Archive for the ‘Living in the World Today’ Category
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Technology was supposed to make things easier and among other things aid in making twenty-something’s (i.e. Gen Y denizens) achieve more, make more money and contribute faster to society. It could be argued that in some cases that has happened – think Mark Zuckerberg, Andrew Mason, and the two principals of Instagram Dennis Skyros and Mike Krieger who just last week became multimillionaires. But the way I see it, far too many Gen Y’ers have become slaves to technology and devices and actually unknowingly spend a disproportionate amount of their income paying for their technology habits. I believe the need for technology and its expense is a significant contributor to college graduates returning home to live with their parents.
In order to function in today’s society people need to have access to the web, a mobile phone (preferably a smartphone), devices such as a computer or tablet to produce and consume content. When those costs are included in monthly expenses the average Gen Y’er might be surprised at the percentage of his/her monthly income that goes to feeding their technology needs. Surely some will point out how inexpensive technology can be. However can is theoretical and in practice the average Gen Y’er spends more than $100/month on technology.
For example – a new smartphone costs anywhere from $300-$500. Since people tend to replace smartphones about every two years the cost of phone purchase amortized over the two years is about $20 monthly. Mobile service costs are $ 50 or more monthly. Add in the costs of buying a tablet, or computer, any software and subscriptions, home internet service and it’s easy to see how the monthly technology costs can easily exceed $100 or more. And I’m leaving out things like cable television service since the Gen Y’ers I know have little interest in watching broadcast or cable television.
For many Americans in their twenties scrounging up $500 a month for rent is not easy. Moving to a big city doubles or triples that number. Transportation costs (subway, bus, taking care of a car with parking and insurance, rail etc.) are a factor as well. It all adds up to a number that makes subsisting on anything near the minimum wage – impossible. Even at $15/hour which is nearly double the minimum wage, thirty-five hours per week equals $2,200 before taxes.
So it is conceivable that the sum of one’s technology bills at over $100 approaches 10% of take-home pay. That’s an expense that did not exist in the 1980’s when college graduates and young people would shudder at the thought of living with their parents.
There really is not an option to live in today’s society without technology. Surely there will be those that will point out technology does not have to cost as much as I am advancing, but in my experience most people just pony up and pay the costs without really thinking too much about the long term ramifications.
It is sometimes said that city dwellers can spend one-fourth to one-third of their income on housing. Add 10% for technology to that and the total can approach 40% of income before doing anything but paying for housing and technology. It’s no wonder things are tough for Generation Y.
Agree? Disagree?
My children are all grown up now (meaning they are over eighteen). Accordingly my days and nights as a father are quite a bit different from what they were just ten years ago. This is because I was a dedicated coach of youth sports – ones in which my children played of course. Like so many people I coached youth soccer (which I name ‘organized mayhem’), youth basketball and youth baseball. I loved every single minute of it and miss it dearly.
I thought of this when I drove past the baseball fields in my newly adopted hometown. There was a man (presumably a father of one of the boys) hitting grounders and pop-ups to young kids under the age of ten (I only guess this because they were really small). Ten years ago I was President of Wilton Little League and even named district one volunteer of the year. There were unending practices, games, car rides and rainouts. However in the process I got to know many families, and the kids themselves. I miss the dirt in my trunk, carrying equipment in the back of my car everywhere I go and simply just being outside working and enjoying being with the kids.
So as I drove past I thought why are my coaching days over? Is it only because I have no children in the program? And in this politically correct time if I were to volunteer to coach baseball (for example) for a team on which I have no children of my own as players, in a town that I have only lived for 5 months would I even be given the opportunity? Would I be seen as creepy for wanting to spend afternoons, evenings or weekends telling kids to hit the cutoff man, to throw strikes, or slide? It only takes one disgruntled parent to completely ruin a reputation.
My conclusion was that while I don’t feel it would be creepy in the least, it’s not my opinion that counts and surely some people would look at it unfavorably, even nervously. And how sad is that? It’s bad enough that good, smart, and capable people choose not to enter politics due to the scrutiny and glare of the spotlight. But that one has to think twice about helping out in youth sports is kind of sad.
How many people are there like me who only want to contribute but hesitate to do so because of the possibility of some people’s negative perception? Am I being overly cautious or oversensitive here?
This week Procter & Gamble announced http://bit.ly/I262sG that it would ban employee access to Netflix and Pandora in order to save bandwith at the company headquarters in Cincinnati. My first reaction was that banning internet site access never seems to work out like as it is intended. This is true in particular when people can access so much on their mobile devices. Ban Facebook or Youtube? No problem – people will just do in on their smartphone. So often the result of banning just causes a shift in how people access social media and video sites.
As it turns out P & G’s banning access to Netflix and Pandora was more a question of reducing data usage and in fact could save the company money since currently the data spend is as much as $15 million annually. P & G is hardly alone in contending with a skyrocketing use of data at the corporate level that taxes internal servers and slows overall employee productivity.
The recently completed NCAA men’s (and women’s) basketball tournaments displayed the incredible adoption of real-time streaming video. I know this since I signed up for the streaming package from CBS sports for $3.99 and had on the games over the first two days in the background while I worked. Please do not mention this to our IT guy as he is not too keen on streaming video in the office. However somehow I get the feeling he knows anyway. In fact, according to an article in the Huffington Post, a survey released by Modis this past March indicates that increased video streaming during the NCAA Men’s Division I basketball championship greatly slows connection speeds and, in 34 percent of cases, causes the network to crash. In addition, more than two-thirds of the 500 IT staffers surveyed responded that they take steps to “either lessen or block the streaming of non-work content” during the tournament.
I posted last year on the subject of whether or not it’s a good idea to allow employees access to March Madness during work hours – http://wp.me/pJX7l-m2 and I still maintain it’s a good thing for employee morale and making the office more community oriented. However at the same time having employees access Netflix does not seem to be essential to me. Pandora would be fine with me if it were not such a giant data consumer.
Growing data usage is becoming a critical issue at the corporate level. Nobody wants to hear the word censorship, but the expense of larger data streams combined with a perceived loss of productivity will cause situations (dilemma’s) like Procter and Gamble’s to happen more frequently.
What do you think? If you think access should be provided without limitations would you be willing to contribute some of your paycheck to have that access?
Since I am old enough to be a card-carrying member of AARP I am also old enough to remember what the acronym stood for – American Association of Retired Persons. In 1999 AARP ‘officially’ changed its name to “AARP” – or Ay Ay R Pee to illustrate that its focus was not on retirees but people over 50.
Still I have an ingrown prejudice that AARP = OLD GUY. I don’t really feel old, and I am far from retirement (whatever that might look like). When I received the invitation to join AARP a couple of years ago I was not overjoyed. Despite that I joined anyway. Part of it was to see from a marketing perspective what I might be offered – after all it was free. So far the main ‘benefit’ I have seen is the monthly magazine, which for those of you who do not know remains the single largest circulation magazine in the world. In fact AARP claims more than 40 million ‘members’ but of course those members don’t pay anything to BE a member.
I have to admit the magazine (cleverly entitled ‘AARP – the magazine’) is something I rarely look at. Part of the reason is that it screams – HEY OLD GUY READ THIS! My own problem I realize but I am betting I share that little prejudice with many others. I truly wonder how many 50 year olds that receive the magazine actually open it. Last night I somehow stumbled upon the most recent issue and thumbed through it.
My takeaway was that the magazine isn’t bad at all and there were a couple of articles worth reading and the membership benefits section outlined something I had not seen before –show your AARP card at Dunkin’ Donuts and with a purchase of a large or extra-large coffee receive a free donut. When I drove past Dunkin’ Donuts this morning I thought about it but decided to pass. I like donuts as much as the next guy. However donuts don’t help me, or anyone, look like less of an old fat guy. But I know I will take advantage of it before too long provided I can actually FIND my AARP card.
AARP also produces radio and television programs (I’ve never heard or seen one). Specific products include Medicare supplemental insurance; member discounts on rental cars, cruises, vacation packages and lodging; special offers on technology and gifts; pharmacy services; legal services; and long-term care insurance.
There are other benefits as well although I fail to take advantage of them since that acknowledges what I prefer to not think about – somehow I am over fifty – and how the heck did that happen? And I really don’t care to be reminded by a magazine of that fact.
AARP has great assets that people like me try to ignore. And if you are not yet eligible you probably are not in a big rush to get there. That does not seem to be as good a business model as it could be.
I think AARP could use a total rebrand don’t you?
Although I have visited a number of factories in China I’ve never had the opportunity to visit the giant Foxconn factories which are located in several different parts of China. Foxconn is actually a Taiwanese company as an affiliate of Hon Hai Precision Industry. Yesterday (Thursday) Apple Inc. agreed that it would work with its partner Foxconn to improve wages and working conditions at the factories where iPads, iPods, and iPhones (among other products) are made – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46896890
The independent Fair Labor Association claims that the results of their probe ends up being good for Foxconn, good for Apple and not least importantly – good for the factory workers themselves. Foxconn has more than 1.2 million workers. Does this mean that popular products made by Apple will become more expensive? Probably but keep in mind that labor costs are only a small part of the total cost of Apple devices made in China. Other companies such as H-P, Amazon, and Sony will all face similar changes and possible price increases.
When I have visited factories in China I cannot ever recall being appalled by the working conditions. That may just be my particular experience and not indicative of things in general. The factory buildings are inelegant and utilitarian. South China, where the city of Shenzhen is located, is very warm for much of the year and there are areas in the factories that are not air conditioned. In fact the Chinese are cost conscious and therefore energy saving conscious. Many offices only have room air conditioners (no central A/C) which are left off when the rooms are not in use. I recall many meetings in a room with temperatures in the mid-80F range when the meeting began. We all were sweating but by the end of the meeting the temperature was a more bearable 75F which somehow felt really cool. But on the factory floor there were fans everywhere and while it was warm it was not uncomfortable and the employees seemed to not be bothered at all.
The probe centered a great deal on the amount of hours Foxconn factory workers were working. What was interesting to me is that during peak production, workers put in more than 60 hours a week on average. Apparently they were paid overtime for additional hours over what they signed on for. Since many of the workers travel far distances to work in factories in order to earn money, they live on the premises in dormitories during the week and some even on the weekends if they live too far away to travel back and forth. It’s possible that those workers counted on the overtime as often is the case here in the United States. But Apple acknowledging that it can play a part in making working conditions better for Foxconn’s employees is a positive development overall.
As China’s economy continues to grow and standards of living continue to improve, it will become more important for Chinese factories to provide technological solutions to problems and challenges and not just bodies. There are now new places in the world that can offer labor costs less expensively than China. Yet since the worker cost in a device like an iPad is small, the likelihood of moving production out of China is not as imminent as some people might like to believe. Accordingly the uneasy marriage between Foxconn and Apple will be around for quite a while yet.
Do you feel Chinese factory workers are being treated unfairly? And if so on what basis do you make that assertion?