Sep
01
Uncompromised cash hauling
By Katie Kieffer
2011 Ford Explorer. Image credit: Ford Motor Company.
This week, I was one of a few people who were lucky enough to see Ford unveil the all-new 2011 Ford Explorer at the Minneapolis Club.
Here is my exclusive video interview with Ford’s Explorer Chief Engineer, Jim Holland. Video produced by Charles Eide of EideCom:
When Henry Ford introduced the Ford Model T in 1908, his innovation changed history forever. Ford continues to innovate and gain market share by releasing newer and better versions of its top products. For example, the 2011 Explorer is twice as strong, 30 percent more fuel efficient, boasts simplified technology like voice activated climate control and introduces sustainable soy materials into the SUV’s interior. It also includes a rear inflatable belt – a first in the industry.
It is exciting to see that, even during a recession, it is possible for corporations to achieve profitability without government aid. Ford was the single American automaker that did not take bailout funds. While Ford joined Chrysler and GM in lobbying Congress for funds in November of 2008, Ford was denied legislative aid. Later, when Chrysler and GM accepted taxpayer dollars, Ford did not ask for government aid in 2009, stating that it could get by on its own.
Clearly, Ford’s independence drove its profitability. Ford is reaping the rewards of its independence, as it is the sole thriving member of the “Big 3” automakers.
The New York Times reports,
“During a time of crisis throughout the auto industry in recent years, Ford emerged as the sole American automaker in a position to survive the steepest sales downturn in decades without a government bailout. That helped the company improve its reputation and win new customers.
In July 2010 Ford said it earned $2.6 billion in the second quarter and expects to have more cash than debt by the end of 2011. It was the fifth consecutive quarterly profit for Ford, whose turnaround has been gaining momentum as it has increased sales and market share in the United States.
Ford earned a net profit of $2.1 billion, or 50 cents a share, in the previous quarter, producing its largest pretax operating profit in six years. The company also outsold G.M. in February 2010, something that had not happened in more than 50 years, aside from several months in 1998 when G.M. workers were on strike.”
Aug
31
After the sushi…
By Katie Kieffer
Affari on rooftop of SEVEN Sushi Ultralounge and SKYBAR. Image credit: Alicia Orvik Photography.
…came the photos of sushi.
Last Monday night, I hosted a special event called Affari for young professionals in the Twin Cities in collaboration with the Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal. It was held on the elegant rooftop of SEVEN Sushi Ultralounge and SKYBAR.
If you’re curious to see what Affari was all about, then here is a tasting of Affari – courtesy of Alicia Orvik Photography:
Affari guests enjoyed sushi from SEVEN's kitchen. Image credit: Alicia Orvik Photography.
Katie Kieffer speaks at Affari. Image credit: Alicia Orvik Photography. Copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
Affari guests lounge in SEVEN's SKYBAR. Image credit: Alicia Orvik Photography.
Guests linger at Affari on SEVEN's rooftop. Image credit: Alicia Orvik Photography.
More images available on the Katie Kieffer Facebook page.
Aug
26
Vornado State of Mind
By Katie Kieffer
Rendering of Vornado Tower in Manhattan. Image credit: Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects/AP.
Let’s hear it for New York. Let’s hear it for the New York City Council’s vote on Wednesday in favor of a new, 1,200-foot tower, Vornado Tower.
The Tower:
Vornado Tower is the new kid on the block. She will become the second tallest building in Manhattan. Vornado Tower will be built on Seventh Avenue near Madison Square Garden and Penn Station at the site of the tired Hotel Pennsylvania. This is widely considered the perfect location for a lofty building.
The Tower’s Friends:
The tower’s advocates acknowledge the value the development would bring in the middle of a recession. The tower will add “6,000 new construction jobs and $3.3 billion in new economic output,” reports The Wall Street Journal. Additionally, the developer, Vornado Realty Trust, plans to add value by investing, “150 million on improving infrastructure around Penn Station, including corridors connecting with Herald Square.”
Prior to casting his vote in favor of the new tower, Councilman Leroy Comrie, asked his peers to consider this question: “Is New York City a snapshot taken in 2010 to be held in perpetuity, or is New York City an evolving, dynamic entity?”
The Tower’s Foes:
While Vornado Tower will be 34 feet lower than the Empire State building, the Empire’s primary owners, Peter and Anthony Malkin, are still shaking in their boots. Competition does not sit well with them. They are fearful that the Vornado Tower will threaten the Empire State Building’s unique place on the New York City Skyline.
The Malkins went so far as to conduct a survey of tourists to see what they thought about the proposed development. Because, apparently, it’s important for New York to consider the opinion of people who do not work or live in Manhattan. More likely, tourists comprised the only demographic the Malkins could find who would categorically oppose the new tower’s development.
Business Week reports, ‘The Malkins took out a full-page ad in the Aug. 23 New York Times denouncing the proposal, and commissioned a poll suggesting that two-thirds of New York’s visitors said the new tower would “degrade the character” of the skyline.’
The Verdict:
Forget the Empire State Building. New York wants to grow and she wants to create jobs. She is not going to let tourists or Malkin Securities get in her way.
The City Council approved the Vornado Tower 47-1, and the only man who can veto the City Council’s decision, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, is an outspoken proponent of the tower.
Mayor Bloomberg responded to the Malkins by saying, “Anybody that builds a building in New York City changes its skyline — we don’t have to run around to every other owner and apologize,” he said. “One guy owns a building, he’d like to have it be the only tall building — I’m sorry, that’s not the real world.”
'New York Sunset.' Image credit: jerryfergusonphotography on Flickr.
As Jay-Z and Alicia Keys know:
In New York,
Concrete jungle where dreams are made of,
There’s nothing you can’t do,
Now you’re in New York,
these streets will make you feel brand new,
the lights will inspire you,
lets here it for New York, New York, New York
Aug
16
Meet me on the rooftop
By Katie Kieffer
SEVEN Sushi Ultralounge and SKYBAR in downtown Minneapolis. Image credit: SEVEN.
If you are a young professional and rising star in the Twin Cities, I invite you to join me on the rooftop of SEVEN Sushi Ultralounge and SKYBAR next Monday, August 23rd from 6-9 pm for Affari. Admittance is complimentary, but you need to pre-register here as all guest names will be checked upon entry. Space is limited, so register now. Affari is filling up and is just a week away!
Agenda
6:00 – 9:00 pm networking and hors d’oeuvres
7:30 pm presentation by Katie Kieffer
Highlights
- Free t-shirts to the first 150 guests, courtesy of Katie Kieffer
- Hors d’oeuvres, courtesy of the The Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal
- Door prize drawing, courtesy of the The Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal
Sponsors
Katie Kieffer and The Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal
Limited additional sponsorship opportunities available upon inquiry.
Sushi at SEVEN Sushi Ultralounge and SKYBAR in downtown Minneapolis. Image credit: SEVEN.
Note: Images used with permission from SEVEN. More images available on SEVEN’s Facebook page.
Aug
11
Minnesotan wins free speech
By Katie Kieffer
Grizzly bear fishing for salmon, Brooks Falls, Katmai National Park, Alaska. Image credit: Craig Mellish, Florentine Films.
A Coon Rapids, Minn. man named Michael Boardley won big last week. He succeeded expanding free speech in national parks for all Americans. In Michael Boardley v. Department of Interior, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit determined that Americans do not need permits in order to ‘demonstrate, distribute brochures or engage in other “expressive” activities in parks,’ reports the Los Angeles Times.
The appellate court’s decision is worthy of celebration given the scrutiny that the current administration is giving to free speech. Remember when I told you about the FCC bubble wrapping the internet? Politicians clamping down on Facebook? Comedy Central micromanaging South Park? Today, it is my pleasure to report a positive story about free speech.
In 2007, Boardley had significant difficulty obtaining a permit to distribute Christian literature in South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore National Park. He tenaciously pursued a legal challenge to the inconsistency and difficulty in the permitting process.
Mount Rushmore. Image credit: KAREN BLEIER/AFP/Getty Images.
Boardley argued that, “Yosemite … required speech permit applications to be submitted at least 10 days in advance, while Yellowstone National Park requested applications several months in advance,” reports McClatchy Newspapers.” Last Friday, the three-panel court ruled in favor of Beardsley by determining that the national park system’s permitting requirement violated the First Amendment.
Judge Janice Rogers Brown explained the court’s decision with ‘several hypothetical examples, including a Girl Scout leader who musters her scouts at Glacier National Park in Montana and “proceeds to lecture them about the effects of global warming.” This could be construed as a “gathering” that needs a permit, Brown reasoned.’
“It is offensive, not only to the values protected by the First Amendment, but to the very notion of a free society, that . . . a citizen must first inform the government of her desire to speak to her neighbors and then obtain a permit,” Brown noted, citing an earlier Supreme Court ruling,’ reports McClatchy Newspapers.
This case illustrates the power of tenacious citizens to defend the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Boardley’s persistence and logical reasoning paid yielded a big win for expanding and preserving free speech in America.
Alaska Brown Bear in Hallo Bay, Katmai National Park, Alaska. Image credit: 'Charge!' by Marshmallow on flickr.
Aug
09
Paying for suicide
By Katie Kieffer
Golden Gate Bridge – San Francisco, CA.
Suicide hurts people. It hurts the person who commits suicide. It also hurts their friends, family, neighbors and coworkers.
So, who should have to pay for suicide? Who should have to shoulder the burden and cushion the fall of those who choose death?
The Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District in San Francisco, California thinks the taxpayer should have to.
The Golden Gate Bridge is the world’s most popular place to commit suicide. Last month, the New York Times reported, “The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the agency that oversees transportation financing in the Bay Area, approved $5 million in federal money for the final engineering and design of a steel mesh net hanging 20 feet below the span, to catch jumpers. Officials estimate the net system will cost an additional $45 million to build and install.”
Suicide attempts from the Golden Gate Bridge have received more attention since the production of a 2006 documentary by Eric Steel called “The Bridge.” Steel’s crew filmed the bridge for an entire year (2004) and captured 23 jumps on camera.
This movie provided suicide barrier advocates with the piece of persuasive emotional media they needed to sway the district to complete a $2 million study in 2005 of “suicide deterrent options.” It is surprising how a state embroiled in debt, such as California, can bow to emotional and political pressure to spend millions of taxpayer dollars in an unproven attempt to end suicide attempts.
Even after completion of the study, there is still no concrete evidence that this net will reduce suicide overall. The study focused on how to design a net that would conform to wind stability measures and meet both historical and aesthetic preservation requirements.
The total $52 million cost of building the steel mesh net does not include the ongoing maintenance costs for the net or for the “cherry picker” truck that will retrieve jumpers. While the net’s $5 million design costs will be funded by federal taxpayer money, the additional $45 million necessary to build the bridge is still lacking.
Some questions worth asking:
Is this an appropriate burden for taxpayers? Would private funding or charities be more appropriate revenue sources to shoulder the burden of preventing the approximately 18 suicide jumps per year that have occurred since the bridge opened in 1937? Will the net motivate people to find another route to end their lives? Will the net entice a new demographic of jumpers who are seeking the thrill and attention of jumping into and being rescued from the net?
This clip from the movie showcases individuals offering testimonials of how their friend Gene Sprauge‘s suicide hurt them. They express pain and anger over Sprauge’s choice to ignore their help and end his life. The clip leaves you wondering whether it is appropriate to expect taxpayers to pay millions of dollars to prevent suicide from the world’s current suicide hot spot – only to discover that sad and desperate people will find another place to romanticize death.
Aug
04
Cornered in a museum
By Katie Kieffer
Venice, Italy. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
Imagine living in a place where things rarely improved or modernized. Imagine living a modern life in a quaint museum of ancient ruins. There are real people living in such a place today. Welcome to Italy.
I recently returned from spending a month abroad and I had the opportunity to talk to many of the locals in Rome, Venice, Bologna, San Miniato and Florence.
My conversations with the locals help to illustrate why the U.S. needs to take proactive steps to preserve freedom and free enterprise.
Piazzale Michelangelo in Florence, Italy. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
The Italian Perspective:
My assessment after talking to the locals throughout Italy is that there is no longer an “Italian Dream.” Italy itself is full of beautiful ancient remains. It is an amazing tribute to the glories of the Roman Empire, but falls short on displaying modern accomplishments. Italy is a wonderful place for tourists to visit and reminisce, but the locals told me that Italian laws and restrictions make it very difficult for them to achieve economic wealth.
For instance, when I visited San Miniato, I toured the Agrisole Vineyards. I spoke with the woman who runs the agency that operates the vineyard. She told me that the laws that regulate her industry make it “very difficult” for her to run a “profitable vineyard.”
This is too bad, since wine and olive oil are two products that Italy can produce better than most places around the world. Furthermore, Italy can produce these products on her own – the anti-business legal environment is the only real impediment.
Agrisole’s agency director also expressed her regret regarding Italy’s failure to adopt modern technology and innovation that would make life and business matters more efficient. She wistfully told me, “Everything works in America. Nothing works in Italy.”
Agrisole Vineyards, San Miniato, Italy. Wine: Chianti 2008 D.O.C.G. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
I also sat next to an Italian gentleman on a train while traveling from Bologna to Venice. He shared with me that he has friends who live in America who tell him that they are able to buy and build “large homes with pools and many bedrooms.” He said that he would never be able to do the same thing in Italy because it costs so much and is so difficult to build anything new.
Furthermore, he pointed out that since Italy’s rich history, quaint countrysides and ancient ruins draw tourists, Italy compels its citizens to “preserve” rather than “rebuild.” He told me, “In America, if there is an old building that is falling apart, you tear it down and build a new one. But, in Italy, we have to keep it.”
Certainly, neither I nor the Italians would recommend tearing down historic monuments of ancient times. Rather, I think the government should loosen unnecessary restrictions on small businesses and individual citizens. A thriving free enterprise system would make it easier for Italians to run profitable businesses, live in more comfortable dwellings and afford modern technology and conveniences that many Americans take for granted.
I thought these stories were interesting to share with you because they help illustrate what can happen to a country if it neglects capitalism and free enterprise and puts too many restrictions on its citizens. The Italians have essentially become subservient to tourists because they lack a true free enterprise system. Museums are fine to visit, but I’d rather not to live in one.
Aug
02
Hailing the Reagan of Rome
Part 3 in a series
By Katie Kieffer
Augustus. Vatican Museums, Rome. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
America can find hope and direction during recession by looking to Rome. Specifically, the U.S. would be wise to follow in the footsteps of the ‘Ronald Reagan of Rome.’
When you think of Rome, you probably think of Julius Caesar. But, in fact, Rome was not always governed by a dictator. Caesar was a politician and a military conqueror. He appointed himself dictator and thereby contributed to the end of Rome’s Republic and the beginning of a more imperial system that ultimately weakened Rome to the point of destruction.
So, Caesar was not necessarily the Roman leader our founding fathers looked to when they were modeling America’s democratic republic. Caesar’s adopted son and successor, Augustus, was who I’ll refer to as the “Ronald Reagan of Rome.”
Ronald Reagan. Image credit: Michael J. Deas.
Augustus, like Ronald Reagan, cut unnecessary government spending. He reigned in the food subsidy (which I discussed here) and kept it at a fixed number. He also lowered taxes and instituted the practice of direct taxation, which was much more fair.
Under Augustus’ reign, Romans suddenly had a huge incentive to produce and become involved in the free enterprise system and the economy flourished as a result.
Rather than hoarding revenue from taxes like other emperors, Augustus invested it back in the people of Rome. He repaired the roads and temples and built many new public baths, aqueducts and buildings. He also pulled Rome out Iran, which was a huge drain on the Roman Empire.
If Augustus’ successors had all upheld his policies, Rome may not have fallen. Unfortunately, most of the emperors who came after Augustus sought their own political power and satisfaction – choosing to raise taxes and expand the military to control the people rather than allowing the free enterprise system to flourish.
As Americans, we can choose to allow our politicians to spend and tax our country into perpetual recession, or we can demand accountability. We can ask our politicians to take a second look at the man who inspired our founding fathers, the ‘Ronald Reagan of Rome:’ Caesar Augustus.
Want more? You are invited to read Part 1 and Part 2 of this series.
Primary Sources:
HERITAGE LECTURES: The Lessons of the Roman Empire of America Today by J. Rufus Fears, PhD.
The Cato Journal: Vol. 14, Number 2, Fall 1994, “How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome,” by Bruce Bartlett.
Jul
29
Watching Rome burn
Part 2 in a series
By Katie Kieffer
Capitoline Sunset. Rome, Italy. Image credit: flickr – MarcelGermain.
If Rome was so prosperous and peaceful during the first and second century AD, why did she fall?
You’ve probably heard people say, “Rome was not built in a day.” Well, Rome also did not fall overnight. It took repeated corruption and poor governance over time for Rome to reach a point of such extreme weakness that German barbarians were able to conquer her.
Given how similar America’s balanced constitution to that of the Roman Republic’s and given America’s similar respect for equality and freedom before the law, it is very important for us to understand why Rome fell so that we do not make the same mistakes that she did.
Today, I’m going to share with you how Rome brought on her own destruction. She weakened herself to the point of no return through inflation, excessive taxation, military over-extension and political corruption.
Subsidies
Rome planted the seeds her own destruction when she began subsidizing bread for all Roman males and raising taxes. As early as 58 B.C., Rome started a policy of distributing free grain to Roman citizens. Over time, emperors expanded the dole to include free pork, oil and even wine. Roman politicians subsidized frivolous items for political gain and helped bankrupt Rome.
'Roma nel bicchiere – Rome in the glass.' Image credit: flickr – Geomangio.
High Taxes
Rome needed to charge high taxes to pay for its growing subsidies and military costs. As Rome expanded geographically and became militarily involved in the Middle East, she needed to pay for an army to keep the people in line and make sure they were paying their taxes. The taxes were high and inconsistent. Eventually, free Romans chose to sell themselves as servants to wealthy Roman landowners because they could no longer afford to pay Rome’s taxes.
The Roman government ended up denouncing individual freedoms entirely and began seizing private property such as food or cattle or land. The free enterprise system eroded and Romans became very unhappy and discontent because they were either forced to perpetually work in an occupation or trade dictated by the state or they were forced to join the army – for life.
Inflation
In order to pay for ever-growing military and government costs, many Roman emperors chose to devalue the Roman currency which led to inflation. In truth, inflation was just another form of taxation.
For examle, the denarious was the basic Roman coin. The denarious started out as a 100% silver coin. However, over time, subsequent Roman emperors reduced the silver content of the denarious so that by the middle of third century AD, it had just a 5 percent silver content.
Intervention in the Middle East
Julius Caesar was a military conqueror and he zealously expanded the Roman empire.
Statue of Julius Caesar. Rome, Italy. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
By the second century AD, nearly the entire Middle East was under Rome’s military rule. As you can imagine, the Middle East became a huge drain on Rome’s military and Rome’s citizens. Not only was the Middle East a huge distraction for Rome’s commander-in-chief, but it was a huge drain on Rome’s economy.
Does Rome’s intervention in the Middle East remind you of the U.S. government’s drive to spend time, resources and money it doesn’t have by trying to patrol the world like ‘World Police‘ – as the creators of South Park might say?
The Fall of Rome
Eventually, Rome’s citizens became so poor that they could not afford to pay the government’s taxes and maintain Rome’s military. As Rome’s politicians became increasingly corrupt and dismissive of individual liberty, vice replaced virtue in Roman society. Adultery, divorce, prostitution and broken families supplanted the once stable, family-oriented culture.
In the end, Rome fell because she abandoned her constitution and her cultural values. After she had become both spiritually and economically weak, she was conquered by German invaders. Interestingly, many Romans actually welcomed the takeover because the barbarians allowed Romans to return to relative self-governance.
Stay tuned to find out about “Rome’s Ronald Reagan” and the best hope for American free enterprise. For Part 1 in this series, click here.
Primary Sources:
HERITAGE LECTURES: The Lessons of the Roman Empire of America Today by J. Rufus Fears, PhD.
The Cato Journal: Vol. 14, Number 2, Fall 1994, “How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome,” by Bruce Bartlett.
Jul
27
‘Roma-romama!’
Part 1 in a series
By Katie Kieffer
Katie Kieffer in front of the Monumento Nazionale a Vittorio Emanuele II in Rome. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
Our founding fathers were obsessed with the Roman Republic. They studied it meticulously and their goal was to form a democratic republic in the United States of America that would replicate and mirror the Roman Republic’s strengths while avoiding Rome’s mistakes.
In the first and second centuries AD, Rome was governed by a balanced constitution. The Roman Republic was a decentralized government. There were checks and balances on power, which our founding fathers liked. There was a Senate and three law-making citizen assemblies that had the power to influence and guide the decisions of the consul or the commander-in-chief. Rome held popular elections for the offices of chief magistrates.
Roman jurists like Ulpian, rooted the law in the belief that all men were created equal and they had inalienable rights like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The taxes were so low that the average Roman citizen only had to work two days a year to pay his taxes. Consequently, the Roman Empire experienced great economic growth, peace and prosperity during this time. Rome herself was free from foreign domination and expanded geographically.
Like the United States, the Roman Republic was also successful because it was united by a strong bond of spirituality and common values. The Romans adopted many of the cultural values of classical Greece and, consequently, they were united by common values and a common spirituality. Jupiter Optimus Maximus was Rome’s imperial divinity. The Roman law upheld the values of the culture and protected individual freedom.
Rome’s influence on America goes beyond our constitution. Even America entertainment and culture, still, to this day, reveal Rome’s influence on America. Take the Colosseum, for example.
Colosseum – Rome. Image copyright Katie Kieffer. All rights reserved.
This elliptical amphitheater in the heart of Rome is where gladiators fought. It could seat 50,000 roaring fans and it was the largest amphitheater in the entire Roman Empire.
Now, think about the comparisons between gladiator games in the coliseum and football, which is America’s most popular sport. In American football, you have that gladiator style of play and the loud and enormous crowds. There are even some football teams that refer to their stadiums as coliseums. And there’s the Super Bowl, the biggest gladiatorial-style game of them all – which is always denoted by Roman numerals.
Why does Rome’s rise and fall matter to the U.S.?
So, if Rome was so prosperous and peaceful during the first and second century AD, why did she eventually fall? You’ve probably heard people say, “Rome wasn’t built in a day.” Well, Rome also did not fall overnight. It took repeated corruption and poor governance over time for Rome to reach a point of such weakness that she was eventually able to be conquered by the German Barbarians.
In this series, I will share the story of how Rome rose to success as a world super power. I will also showcase the actions Rome took that brought on her own destruction. Given how similar America’s balanced constitution is to that of the Roman Republic’s and given America’s similar respect for equality and freedom before the law, it is very important for us to understand why Rome fell so that we do not make the same mistakes she did. Stay tuned for more.
Primary Sources:
HERITAGE LECTURES: The Lessons of the Roman Empire of America Today by J. Rufus Fears, PhD.
The Cato Journal: Vol. 14, Number 2, Fall 1994, “How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome,” by Bruce Bartlett.
