Roger Lee Commentaries

Did you see any U.S. made car in the parking lot?  Sometimes from a small thing we can tell the mentality of the company.

Staying in a five-star hotel may give you some jubilant feeling of self-importance and prestige; staying in a business hotel may accompany you with a facade of career success. However they would not be able to provide you with the opportunities or the first-hand experience to interact with people of all-walks. After having stayed in business hotels like Holiday Inn Express or Courtyard Residence Inn, I did not feel that I had gotten smarter as TV commercials infer to; in contrary, I felt that I had been given a false sense of everything being honky-dory and everyone (businessman or business-woman) was doing well with a busy career: attending business meetings, arriving and departing the airport, renting a car and going out for business dinners etc. There is no sign of unemployment, distressed family life or poverty.

During a recent trip I decided to stay in a very modest motel in Santa Clara along the El Camino Real. The price tag for a week long stay was around $300 which, by Silicon Valley’s standard, was the lowest you could find.

The motel compound had only one floor with some 20 rooms. It had a small courtyard for children to play and there were a few vending machines nearby. A tall oak tree stood in the center of the courtyard. The room was very small and simple: no fixed telephone (but I could rent one phone with $5 charge) and no fancy bath room accessories. The 1950’s carpet and furniture were quite antiquated with some strange odors. The bath room sink had a small piece of soap and a small bottle of shampoo. The shampoo bottle must have been recycled many times because the printed letters on the bottle had been wore out so much that they could barely be read. However, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the bedding is spotlessly clean.
The receptionist was a very friendly lady in her 60’s. She lived on the premise with her grand-children. She explained to me the daily rate and the weekly rate as well as the internet connection.
Most folks stay here were on a semi-long term or long term basis: weekly, monthly or even longer. I noticed that there were many children playing in the motel compound. Some were riding small bicycles and some were just chasing after each other.

Walking to my room, the first motel patron I saw (his room door was wide open) was a man in his 40’s. His small room was filled with all his household belongings, from clothes to sport wares, books to cooking utensils. It doesn’t take a rocky scientist to realize that he is a newly divorced man having been kicked out of the house by his wife. In other words, he was a homeless man. His face was full of anxieties and his clothes were wrinkled. He may be (or may have been) some high-tech engineer or manager for a Silicon Valley company.  Whatever happened to him must have turned his life and family chrysalis upside down.

Before I arrived to my room, there were a couple in their 50’s standing outside their room smoking cigarettes. “Nice weather today. How are you? ”   they asked. “I am fine. Thank you,” I answered.  Then we had some small talks shooting the breeze. They are from a nearby town and had been homeless for more than one year until they came to this motel and the owner of the motel was nice enough to give the wife a part time cleaning job so she and her husband can stay in a room for almost free. Until a few years ago, her husband made $40/hour doing a painting job for a company in the Bay Area. Then the recession hit and the company was closed and he, lost his job. “We have no car, we have no nothing, but we are so grateful and thankful that we have a place to live,” she said, with some tear in her eyes. I told them that I have a rental car and if they need to go to get groceries please let me know so I can give them a ride. “Thank you, but we normally don’t want to bother people,” she replied.

I totally agree with Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.’s recent statement, that “The government has no business telling an individual what kind of light bulb to buy.”

Don’t get me wrong.  There is no doubt that the latest Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) bulbs have much higher energy efficiency than the Edison-era incandescent light bulbs that have been around for generations.  Personally, I have replaced almost half of our household light bulbs with the CFLs.  They consume less energy and last much longer.  Like many things in life, we adopt to the things brought to us by the new technology and become adapted well to it,  sometimes faster and sometimes slower. At the end of the day, the net cost vs.benefit prevails.

The argument isn’t whether or not the CFL has higher lighting efficiency; it isn’t about how much money each household can save each year on the electric bill (it is estimated that the average household can save $100 to $200 a year on the electricity); it isn’t how much carbon diode emission the conversion can reduce. It is about whether the consumers have the right to choose what light bulb they can use.  If incandescent light bulbs were banned, then your private reading room or bedroom’s  comforting lighting brought by the incandescent light bulbs would be replaced by cold, office-like and discomfort fluorescent light, just in the name of saving the environment.

Looking back to the history of computers.  The very second computer, ENIAC, came out in 1946 (the first computer was built by Professor John Atanasoff and Research Assistant Cliffort Berry at Iowa State University).  This gigantic machine  used 19,000 vacuum tube and weighted 30 tons. The energy it consumed was enormous.  Later on, the semiconductor based IC chips replaced the bulky vacuum tubes and the desktop PCs became the main stream home computers. The power consumption of a typical desk top computer with a CRT monitor was around 150 watts which was much less than that of the prior generation. Then came the laptop computer with LCD display, which consumed less than 10% of that of a desk top. Finally Apple invented the tablet computer which consumes less than half of a typical laptop would consumes.   In other words, from Desktop PC to Tablet, 95% of power consumption has been saved.

Interestingly, all these power saving transformation/revolution took place without any government’s interventions or any regulatory policies.

By government making the decision on banning the incandescent light bulbs, it would have the following undesirable effects:

1. The diminishing of incentives for the makers of compact fluorescent light bulbs to improve CFL’s lighting quality and cost and to compete further.
2. To prematurely force consumers to replace warm-colored lighting environments that incandescent light bulbs can provide compared to the cold and less comfortable light of the CFL or LED lights today.  How can you tell a loving couple having a romantic dinner under a warm and suiting candle-light-like incandescent lighting to switch to a cold and intelligation-like CFL light?
3. Since desk top computer consumes much more power than the laptop, would we have a new legislation to outlaw the desktop?  Or going one step further, since bigger house takes more energy to warm up in the winter and more electricity to cool down during the summer, would we have a new law to limit the physical house size for each family?  Where we draw the line?

The choice, in my view, should be made by the consumers. It did not take the government’s policy to switch from CRT-based TV to LCD-based TV, from vacuum-tube big desktop radio to semiconductor-based pocket radio, from 8-cylinder Grand Torino to a much more efficient 4-cylinder Chevy compact Cruze.

While many people talk about fiscal disciplines, President Obama is doing something about it by trying to eliminate the unfair tax cut for the super riches in the country while trying to cut the taxes for the middle class Americans.  It makes good sense for the Americans, and it makes good sense for America.

Turning on the radio on my way to Wal-Mart,  I scanned into a station and the cacophony voice of Rush Limbaugh dominated the talk show.  The topics was on the pending legislation to extend or not to extend the tax cut of those making $250K or above, the top 2% so to speak.

For many years,  some people, particularly the conservative Republicans have accused the democrats for being not fiscal disciplined, the “big spender,” and what not. Yet ironically, some of these very same high-minded, out-of-touch folks are pushing the permanent tax cut for the super riches in America . As we all know, this cut alone will add additional $700B deficit to the budget.

There is an old Chinese saying that  天下兴亡，匹夫有责 (tiān xià xīnɡ wánɡ ，pǐ fū yǒu zé ).  The English translation is: Whether  a nation stands or falls depends on ordinary citizens.  This may well be applied to Americans today.  We are facing a severe economic challenge. We have a huge budget deficit and trade deficit, and we have so high unemployment rate.  We need money to invest in areas that can stimulate the economic growth and create jobs; we need money to help, particularly during the Christmas season, the time for the perpetual love and share, those who lost their jobs due to the financial crisis (far beyond their control) and who sent out resumes day after day without getting a single word from the companies they have applied. Is it too much to ask the super rich to share the responsibility? Or for a super rich to postpone his or her purchase of the latest edition of Porsche, or skip a betting on the latest Christie’s art auction?

“The more money they have, the more jobs they will create” is what you would hear from the proponents. Of course if the super rich would use the money  saved from the tax cut and invest to create jobs for his or her community instead of pursuing bigger ticket items,  then I would undoubtedly support the tax cut for these folks.  After all, when it comes to business,  private sector is a much more efficient entity than the government.

Recently I stopped over in Tokyo’s Narita International Airport for a connecting flight. I had a few hours of layover so I went to the ANA Airlines VIP lounge to use their facility (free coffee, all snacks, soft drinks and yes, the internet) thanks to my United Airlines gold card membership.

Upon entering the lounge, I saw one lady talking to her laptop computer in Japanese. “Good,  there is an internet here”  I said to myself.  I then found a comfortable seat at a corner, plugged my PC power supply and helped myself with a nice cup of cappuccino and some dried fruit. “Very nice service and environment here.” I told one pleasant and  smiling Japanese waitress nearby. “Thank you” she replied with another smile.

“Is the wireless working well?” I asked a Japanese lady who was using her laptop surfing some Japanese website. “Oh yes, very easy to get into it.  And it is free,” she answered with a smile.

Wasting no time and being mindful that it was almost midnight back home in the U.S., I powered up the computer and opened my Internet Explorer and the Skype in hope that I could get to talk to my wife home before she hit the sack.   Earlier, I tried to use my U.S. phone to call her but it had no signals due to the lack of 3G compatibility. Now my only hope to communicate with family was to use the internet and skype.

The first page popped up was in Japanese of course. I clicked on the only non-Japanese word shown on the screen–a small “English” at the upper corner.  To my surprise, the free VIP lounge wireless internet login process for English users was very slow and burdensome. After many “agree” and “ok” clicks, the screen asked me whether to accept the terms of conditions (see the attached photo).

However, there was a problem:  it only gave me the choice of  “I do not accept the terms of use” instead of giving me two choices.

After a few more attempts, another screen showed up.  This time it was totally written in Japanese (see the attached photo) which I could not understand at all.

Finally, I acquiesed and powered off the computer,  just hoping that wife would not blame me for not calling her, and at the same time, admiring those Japanese users who seemed to have a jovious times on the internet,  and hoping that the next destination would be more xenophilia.

I was sitting near the window in a Chinese restaurant on the second floor of Shangri-La Shenzhen Hotel next to the Hong Kong border. It was a Sunday evening. Sunday is the day I go out and have some fine and nutritious meals, for during the weekdays, I usually have simple meals from the company cafe or from fast food chains.

I ordered a one-person set menu B, which includes:  (1)Shark’s fin soup with whole papaya (2) Braised sea cucumber with mushroom, (3) Sauteed spring bean with minced pork and preserved vegetable, (4) Fried rice with crab roe (5)Fried snow beef steak with black pepper sauce and (6) Seasoned fruit plate. It cost 218 RMB which was around $30, a kind of pricey but considering this is my once-a-week nutrition balance meal, I acquiesced.

While waiting for the meal, I turned on my computer. One headline news popped up: “Honolulu, Hawaii. Gov. Linda Lingle on Friday signed a bill prohibiting the possession, sale or distribution of shark fins. The bill passed the state House and Senate with broad support earlier this year.”

Two thoughts came to me immediately after I read the news. First, I was glad that some people somewhere have decided to take some concrete action to slow down the slaughter of sharks (it is estimated that each year more than 100 million sharks are killed, and one key cause is this very shark’s fin soup); secondly, I looked at what I had just ordered, feeling  a little bit  guilty and said to my self, “I’d better enjoy this very shark’s fin soup today, for very soon this delicacy may become a thing of the past.”

I must admit that I have a mixed feeling toward this legislation. While I applause the new Hawaii legislation with a full understanding of the importance of preserving a healthy ocean eco-system, I have to say that I don’t mind to have a bowl of shark’s fin soup once in a while simply because of its texture and taste when cooking with other ingredients such as crab meat and chicken broth, not because of believing in its ostensibly wholesome medical benefits many Asian folks religiously conceive. In fact, the high level of mercury and other heavy metals stored inside Shark’s cartilages is something to be concerned and considered.

I then did some search on other endangered ocean species and Bluefin tuna came to my attention. Maybe the Bluefin tuna is something we should put on the list next, but for now, the sashimi and sushi have not yet become the institution or household name other than in Japan, which is a good news for Bluefin tuna for sure.

The more I read about the synthetic CDO (Collateral Debt Obligation) and their derivatives , the more I am perplexed.

I always thought that the American insurance, financial and banking companies like AIG, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citi Bank, etc. are conservative institutions run by an ultra-conservative board of faces like Professor Kingsfield as pictured in Hollywood movies. I never associated Las Vegas casinos with these revered institutions.

The more I read and understood the synthetic CDO and the financial instrument and derivatives such as Credit Default Swap (CDS), the more I have come to realize that Casaes Palace, Treasure Isalnd of Las Vegas Strip and Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers of Wall Street have a lot in common: they bet.  Moreover, often the banks bet on something they don’t have. As Senator Branche Lincoln rightly argues that “naked shorting” (using derivatives to bet against assets you don’t hold) is just like buying life insurance on your neighbor’s house-and then setting it afire.

If they themselves don’t set the fire, at least I don’t think they would alert the fire department if they saw the wild fire approaching the house, let alone rushing out to put the fire off.

However, there is a difference between Las Vegas casinos and the banks.  The banks play with “the house money.” As Randall Wray, professor of University of Missouri-Kansas City puts it, “At most, banks put up 8% of their owners’ money, and the Treasury kicks in 92% that the banks use to buy assets or to make bets. It is as if you went to Las Vegas and Uncle Sam provided 92 cents of every dollar you gambled. And if you still manage to run into trouble, Uncle Ben Bernanke stands ready to bail you out with free cash. Quite a deal! And a gamble you literally cannot lose.”

The normal business activities are regulated by the government agencies; however, the “gambling/betting” activities are not, and the “gambling/betting” are the nutshell of the problems.

Whether we like it or not, they are indeed too big to fail. The bankers know it, and know it too well. Even the US government has to depend on these “good old boys” institutions to function properly. For example, recently the Treasury Department decided to cash in the CitiGroup stock they purchased under the financial rescue plan. Guess who arranged the sale of the CitiGroup stock for the Treasury Department? You might have guessed it right: JPMorgan. It therefore doesn’t take a rocky scientist to figure out that if any of the financial institutions fails, the devastation it brings to the economy will be tremendous. We still have the vivid memory of what happened after Lehman Brothers failed and the domino reactions that followed in the Fall of 2008.

That is the concern we have ab0ut the American financial institutions today. Many people credited this to the legacy the former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan has left behind. His “Ayn Rand-style” notion that “Bankers’ self-interest will be good enough a safe guard against, and deter anyone from wrong doings or high-risk taking activities” was what Mr Greenspan had believed in strongly prior to the crisis.  “I was 70% right and 30% wrong,” said Mr Greenspan in a senate hearing.  I don’t know whether this 30% includes his resistance in regulating banks and financial institutions’ derivatives activities.

Financial reform is not therefore something that we can wait and take care of it later; it is something we must do and take care of before a bigger CDO and their derivatives crisis hit the economy again. One scaring reminder: 2008/2009 financial crisis was triggered by the subprime problem yet the subprime-based synthetic CDOs and their derivatives are only a small percentage of the total CDOs and derivatives the financial institutions are gambling on and have gotten into. If betting on subprime were a miniture schnauzer in size;  betting on interest rate would be an elephant in dimension.

While a lot of people believe that the Senator Blanche Lincoln’s financial reform proposal might be somewhat unnecessarily too tough, it ceratinly raises the awareness of the issue and its urgency for a good discussion and debate.

On my way from San Francisco to Hong Kong aboard the United Flight 869 on April 5^th, 2010, there was one gentleman sitting next to me. We both were on the economy-plus seating zone which gave us a few inches of leg room to stretch to. He is in his early 60’s, not much a scholarly look but doesn’t have typical blue-collar attributes either, a little bit stocky but not too much overweight. We said hi to each other before the plane took off, without too much into conversation. He watched the in-flight movies while I wore my ear plugs and dosed off.

A few hours before landing, we were given the Hong Kong immigration registration form to fill. I asked him where he was heading to, “Hong Kong, then China, then maybe the Philippines or Thailand,” he replied. This was where the discourse started. “My name is Llyod,” he introduced himself. After a few casual exchanges, we started a long and interesting conversation which was an eye-opening in a sense but was more a new perspective to understand and appreciate the beauty of the vast differences in looking at life, work and material things.

Llyod was an owner of a small welding company located in Houston, Texas, having a half dozen of employees. His wife died two years earlier of illness. Before the financial crisis, he was doing quite well making good money, especially making a small fortune by importing some steel pipes from China. “It cost me $8 to import a steel pipe from China that I could sell for at least $60 here in the US.”  But as more people got involved in the import and export business, the price plunged and then the financial crisis hit. He lost quite a lot of money over the last two years but still managed to save enough before he decided to close the business and called it quit.

“I miss being a boss,” said Llyod,  his eyes registering some loneliness and sadness. “but I still have enough money to live for many years,” he added. I then asked him what his plan was now being free of the day-in day-out grind.

Llyod’s replies intrigued me, in fact, I think it is fascinating to hear what he had done and what he was going to do. After he closed his business, letting go of his employees, lo and behold, Llyod sold his house, his condo, his cars and his beloved truck. Before he turned the house key to the buyer, he called upon his two children–one son and one daughter, both of who live in Houston area having their own families, and asked them to come to the house where they had grown up. “Kids, look around the house and take whatever items you like.” The next day, he sold all the household items that his children did not take, including items of  sentimental values, via a garage sale. “Sooner or later, everyone has to let go of everything,” said Llyod.  He did not keep anything; he did not rent a storage to store his important documents; he did not have a mail box. In fact, he did not have a mailing address either. “I spent many weeks scanning all my important photos and papers such as tax related documents and stored them to two 1-Tera Byte hard drives. I have two suitcases with me and I packed one hard drive to each suitcase just in case. I use internet banking, credit card payment etc,” he added. “Most likely I will be ending up in the Philippines where I can rent an apartment for a few hundred dollars a month. My budget is a few thousand dollars a month which should not be a problem with my current savings.”

“Would your children support what you are doing?” I asked. “Yes, in fact, they all went to the airport to see me off. We hugged and said goodbye to each other yesterday,” replied Llyod.

I don’t know if I would have the same courage to do what Llyod is doing if I were under similar circumstances someday. However, I must applaud him for his unorthodox behavior and for his eschew of earthly material possession.

I don’t know what location or what country Llyod is now since he did not have a set schedule or plan, or at least he did not tell anyone. I do wish him well and of great happiness in his retirement and his new adventures. There is no question that he is a free man, a very free man in every sense, without phone call, without monthly bills, without anything.

Being a natural food epicure, I have a fastidious tastes in food.  Though nowadays much talk has been on health food, green food, low fat diet etc, I must say that once in a while, a piece or two of Chinese Dongbo Belly Port (东坡肉）can be really rewarding and enjoyable. 

东波肉 is a slow braised pork belly that gives you rich yet no-fatty mouth-watering experience.  It is the “New Orleans Oyster Bienville of the Fast East.”

Legend has it that Song dynasty officer 苏东坡,  upon completion of now famous Hangzhou West Lake scenic route, wanted to reward the labor force who had worked so hard and for so long, came up with this special recipe that later named after him.

To prepare the Dongbo Rou, you need cut the pork belly into squares of roughly 2 inch by 2 inch, then boil the cut pork belly until half cooked, marinade for 10 minutes, then deep fry until golden brown.  Now place the fried pork, the remaining ingredients and seasoning inside a ceramic bowl (with bowl cover)  onto a steaming tray.  Seal and steam at high heat for 3 hours until it is tender.

• 1.5 lb  pork belly (with skin. Skin is critical) 
• 1 tbsp light soy sauce
• 3 cups oil for deep frying
• 2 stalks spring oniio
• 5 slices ginger
• 1 star anisseed
• 3 tbsp sugar (seasoning)
• 5 tbsp light soy sauce (seasoning)
• 150 ml shaoxing wine (seasoning)
• 100 g cooked green vege
• 1 tbsp corn flour mix with water, thickening

One of our all time favorite TV figures was Charles Kuralt of CBS. From “On the Road” show to “Sunday Morning with Charles Kuralt” to “Charles Kuralt’s America” audio books after Kuralt’s retirement, his sonorous and avuncular voice has been an institution to our family. When we are on the road as a family, Charles Kuralt’ stories are there; before we finish our exciting day and head to the sack, his voice on North Carolina Blue Ridge Mountains or South Carolina mocking birds are likely to be there. In fact, we have learnt a great deal from his vivid sharings of many great America experience from Alaska Native’s totem pole to Charleston’s magnolia garden to New Orleans’ famous oyster bienville restaurants. He, as someone has put it, was a poet laureate for a common man.

There have been many fine journalists and reporters over the years. Yet Charles Kuralt’s unique view on life and work, his passion for adventure and his love to travel to different places to meet different people, and his ability to tell a wonderful story based on a very ordinary event or by an ordinary American are something that distinguish him from the rest.

Love your work but know when to quit is something that we all need to learn from Charles. “I don’t think one should ever come t my stage of life and have to look back and say, Gosh, I wish I hadn’t spent all those years doing that job I was never really interested in,”  said Charles. Referring to his decision to quit CBS in 1994, “….we were consumed at each other; we were content. Then I woke up one morning and realized that I didn’t love her anymore… the desire for substance and reality came over me. .. maybe sooner or later this craving will hit everybody.”