Winning and Losing
Posted by Jeff Id on November 9, 2013
Some things in blogland make you smile, others, not so much. I just answered a comment from a reader which left me cold. If you want to comment here, bring more than a thimble full of facts with you. For reference, I am an EVIL business owner with a natural dislike for the authoritarian population.
Unlike Lewandowsky or Michael Mann, I don’t earn a large salary by writing political commentary or by supporting political goals. I earn my IMHO a far-too-small salary by selling things that work. And work well. In fact, unlike the self-promotional aspects of Real Climate, this blog is a major liability to me and our company. We experienced it first-hand last week, where the top VP level buyer of a major customer that, every single reader here knows by sight, discussed with me — sustainability. I did not explain my/our (as there are other non-authoritarian partners who were present) background to them, other than the fact that we make the most efficient lighting products in our category.
In my life, wealth was not something my family considered much. It wasn’t important. In my thirties, a non-work related event which was out of my control, left me far poorer than anyone I have ever actually met. I am certain that some have had similarly bad or worse money situations, but I just don’t know them. I was a white male with a very good job, yet still held large debt that could not be reasonably cleared through bankruptcy or reasonably paid off by any but CEO level salaries.
So having smart friends and no personal property for myself left to lose, I quit my job and we started a company. The work has been incredibly difficult, and I’ve blogged through more than half of it but we have succeeded in our efforts to date. I actually remember sitting on the floor of an unfurnished bedroom writing my first posts here back in 2008. Who knows what tomorrow will bring but last week, I found myself being told yet NOT replying to someone regarding their views of human-causes damage to the environment. Readers here know that NOT telling someone what I think is not part of my genetic makeup! Instead I listened about discussions regarding sustainability and Clinton and conferences……etc.
In the end, a good company does what is best for itself, and we are by far the best option for this particular group. They are still working that part out, hopefully to our betterment. What it means is that as our organization grows, the Air Vent is becoming an albatross which is hard to ignore. Exactly the intent of Lewandowsky’s and Mann’s recent sciencology methinks. We have years of work into this company and won’t take less than perfect results. If you disagree with my decision to hold back my opinions to this customer (which I doubt), give me a number as to how many years of effort (not money) would you be willing to forgo for the sake of commenting on personal politics?
In reality, I’m not fretting about these questions now. I have reached my decisions long before, and the business is more important than this blog. We have employees and shareholders that are far more important than explanations to powerful people. That fact makes me a pragmatic dissenter IMO. Some who would expect a more idealistic result should re-read my post more carefully. Still, I wanted readers to know another part of what us business owners go through. Cost is cost and it is important that this blog not become one. Our unfortunate curse at my company is that we are a bunch of tea-party conservative, anti-authoritarians who own a fantastically CO2 efficient business. Our entire business concept (no official plan, just driven engineers) was based on improved efficiency – for better costs. Environment is a side-benefit!
If we suddenly experienced a multi-million dollar loss because of this blog and its inherent political accuracy ;D , I could (and perhaps should) be removed from the board and my position by our shareholders. Seeing my name be trashed by Lewandowsky in a printed journal was more flattering than threatening. How cool is it that your ideas are intentionally misrepresented by what are apparently major psychology journals, on another continent, using other peoples tax dollars! The problem was the media publicity and the longevity of the fake claims. Imagine dealing with the same falsehoods repeated across the newspapers of this globe for decades on end. That definitely was something that I was concerned about, and that meant that Lew had to be addressed.
Some wonder what my recent blogging absence had been about. We have been incredibly busy, no doubt and that was primary. Still the political situation today means that the Air Vent could become very expensive at any time. I don’t think that any of us expect this situation to improve either! How to proceed, when you are being publicly attacked by people with endless flow of government money, and have literally zero respect for free market business owners, even when the product is “green”. It is very much shocking to see journals publish rants against those who understand capitalism as though it were some kind of defect. The journal gives up all pretext of an unbiased broker of science, yet they behave as though we shouldn’t notice the editors and authors have a vested interest in expanded authoritarian government.
Marginalization of my opinion was exactly Lewandowsky’s intent, and he and Mann more guilty than those they accuse of being blinded by their belief system.
I did a little editing this morning for clarity – Jeff