added June 17, 2013:  I made the point back in July 2011 and again in March 2012 that bankers are smarter than the government when it comes to business and finance.  They react to new regulations with new policies or fees, forcing the government to come back later with more regulations.  It’s a vicious cycle.  So a few days ago another large bank restricted free checking.  The article states:  “New regulations limiting overdraft and interchange fees have led many banks to eliminate free checking or raise their fees.”

Perspective and Sports

Big news at the end of the week was the investigation into doping in Major League Baseball.  A question that never makes the news is why we make sports so important in our lives.  People will tell you that the most important things to them, what they hold dear, include values like:  family, faith, health, a good education and safe environment for their children, freedom, friendship and loyalty, integrity, and security.  These are what they say are important to them and should play a role in making decisions and setting priorities.

Then along come our favorite sports teams, and people will ignore family, glued to the television, allowing the outcome of a game to affect their mood for the rest of the day.  There must also be a winner and a loser.  Ties are not acceptable, so professional sports and the NCAA go to great lengths to develop tie-breaking rules.  Even in high school where sports should be a vehicle for teaching sportsmanship, character building, and teamwork, ties are not acceptable.  A coach who doesn’t deliver a winning season for a few years is run out of town.  The stars play while the rest sit on the bench – presumably building character.  We have read about recent examples of recreational sports referees being attacked by players and spectators.

We see professional athletes not as entertainers, but as heroes.  We buy products and favor brands based only on their word.  We pay half a house payment for tickets, parking and concessions so they can collect millions of dollars for throwing, batting or catching.  When athletes use drugs to help them perform better, to entertain us better, we feel betrayed.  When they can't live up to the hero status, we are shocked.  The league officials and even Congress investigate to punish the culprits and clean up the game.  This is only a problem because we have enough time and money to indulge in this luxury, elevating it to an exalted level of interest and importance – if most people didn’t care, it wouldn’t make the news.  If we refused to pay more than $6 per ticket instead of $60 and up, so they are paid thousands instead of millions, how many athletes would be willing to risk their health or their lives by taking performance-enhancing drugs?  

We can complain about teachers having the most important jobs and being paid less than entertainers, but the pay of each is driven by how much value we put on each based on our willingness to spend or be taxed.  It’s exactly the outcome we have chosen. 

Our real values are not what we say they are; they are reflected in our behavior.  In this case, perhaps they are investigating the wrong side of the equation.

Wisdom?

Behavior has consequences.  Everyone knows it.  Hinduism and other eastern religions call it karma.  Colloquially it’s said, “What goes around, comes around.”  Christians have the concept of heaven and hell as recompense for actions on earth.  The Old Testament is filled with warnings about bad behavior: “But I will punish you according to the fruit of your doings, saith the Lord” (Jeremiah 21:14).  When bad things happen to good people we look for some rationale to explain and justify it, because it’s universally accepted that like consequences should follow like behavior.

Another well-accepted truth is that people don’t change unless they are unhappy enough with the status quo to overcome inertia.  It takes more energy (physical, mental or emotional) to move out of your comfort zone than to continue along the familiar path of old habits and routines.  One of Dr. Phil McGraw’s favorite questions is:  “How is that working for you?” as he tries to get people to acknowledge the pain that comes directly from their choices.  Unless they hate what’s going on, they will not change.  They aren’t motivated enough to commit to a new plan.

In most cases, the problem is not a lack of understanding of these two fundamentals.  The real problem is the time lag between them.  If I touch a hot pot on a stove, I quickly learn to use a potholder.  I am motivated to change behavior because the unpleasant feedback is immediate.  If I smoke my first cigarette at the age of 15, knowing that continuing to smoke may lead to a painful death at 55 has minimal motivational value.  If I am living from paycheck to paycheck today, the prospect of retiring in poverty in 30 or 40 years has little power over my decision.  Remote consequences, though well understood, provide less incentive to change.  To quit smoking or save for tomorrow means giving up today’s pleasure and gratification for some vague promise of a better future.  It is easy to disregard distant repercussions.  Change is hard work, and thirty years is a long way off!

Some people do it; most do not.  What is the mechanism that connects the idea of remote consequences to the need for immediate-term change?  What reminds some people to do the hard work today, striving for a brighter future?  It may be a general aversion to risk.  Perhaps it’s maturity or wisdom.  This article suggests that it’s merely a strong imagination to see more clearly a happier self in the future.  Whatever you call it, America needs more.

Our past behavior has developed into today’s problems.  Failures in perspective, critical thinking, discipline, responsibility, and economic understanding have long-term consequences for America,  Examples of these consequences are found in our obesity epidemics, unpreparedness for retirement, frivolous lawsuits, action based on impulse rather than values, wasting money on unproven cures, buying more house, toys or vacations than we can afford, a failing education system, out of control healthcare and college cost.  Meanwhile we expect the government to solve all our problems with money that appears out of thin air.  Clearly poor choices by the many sabotage the overall direction of the country.  We need better choices, not more laws, regulations and bailouts.  We must unite around this behavioral model to find the real solutions – other approaches continue to fail.

My Choice, Your Treat

I often see news articles that reflect the kind of thinking in the title.  Some people want to get their own way – make a decision, but want others to pay for it.  They argue vehemently that they only want it because it is fair or the right thing to do, but they aren't willing to take on the financial burden.  In many cases they seem oblivious to the fact that finances are involved.

Take the case of the Girl Scout camps mentioned in this recent article.  When the Iowa Girl Scout councils reviewed their budget and proposed selling their four remaining summer camps, one mother started a petition to fight the idea.  “Other scouting alums and volunteers have taken up the cause, too, packing public meetings, sending letters to newspapers and recording a protest song for YouTube. When those efforts failed, they filed a lawsuit.”  The fight is not limited to Iowa.  It’s a nationwide battle between the leaders who say that girls are less interested in camping and the protesters who “insist the camping experience shaped who they are and must be preserved for future generations.” 

“Pro-camp activists have boycotted cookie drives, held overnight camp-ins outside council offices, filed legal actions and tried to elect sympathetic volunteers to governing boards.”  This is a budget issue, but I don’t see any mention of those with strong feelings offering to dig deep into their own pockets or to start a campaign to raise funds for a cause they feel is so important.  Instead they petition, write letters, protest and boycott.  It’s a common case of wanting one's wishes fulfilled, but expecting the money to come from somewhere else.

On somewhat a related subject an article last week bemoaned the fact that the US is the only rich country that does not mandate paid vacation and/or holidays for all workers.  They show charts and tell how awful it is and how behind the rest of the world we are.  Again the argument centers on doing the right thing with someone else's money.

No one should expect to get paid for not working.  That pay is part of a compensation package earned during working hours.  Wages for holidays and vacations are ultimately paid by customers when they receive a product or service.  What if you went to the bakery to pick up your Saturday morning bagels and were told that the baker was on vacation but you were expected to pay anyway?  What if instead you were told that the baker had retired and that you were expected to pay every Saturday for the next 30 years but not get any bagels?  It sounds crazy, but some people think about vacation, holiday, sick leave, disability, FMLA and pension so narrowly that it’s as if they believe the world really works that way.  Of course, it doesn't.  Despite the name, "paid time off" is another form of pay for work done.  It’s nice to feel strongly about paid time off, but the solution is not that easy.  If the government forces companies to pay for time off, either the current compensation must be divided differently or the customers must pay more.   There is no magic money tree or mystery philanthropist to cover the cost.  Passing the costs to the customer, in a sense paying for each other’s vacation time, leaves us right back where we started.