My Veterans

I first published this in 2007 and I added a "Word History" in 2012. I periodically rerun it, as it was a memorable experience in my life.

During my time in property management, I had lots of experiences and made many acquaintances, including a good number of American military veterans. Just like any group of people, there were some veterans who certainly were not model citizens, but overall, this group made an impression on me more than any other. Now, military veterans are everywhere in American society, but the specific group of veterans I’m going to emphasize here is a group composed of men who had problems with drugs and alcohol (it just so happens these were all men, but there could just have likely been women involved). They were part of a treatment program at our VA hospital in Cleveland (the then Brecksville unit) where the veterans had to actually live at the hospital facility where they received the treatment and the counseling for their addiction. To be quite honest, there were some rough and tough folks involved in this program, as many had been living out on the streets, but they had finally sought treatment; treatment that could last for many months or even for a year or two.

After the VA officials determined that a person had made sufficient progress, they would help them find work, and then housing. I want to emphasize, this was NOT some government give away program, nor did the VA coddle any of these guys. It was tough, and I can tell you the TREMENDOUS RESPECT I have for the VA counselors who worked in this program. At first I was a bit taken back by how tough talking the counselors really were in dealing with the veterans who first entered the program, or especially with those who went back to their addictions and had to re-enter the program, but it’s a tough world, and the counselors were only dealing with the harsh realities of folks trapped in their own addictions. Once a veteran was committed to trying to straighten out his life, the counselors relaxed the tough talk. I can testify how much these veterans respected the counselors as they moved through the program.

The VA tried a cooperative program with the local housing authority to provide Section 8 vouchers to veterans who were preparing to leave the treatment program. Again, this was not a give away program, as the veterans HAD to have a job, and show responsibility for a certain period of time before being able to move out on their own. The housing authority only paid a small portion of each veteran’s rent; I just forget the percentage, but I believe it was no more than thirty percent of the rent, and in many cases it was less than that. The VA monitored each veteran’s employment record, and then their tenant record; that is, the VA made sure the veteran paid their share of the rent and kept their living quarters in decent condition. When I had a problem with a veteran, all I had to do was call my VA contact, and she sent someone out to the property within a day or two to check on the situation. Let me make this clear, the program was not one hundred percent successful, but I’m happy to say that there were more successes than failures.

Over time, I developed a good relationship with many of these veterans. As I said, there were failures, and one guy in particular, whom I recall, went back to the streets. One little story on the positive side, a veteran was moving into the building one day, after more than a year in the recovery program. He always seemed to have “a chip on his shoulder,” but this story shows how that chip finally fell off. The building office overlooked a busy street across from a feeding center for homeless people. After the veteran had signed all of the paperwork to move in, he went out to get his belongings from someone who had transported him to the building. I was looking out the window when I saw two homeless guys approach and then call out to him. They may have known him from his “previous” life, but I’m not certain of that. They extended their hands and he went to them and shook their outstretched hands. When he came back to the office, I told him, “I saw those guys come up to you and I just want to say to you, leave those people alone!!! No good can ever come of it for you!” He just glared at me. Now, I probably would never have even remembered this incident, except about 8 or 9 months later, this same veteran came into the office to pay his rent. He had been doing exceptionally well, and had a good job working in a hospital. He told me the VA had given him a really good evaluation, and he then said, “And you’re part of the reason I’ve done so well.” I was stunned and I couldn’t imagine what I had done to earn such a remark from this battle hardened guy who had been living on the streets just a couple of years before. He said, “Do you remember the day I moved in? You saw those street guys come over to shake my hand.” He then mentioned what I had told him that day with emphasis on the  “no good can ever come of it for you.” He said, “At first I was angry that you would say that to me, but then it stayed on my mind. Every time I thought about going back to the streets, I thought of what you’d said that day. Those guys had their hands out to try to drag me back into the streets with them.”

A few of the veterans, including the above mentioned man, became friends with one another and acted as a ready-made support group. I so enjoyed the way these guys helped each other. These guys had come so far and were doing so well. I wasn’t afraid to let them know if they got out of line in some way, and they knew my remarks were for their own good. Then, the time came that the building was to be torn down for redevelopment. I had to give notices to all of the tenants that they would have to move within sixty days. I was concerned about some of these veterans finding housing, because their personal histories were not without some blemishes, namely arrests. A short time after the vacate notices were given out, a knock came at the office door. When I opened the door, in came a group of veterans and another tenant who had become friends with them. They sat down and I told them that when they went to look for housing, to use my name as a reference, and I’d be sure to get them in somewhere, even if I had to fudge the truth a bit. (Hey, I never claimed to be up for the “Mother Theresa Award” that year.)

Then came perhaps the nicest thing that has ever happened to me in my life. To this day, I get tears in my eyes when I tell or write about it. The one guy acted as spokesman for the group, and he said, “Randy, we didn’t come down here to get help from you. We came down here because we’re all worried about you and whether you’ll have a job now.” I can be pretty battle hardened myself, but I have to admit that it took me a couple of moments to get my composure. Here, these rough and tough guys were worried about me. So maybe old Randy did accomplish a little something in his life.

(This next part was published separately, but I'm including it here)

Just a few other thoughts about this story: I had an excellent relationship with the Cleveland VA Hospital counselors and I sadly miss them, as they did so much good for people. I called the Cleveland VA a few years ago to inquire about the counselors I had dealt with back during the time of this story, Jan, Steve and Charlie, only to find that they had all transferred to other parts of the country; a loss for Cleveland, but a gain for those other parts of the country. The veterans housing program that I participated in was the first in the country.

I don’t know where all of the veterans are, but I sure hope those who had progressed so much have been able to maintain their lives, without going back to any dependency on drugs or alcohol. And I hope that those who were not success stories at our building regained their footing and continued to fight the battle against addiction elsewhere, but not on the streets. My thoughts are often with you guys and will continue to be with you for the rest of my life.

After the building was vacated, I received a call from one of the VA counselors. He said the VA had something special for me and that he would be in to see me shortly. He showed up with a signed card, a cake and a special certificate that I have on my wall to this day.

It reads:
“Department of Veterans Affairs”Certificate of Appreciation Presented to Randy Smith

For his participation and service in the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Program. As the FIRST participant in this initiative to provide veterans housing assistance, Mr. Smith provided the veterans with a unique opportunity to reside in the community, obtain employment and live a more productive lifestyle. Mr. Smith's contributions to the veterans are greatly appreciated by the veterans and staff of the Domiciliary Service.

Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Cleveland, Ohio
December 1, 1994

(It is signed by the Chief of the Domiciliary Service and has the seal of the Department of Veterans Affairs.)

WORD HISTORY:
Honor/Honour, first is the American spelling, second the British spelling-The ultimate origins of this word are unknown, but it traces back to Latin "honor(em)," which meant "esteem, respect." Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited the word as "honor," and it was carried to England with the Norman dialect of French in 1066 as "honour." It was borrowed into English in the late 1100s as "honour," and overtook the native Germanic word for "honor," which was "aar" (German, for instance, still has the related "Ehre" and Frisian has "eare" as their words for "honor"). The American spelling without the "u" developed in the 1800s. The basic meanings of "respect, esteem" have remained, as in the title/address "Your Honor;" that is, "someone due respect." The verb form developed from Latin "honorare," which had been derived from the original Latin noun (above). This gave Old French "honorer," which was also carried to England by the Norman dialect, and "apparently" it was borrowed into English as "honouren" or "honuren" a few decades after "honour," the noun.

Making A Choice, Final

So, out with N.E.W. and in with O.L.D. To be quite honest, Dan's overall personality just wasn't suited to the job of actually running a company. Like him or not, George was much more dynamic, and just his "hustle and bustle" made him far more appealing to the owners than the laid back Dan. Plus, Dan was basically truthful and straightforward; where George was a master of spin. Even when he didn't know what he was talking about, he could make many folks think he was right on top of the situation. There's no question that his connections to the ownership of the property helped him, and he used it. It just shows how weak a figure Dan was, when early on and the owners had issues, they went to George, not Dan, even though we now know that Dan was the actual owner of the company, although I'm sure the property owners still thought that George was the real owner, too. (What ever deal George and Dan had about N.E.W., it doesn't matter. Dan was the owner.) What perhaps is even more telling, Dan didn't seem to mind the situation in the least. I come back to "balance." You've got to have SOME ego, and Dan was just lacking in this department.

In the aftermath of my leaving, one of the employees for the property owners told me that I should file for unemployment, even though technically I had walked out. I finally contacted Art, the president of George's overall company, and Del's boss. He was nice and granted me the vacation pay I had coming (the building owners were paying for it), and, before I said anything, said that he felt that I should collect unemployment until I got other work. I eventually did contact the local unemployment office and they sent the necessary paperwork, which I completed and returned. The interesting thing was, Art turned over to Del the job of answering the questions of the unemployment office on behalf of the company, something he did with relish and lies. The unemployment office called me and denied the claim, and the lady read back to me exactly what Del had told them, which was untrue. He never mentioned the incident with the Polish student, and he said that I was "unqualified," and he insisted that I REFUSED an offer to learn new job tasks necessary for employment with O.L.D. Now, I had been in property management for 17 years, 12 of those years with O.L.D. or what I'll call the "affiliated" N.E.W.. So now I'm not qualified? And this imaginary "offer" to learn new tasks was just that, IMAGINARY... it never happened!

O.L.D. received the info about the claim denial and Art called me apologizing for what had happened, saying that he had just called Del and "told him that he better be on the phone to the unemployment office explaining to them that he'd misspoken," but you can't undo something like that, so the denial stood. I told the unemployment office the truth, and I have no regrets about doing so. Art proposed that I call them and say that I, too, had misspoken, and alter my story, something I would not do. (So typical of these companies, any lie for whatever purpose of the moment.) The whole thing was, the incident happened just three days after O.L.D. had taken over. If they didn't want me, which is what I think was Del's real agenda, they should have made that clear before, and I would have left when Dan's contract expired, and there would have been no issue about unemployment benefits, because Dan's company went out of business at that point. To keep me on for those three days put me into O.L.D.'s employment, and gave Del the chance to get even with me for the incident with the young Polish student; something he did with relish, and WITHOUT penalty, despite Art's reprimand. I can only remember George saying so many times, "This company reflects its owner!" I'll let you ponder that statement.

Nealy a year later, Dan called me about something. During the conversation, he mentioned that he had been talking with Del, and that the building was still struggling and that Del now knew, first hand, what we had been up against in getting and keeping the occupancy up. To this day, from what I've read in the newspaper, it is still not anywhere near full occupancy.*

* Since I wrote the original article, the property has been taken over by the university, something Dan had recommended several years before, as the university wanted more student housing directly under its control. The owners of the building were against the idea, at that time, as it would have proven how poorly conceived their renovation plan had been and how over leveraged they were. Dan died a few years years ago. He was in his mid 70s. 

Word History:
Ware-Noun form-This goes back to the Indo European root "wer," which had the notion of "watch out for, be aware of." This then gave Old Germanic "war/wer/waro." The idea behind any of these was "watch, be on guard, be alert." From the Germanic base evolved a variety of words in the developing Germanic languages, for example: Frisian "were," Swedish "vara," Dutch "waar," and German "ware." In Old English it was "waru." The idea behind "ware," or more commonly in modern times, "wares," was "object(s) of care." Eventually this changed into "goods for sale." As I mentioned, in modern times we use "wares," the plural form, except in compound words like "adware" (watch your computer!), "hardware," "software," and "Tupperware!" Or, if we reverse the position of the word in a compound, we have "warehouse." By the way, German has "Warenhaus" (literally a "wareshouse"), and while closely related to the English word, the meaning isn't a building for storing "wares," but rather a building that sells "Waren;" that is, a department store!

Ware-Verb form-This too comes from the same Old Germanic base "war/wer/waro." From the base developed the word "warojan," meaning "to guard, to watch out for, be cautious." In Old English it was "warian," with much the same meaning. The word still exists in English, but its usage is archaic. In modern times we prefer the offshoot of the Old English word: "beware," which has much the same meaning.

Making A Choice, Part Six

So, the “divorce” was complete between O.L.D. and N.E.W., and everyone now knew that they were indeed two separate companies, although George had always acted like he was really the owner of both. (There’s that galloping ego!) The purely figurehead president of N.E.W. resigned, as she was an employee of O.L.D. and, to be quite honest, I don’t know who was made president; perhaps Dan gave his wife the title. As the former president told me, she was stunned by the developments, as she always thought that George was the real owner of N.E.W. In reality, N.E.W. was only a one-person management company, Dan! It had no office or phone number, as previously, O.L.D.’s address and phone number were used. Eventually, Dan used his home phone number and home address for N.E.W.

In spite of all of the crap going on behind-the-scenes, N.E.W. got a letter of “commendation” from the local HUD director. Remember, the government was insuring the loan on the property through HUD, and periodic inspections were required to verify that all was in order, and that the management was performing its duties properly. Each month, HUD also received financial reports for the property. While the apartment building was part of a larger complex, HUD was only insuring the apartment building, and was in no way involved with the rest of the non-residential complex. When we got this “commendation,” it was after an inspection by the HUD director himself, not someone down the chain of command.

Laying the commendation aside, three main issues plagued the situation: one, “good,” but not “great” occupancy numbers, which affected two, “good,” but not “great” profits,* and three, Dan’s relationship with the owners and the project in general. Dan wasn't "political" enough. He seemed NOT to understand how he needed to relate to and interact with the owners of the building, especially once he lost the support services of O.L.D. There were egos involved here, and Dan just didn't get it, that you have to pay a certain amount of "homage" to the powers that be. You don't have to kiss their...ah...well...below the belt, but you do have to show that you're interested and involved. The owners' offices were right in the apartment building, but Dan very rarely ever went up to them. Just stopping in to say, "Hello," would have helped, but in reality, Dan didn't much care for the owners, and it showed. That's not to say that I loved them either, as I thought they were a bunch of bunglers who'd gotten themselves into a real mess with all of the debts they had taken on, and with the unrealistic income forecasts they had made. Folks, any time you mortgage virtually everything you have, and then you need about 100% occupancy, or 100% of anything, to pay your debts, you've got problems, all of your own making! (Well, George's development company has to bear some responsibility, too. You can't call yourself a responsible developer and either recommend or allow such nonsense to go on.)

Now back to Dan. He used poor judgment about some decisions he made, perhaps influenced by his own dislike of the owners. (He should have loved them after they allowed him to put himself and his wife on an insurance plan being paid for by the building!) For instance, he kept raising wages, which as an employee I liked, but it wasn't realistic, given the fact that the building's income was stagnant, and that there was no way to recover those costs. Now, you're probably thinking, "That blasted Randy is always popping off about poor wages and working people and such, and here's a guy upping his and the other employees' pay, and he's criticizing him." That's true, but I also understand that businesses have to make money. I'm not that far out there. Plus eventually, in self interest, I could see what was going to happen; the owners would look elsewhere for a management company. So keep giving me raises, and lose my job, or give me an occasional raise and keep my job? And yes, if the building had been raking it in, I'd say the profits should have been shared to some degree in salary increases. With competition from the student dormitory and our own occupancy less than great, we couldn't raise rents, even a little, to recover ANY costs, let alone regular raises and the yearly increase in health insurance costs. In what turned out to be our last year at the building, I finally convinced Dan to at least scale back the wage increases that he'd put into the budget, just to show that he was trying to rein in expenses.

Eventually, the owners began experiencing serious financial problems with the entire complex. Several of their employees were let go, some having been with them for 25 and 30 years!!! The City was complaining that the loan they owed to them was actually escalating, as the owners couldn't even pay enough to cover the interest costs. It was VERY UGLY! Not one of their income assumptions proved to be correct. (How did Gomer Pyle say that? "Surprise! Surprise!") They began to make noises that they would look for another management company to get the occupancy up nearer 100%. Just to show how poor the communication was between the owners and Dan, the owner's representative came to me and told me to tell Dan that they were thinking of changing management companies. Eventually, they called, guess who? George. Whether George put the idea into their heads, I have no idea, but it wouldn't surprise me. With about three months left on N.E.W.'s contract with the owners, they informed Dan by letter that his contract would not be renewed.

* The owners had a large regular mortgage payment and had taken out another loan through the City, and it was to be paid back according to a percentage of profits from the apartment building. With the owners leveraged up to their necks, they essentially needed the building to be 100% occupied, year round, to be able to pay down the loan to the City in a timely manner. Remember, this was primarily student housing, and keeping it anywhere near “full” during the summer months was next to impossible, and even during the regular school year, many college students stayed in the nearby dorm, run by the university. Next, "Part Seven," the final part..... 

Word History:
Listen-This goes back to the Indo European base "klu/kleu," which had to do with "hearing." Lithuanian, an Indo European language related to English further down the family tree, has "klausau," meaning "to hear." Some linguists feel that Lithuanian is the modern language that is closest to ancient Indo European, as they believe it has changed the least over the centuries. Greek, another relative of English further down the line, has "klyo," also meaning "to hear," and Latin, another relative, had "cluere," meaning "for a person to hear themselves called, or be spoken of." Anyway, from the Indo European base word, Old Germanic developed a verb something like, "khlusnojan" and/or "khlusinon," but it is possible that the first was an older form and the other came a bit later. My "guess" is, the "k" sound was NOT prominent in the Germanic pronunciation of the word and was more aspirated, thus it is often rendered with an "h" replacing "k." The developing Germanic dialects had various forms of the word and Old High German had "hlosen," which meant "to listen" and in Old English is was "hlysnan," both forms meaning "to listen." Both modern English and modern German have altered the spelling of their respective words, with German having "lauschen" and, of course, English with "listen." The beginning "h" sound undoubtedly blended in with the "L" in both languages. So why do we have a "t" in the spelling? From the same Old Germanic verb (see above) was derived a noun "khlustiz," which developed into Old English "list," (not the kind for your groceries), which meant/means "to listen," and the word is still around in modern English, but it is certainly archaic. Linguists feel that "list" influenced the spelling of "lissen," I mean "listen." Notice that close relative German does not contain a "t" in the spelling, but another close English relative, Dutch, has "luisteren." Ah, there's that "t!"

Making A Choice, Part Five

I have made a very small addition to the original article for clarification purposes.

About a year after Dan was released as president of O.L.D., a scandalous story broke in the local media about a subsidized apartment complex owned by George, and naturally managed by his affiliate company, O.L.D. The media reported that the building was receiving government rent subsidies for tenants who were dead. (Hey, I wonder if they had been voting, too?) This property had been under Dan’s overall supervision until his departure from the company, at which time, a lady took over as the supervisor. (They were not on-site supervisors, but made periodic visits to the property, or at least were supposed to do so.) As I said earlier, Dan was NOT a “hands on” kind of person (nor was the lady). Whether he was aware of these payments, I seriously doubt it; likewise, I doubt that the lady knew about them either. Neither person could have derived any benefit from these payments. Now, should they have known? Yes, absolutely!

When this whole story broke, George was furious (and rightly so), and this is why the above story is important to this saga: Now everyone found out that N.E.W. Management, already three years old, had truly been set up with Dan as the owner. There was some agreement between George and Dan about this set up, but to this day, I don’t really know for sure what it was;* regardless, the situation for N.E.W. changed dramatically. Remember from an earlier part, all of the support services for N.E.W. were provided by George's O.L.D. Management, and George now pulled those services from Dan's company. N.E.W., which only managed one property, the building I managed, was left with no accounting services, no insurance provider for the employees, no payroll service. Dan was now forced to go to the representative of the owners and tell him that there would be new expenses for an accountant (not cheap) and payroll services (not really a large expense). The property was already paying employee health insurance premiums to O.L.D., so this wasn't necessarily a big change, but then again, I don't know what the difference in the amount was between the O.L.D. plan and the plan that was taken by Dan for N.E.W.** The big difference was, Dan now was on the insurance for the building, with the knowledge of the owners' representative. If you know anything about health insurance costs, it was many thousands of dollars, as Dan got coverage for himself AND his wife. Keep in mind, the building was already under performing in terms of revenue, although it was profitable.

Now this is purely my opinion, but I think George knew exactly what he was doing when he pulled the support services from Dan's company. He knew that the owners wanted more revenue*** and that the added expenses would be a major blow to the property, giving him a chance to oust Dan's company (since Dan had not retired) and get his own management company the account; a coup of sorts, if you will. You'll see how all of this develops in the next part.

* This is PURE speculation, but perhaps, as George had told me several times, when Dan retired, O.L.D. would simply take over the management. Given George’s connections to the building ownership, that would have been relatively easy, in my opinion. Also, by that time, George may have felt that he would have matters cleared up with HUD, and they would not have blocked any such maneuver. (See earlier part in regard HUD)

** Just some explanation: Typically, when a property management company gets an account, the managed property covers all of the expenses for any employees specifically hired to work at that property. In the case of the building I managed, the property paid salary and health insurance costs, plus any employment taxes, for a manager, a secretary, and a maintenance man. The management company charges the property a fee for its services, from which it often pays (but not always) for any support services, like accounting and management oversight. The fee is typically based upon some percentage of rents collected. I'm using the word "typically," because there are variations, as in any contract negotiation. In this case, the property paid for accounting services and for the health insurance for management company's owner.

*** The apartment building was a part of a larger complex (the rest being non residential) owned by the same people, and the rest of that complex was not financially stable, and the owners wanted more income from the apartment section to bolster the rest of the complex.

Word History:
Timber-This noun goes back to Indo European "demrom," which had the notion of "building/structure." This idea continued in the Old Germanic offshoot "temran/timram" (I found two spellings). Old English had the same spelling as we do today, "timber," but it still retained the old meaning of "building." Later in English the meaning broadened to "building material or wood used for building." It wasn't long before the word simply took on the meaning of "wood." The other Germanic dialects from long ago had similar meanings: Old Frisian (a very close Old English relative) also had the meaning of "wood," besides the meaning "building." Old High German, which eventually evolved into modern German, had "zimbar," which had the meanings "wood for building, wooden dwelling, and the added meaning 'room of a dwelling.' " Old Norse had "timbr," which meant "wood." The Old German word "zimbar" gradually evolved into modern German "Zimmer," which means "room," but a German "Zimmermann" is a "carpenter," thus retaining the notion of "building with wood." Long ago in English, the main verb for "to build" was "timbran/timbrian," and German still has a verb, "zimmern," but it is not in every day use, and to my recollection, it has more of the meaning "to build or construct a frame." "Timber!!!!" The warning cry given when a tree is about to fall, supposedly developed in Canada in the early 1900s. "Shiver me timbers," the term used on British ships came about in the mid 1700s from the idea of the "ship's frame" (see German "zimmern" above) being made of wood.

Making A Choice, Part Four

 
I want to reiterate, this is a true story. The names have been changed to protect the innocent and the guilty (darn it!). Actually, I’ve decided that it might be easier to follow things, if I used a couple of names for the participants and for the companies, as it can be quite confusing. If you think all of this is difficult to follow, please remember that this was a relatively small corporate set up, so just think, when you’ve heard media reports and even investigators saying that they have had trouble tracing matters through corporations like ENRON, Tyco and Haliburton, they are telling the truth. So, here we go:

George: The owner and CEO of “George Enterprises,” which is the HQ corporation for O.L.D. Management Company. “George Enterprises” also contained a development company and a construction management company (names really unimportant to this story) and personnel from these various companies frequently worked in cooperation with one another, as all were under the same overall HQ, but the paychecks were simply drawn from one of the specific branch companies. George was a VERY egotistical, ruthless, cunning, conniving, deceitful, etc, etc, guy. He was relatively short, and a bit stout, and the way he strutted around, he reminded me of Mussolini, without the uniform, in the old news reels from the World War II era.

In fairness, he could at times have some compassion when others were able to point things out to him, but getting through that burgeoning ego wasn’t always easy to do. For instance, at another apartment building where he was part owner and one of the managing partners, the apartments were all subsidized units for elderly and disabled people. The subsidies were granted by the local housing authority, which didn’t always function in an efficient manner.* One woman, a quadriplegic, was approved by the housing authority, but we never received payments from them for her rent. Documentation was provided to prove her case, but the case went on and on, until the amount owed was very large. A representative of one of the other owners, a VERY hard line individual, informed George of the large amount owed. George called me into his office for an explanation, and after hearing the whole story, he said, “You’re doing the right thing. We don’t want to evict this woman. She has enough problems. Keep after the housing authority." That was the right thing to do!

Dan: President of O.L.D. Management and vice president of N.E.W. Management Company. He had a conscience and he helped stir a conscience in others, including George. When he was gone, any conscience in “George Enterprises” and the related companies went with him. See more about Dan in the continued story.

Art: President of “George Enterprises,” and later, simultaneously held title of president of O.L.D. Management. Basically a decent guy, but over time, George wanted him to follow his usual ruthless, tough approach to things, which he did, but his conscience seemed to bother him, at least on some occasions, although he seemed able to squelch any pangs of conscience after a little time passed.

Del: Later operations head of O.L.D. Management. An egotistical, cocky little guy, who also carried himself with that Mussolini strut, but without Il Duce’s girth. Absolutely ruthless and conniving. When I listened to him, I could tell that he spent lots of time thinking out his ruthlessness, he was so calculating. He was the guy who wanted the young student from Poland put out onto the streets. To me, he was out and out evil. He was like Eichmann was to Hitler and Himmler, a guy who carried out operations, but with his own personal evil stamp imposed on it. Unfortunately, both George and Art came very much to admire him, and turn a blind eye to his tactics. Interestingly, he said to me on several occasions, “I can’t understand why people don’t like me; I’m really a nice guy.” My thoughts were, “Maybe when you’re asleep.” But to be quite honest, I doubt that, as I think this guy dreamed in evil.

N.E.W. Management was set up with O.L.D. Management Company doing the accounting, handling the payroll, under the same insurance plan, the same employee handbook (“white out” was simply used to cover the name of the existing company in the various passages and the new company was then added), the same holidays, the same company Christmas party, the same 401 K plan and for me, with the same “seniority,” which mattered for the company vacation plan. George, the owner of George Enterprises, always acted as if he also owned N.E.W., and he never discouraged anyone from believing such. In fact, he told me that in a few years, N.E.W. would be abolished and blended into O.L.D.

The “boss” for N.E.W., Dan, was the president of O.L.D., but he had the title of vice president of N.E.W. Management (the president’s name is unimportant to this story). Dan was just a few years away from being eligible for Social Security and Medicare, and it was thought by all involved that he would retire at that time. Dan was a VERY nice guy, in fact, maybe too nice. It was and is my opinion that he was not really the executive type. He liked gathering information for various projects and putting together and “crunching” numbers, but he was not an every day operations guy and in other matters, like dealing with employees, he was weak. I say this without the oft-implied derogatory meaning; he was a bureaucrat, not an executive. Even though he was president of O.L.D. Management, it was more of just a title than a clearly defined position, as George was really the one and only true executive, and everyone knew it, the “King,” as Art called him. Dan provided a great counterbalance to some of the deceit and ruthlessness of others in the overall company set up. I’m not saying he was a saint, none of us is, but he basically played things straight up, which is difficult to maintain in the corporate world. After three years, George “released” Dan from his position as president of the existing management company, leaving him with substantially less income, only from the apartment building in question, and no medical insurance. I can’t recall exactly, but I believe he was just about to go on Medicare. His wife was about a year older and so already was on Medicare, but as he explained to me at some later point, they needed the company insurance for medications, as there was no prescription drug coverage for Medicare, at that point, and his wife had regular prescriptions that would have cost several hundred dollars per month just for her, and he had just recently had medical problems that also required regular prescription medication.

Now that these things are out of the way, I’ll take up with the actual story again in Part 5.

* Hey, I admit government entities don’t always function properly, but at times, too, they aren’t properly funded either. We all want government agencies providing help to people to get the money and services to those who are truly needy, but there IS a cost to do that. We can’t have it both ways; that is, have agencies investigate applicants to see if they really qualify for help, but then not hire enough people to handle the cases in a timely manner. My experience with the local housing authority wasn’t all good, nor was it all bad, but I can say that the caseworkers were pretty overwhelmed at times, and getting in to see them was akin to getting an appointment with Dick Cheney, when he’s in his “undisclosed location.” (This article was written during the time George W. Bush was President)

Word History:
Lull-This verb, meaning "to calm, to soothe, to help to rest, to make to feel at ease," began to appear in English "in writing," during the 1300s, thus some assume that "lull" was borrowed from another Germanic language, as Swedish has "lulla," meaning "softly sing a song," German and Low German have "lullen," meaning "sing a child to sleep, to lull," and Dutch has "lullen," meaning "to prattle/talk silly," Danish and Norwegian "lulle" (lull), Icelandic "lulla" (lull). I just wonder if this could be one of those words that had been used by the common people, which didn't make it into written English until later; especially since German and Dutch have forms of the word, and they are both closely related to English. It likely originated from the songs and sounds made to comfort a baby. The noun form, meaning "a pause, a break, a quiet time," came from the verb seemingly during the mid 1600s.

Making A Choice, Part Three

In the first two parts, I tried to present just the facts and events as they unfolded. Now in this part, I’ll have to include some “educated speculation,” some “I was told by others,” and some EDITORIALIZING. YIPPEE!!! (Hey, I don’t call this “Pontificating Randy for nuthin’!”) I will try to differentiate facts from speculation. The editorializing I’m sure you’ll understand without my necessarily pointing it out.

In case you haven’t guessed, the apartment building manager was myself. I worked in property management for 17 years prior to the incident described earlier. I was around some very wealthy (millionaires), egotistical (including downright strutting), manipulative, cunning, deceitful, lying, ruthless @$%&#$@#, ah, I mean people. When these folks sat down at meetings with one another, the “spin” was so great that, well, let’s just say, “Thank God tornadoes don’t spin that fast!” They could have belonged to “The Four Tops,” or “The Spinners.” (Just a little music touch here.)

Just some background facts, in the 17 years I managed property, I was basically involved with residential tenants who were middle or low income. There were some commercial tenants, too, but that really doesn’t enter into this story at all, as there were no commercial tenants involved in the building in question. I was frequently involved with Veterans, something of which I am VERY proud.* In fact, I have a “Certificate Of Appreciation” on my wall issued to me from the Department of Veterans Affairs of the U.S. Government. I DON’T want to sound like one of the “strutting” egotistical @$%&#$@#, I mean people, I referred to earlier. (Oh, by the way, that last was “editorializing.”) I mention this info only to provide some bona fides on my service over the years.

When the building in question was renovated, the development arm of the company I worked for was hired as the developer for the project. The corporate “umbrella” company** had a development section (company), a construction section (company), as well as the property management section (company). The role of developer for the property certainly gave the company the inside track on managing the finished product, and although that is speculation on my part, I am able to connect dots pretty well, and I still use my 3rd Grade “Connect The Dot” books, so I can prove it. Further, the owner of our company was an investor in a specialized part of the property, and hmm, do you think that might have influenced the owners in any way? I have no idea how many other companies submitted bids to manage the building, as I wasn’t privy to that info. At the time all of this was going on, I was overseeing two apartment buildings, including one in a very bad neighborhood, and I was doing the overall company banking each day, which involved many thousands, and even hundreds of thousands of dollars at something like 5 or 6 different banks, stretching from downtown Cleveland to the West Side. (One day, they didn’t tell me what was in this one envelope, as they were afraid that I’d almost panic, but it was a check for something like 3 million dollars!)

Anyhow, the owners of the property gave the management contract to our property management company. As the opening of the building approached, I was told that there was a problem. The Federal government, through The Housing and Urban Development Department, known to most people simply as HUD, had insured the property, and they didn’t like the owner of our company. (It is a fact that I was told this, but whether it was true is another question. I do have personal knowledge of some things, but they really aren’t relevant, so I’ll move on.)

HUD would NOT allow the company to manage the property. This may be very difficult to follow, but the owner of our company set about to still keep some control, but by setting up another company, run by the then president of our property management company. A new name was issued and incorporated, and new officers selected (the existing property management president became vice president), and one of the “existing” company officers became president. I want to make this clear; I was told that HUD approved of this set up, since the owner was not supposed to be directly involved in the management of the building. This all transpired within just a couple of weeks of the building opening to occupancy. Now we’re ready to move on to Part 4..

* See my article: http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2012/05/my-veterans.html

** It is difficult to use the word “company” here, as there was a corporate HQ company with the smaller specialized companies beneath. Usually, when I refer to “company,” I mean the corporate HQ.

Word History:
Send-This verb traces back to Indo European "sent," which had the notion of "travel to, journey, go to(ward)." The Old Germanic offshoot was "santhjan/sandijanan, with the same general meaning, but with the further notion of "causing to go or to journey." In Old English it was "sendan," and it was found in the other Germanic dialects from way back when; for example, Old Saxon had "sendian," Old Norse had "senda," and Gothic had "sandjan." Forms of the word are still common in most of the Germanic languages as Danish and Norwegian both have "sende," Swedish has "sända," Icelandic has "senda," and close relatives of English, Dutch has "zenden," and German has "senden," although in modern German it is used more in the sense "send/transmit by radio;" thus with that continuing notion of "causing something to go to a place." I could not find modern forms of the word in either Low German or West Frisian. Also derived from the same Old Germanic word was "sandaz," a noun, which meant "something that is sent; that is, a message or a messenger," and from that English got "godsend."

Making A Choice, Part Two

So to continue...

The manager has been confronted by his supervisor in front of others of the building staff. He has been told that he should have put the 19 year old Polish college student out on the street, because the company sponsoring the young man hadn’t paid the $100 balance due prior to the student’s move in. Further, the supervisor has said that is what is to be done in the future, if such a case arises. So, what would you do? Here’s what the manager did: When the supervisor told the manager that he would have to put anybody out on the street under similar circumstances, the manager answered, “Not me, I won’t do it!” The supervisor said, “You’ll do it or you won’t have a job here.” The manager said, “See ya!”

To be continued, WITH editorializing, in "Part Three."

Word History:
Lug-The verb form, "to pull or drag something with some difficulty," seems to have come into English usage during the 1300s and is from North Germanic "lugge," which meant "to pull someone's hair," and the idea of pulling hair was expanded in English. Modern North Germanic languages have forms of "lug:" Swedish has "lugga," Norwegian has "lugge," both with the meaning "pull someone's hair." I'll try to keep this simple: the West Germanic speaking groups (Angles, Saxons, Frisians, etc) who invaded Britain and established England, also later faced invasion by their North Germanic cousins, the "Danes" and some "Norwegians," although the tendency was to refer to all North Germanic speakers, then speakers of Old Norse, the forerunner of the modern North Germanic languages, as "Danes.". The Danes literally took control of large areas of eastern England and southern Scotland, and while their language was related to English, they brought new words to the island, some of which eventually spread to other parts of England and became part of the English language. The noun form of "lug" comes from North Germanic "lugg," and meant "a tuft of hair." When this was put into context with the verb form, the idea of "tuft of hair that could be pulled" was expanded to other things that could be grasped and "pulled," like "ear," as we have a slang term of lug=ear, or something that was heavy or difficult to pull, like a big man=big lug, although that term also carries the additional notion of someone who isn't "the brightest star in the sky."

Making A Choice, Part One

I first published this series in 2006 and I decided to re-run it in August 2009, as it is central to much of my life's situation..Since there are many new readers here, I decided to run the series again. Initial articles did not contain word histories, but I added them in 2009. Unless otherwise indicated, each article is the same as in 2009. In this first part, only this preface has been added. 

I'm going to keep this simple and lay out facts, with no editorializing (I HATE when I say or type that!).

A person in their 50s works for a company that manages apartments. The person is an on site manager for a building that has a large college student residency, although with a number of non students also. Many of the college students are from overseas, and most are here in America on student visas to attend college. The apartments are rented as furnished units. The building makes money, but is not living up to what the owners had envisioned, and to what they had laid out for investors prior to when the project was started. The building was built circa 1910, and was very rundown, and in fact, had been closed for several years. The project plan was to renovate it and market it primarily to college students, as a community college and an urban university are nearby. The manager has company provided health insurance. The manager has some health issues, one being fairly high bad cholesterol and low good cholesterol, and requiring relatively expensive cholesterol medication. Further, there are spine and possible hernia problems that could require surgery.

A company makes inquiry about housing for a student coming to America from Poland on a work-study type of program for the summer. The student will be employed by this company and attend some classes at one of the nearby schools. The company representative states that the company will pay for the student employee's first month's rent and the security deposit. The total sum is approximately $850. The student arrives at the building, having been in the United States less than 24 hours (he had landed at another city and took an overnight bus from there). The company representative brings $750 to the apartment building prior to the student's arrival. The representative says that she will bring the $100 balance the next day. The young man, only 19 years old, arrives and he is given the keys to his apartment. He has a fair understanding of English, but is not totally fluent. He has never been to America before. He is expected to be at work at about 3 p.m. He arrives at the building at sometime between Noon and 1 p.m.

So, we have the 19 year old Polish student moved into his apartment. Shortly thereafter he heads off to his job, which is about a ten minute walk from the apartment building. The manager has collected all but $100 from the company sponsoring the student, with a promise by the company representative to pay the balance the next day.

The manager's supervisor calls and checks on the student's arrival and move in. He hears that there is a $100 balance due. He tells the manager to get on the phone immediately and call the company representative and demand payment of the $100 the same day, not by the next day. The manager's attempts to reach the representative fail, as she is with the new student (she is also the student's supervisor).

The next morning, the manager's supervisor comes to the building. He wants to know if the company paid the balance the day before. The manager explains that he couldn't reach the lady, and that she wouldn't be at work until in the afternoon, when she had said she would bring in the $100 balance. The supervisor tells the manager, "You'd better NEVER do this again!!! You never let anyone move in without paying all money owed!" The manager asks, "So what, I should put a 19 year old foreign student out on the streets?" The supervisor answered, "Yes, that's exactly what you should have done, and that you WILL do from now on!"

Just think for a second, what would you do in this situation? I'll continue with the second part in the near future.

Word History:
STEM-There are two different words of this spelling in English. (1) The noun: This goes back to the Indo European root "sta," which meant "to stand," and yes, it is also the ancestor of our word "stand." The Old Proto Germanic offshoot was "stamniz," which the gave the various developing Germanic languages forms of the word: Danish "stamme," Swedish "stam," Dutch "stam," German "Stamm," all of which mean "tree trunk," although the German word also has the broader meaning "family line, tribe, a particular breed of something, a strain (as in "this strain of virus"), a root of a word." Of course, all of these meanings still point to the notion of things "stemming" from some main thing, just a a tree "stems" from the trunk, which is how the tree "stands;" going back to the Indo European base. Old English had "stemn," which meant "the trunk of a plant, not just a tree." Further in Old English, because ships tended to have a post at either end, these were also referred to as "stems," and we still say "from stem to stern" to this day. In the 1870s, the little device on a watch came to be called "the stem." Like our close relative German, English also uses this same word as a verb, with the similar meanings I gave above for German.

Stem (2)-This is not the same word as #1. This is a verb meaning "stop, hold something back," as in, "Our troops were able to stem the enemy attack." This word goes back to Indo European "stem/stam," which had the notion of "use some kind of force against something." The Old Germanic offshoot was "stamjan." Whether Old English had some form of this word, I don't know, as many linguists seem to believe that English acquired it during the 1200s from Old Norse "stemma." However, and this is just my thought here, it seems odd to me that the other West Germanic languages (the closest relatives of English, as English, too, is West Germanic) have, or in the past had, a form of the word: Old Saxon (the dialect that remained on the Continent in what is now northern Germany) had "stemmian," Middle Dutch* had "stemon," and German still has "stemmen," which, besides meaning "stop, hold back," also means "to lift weights (in this case "holding up").

* The Dutch used from about 1100 until 1500 A.D.

The World In Protest, Revolution or Civil War? Part Fifteen

This was first published in May 2012


"Battle Over Budgets" Part Two/Austerity 

The huge deficits of the 2000s added trillions to the collective national debt by the time of the 2008 crisis. When voters elected Democrat Barack Obama as President, his economic team wanted a major stimulus bill passed by Congress to counter the economic decline. This was in contrast to many Republicans who wanted more tax cuts, naturally with much of the money going to the wealthiest Americans, and to their basic hands off of the economy beliefs. For the administration, with no money, there was only one way to get that money, DEBT. In the end a combination of spending proposals and tax cuts were enacted. Gradually, although faster than I thought possible, the economic plunge halted and the economy stabilized. The problem ever since has been, now what?* (See Part 14 for the headwinds that have also limited the recovery.)

Conservatives in America and the world over have been arguing that budget deficits are keeping the economy from expanding and that the tremendous debts will bring a day of reckoning.** Conservative governments in Europe have implemented "austere budgets" to cope with their respective debts, with much of the pain falling on those less then wealthy individuals and families. These policies have been especially implemented in Greece, Spain, and to some degree, in France and Britain. If you're an American and this all sounds familiar, it should, as Republicans, led by conservative Congressman Paul Ryan, have laid out plans to deal with the deficits, largely at the expense of everyone, but the wealthy, to whom he wants to give MORE tax cuts! These folks have used their policy ideas as an almost slogan of  "don't punish the job creators." They have attacked unions, attempting to destroy or to limit the labor movement. They have tried to "fix" unbroken election laws, thus limiting potential Democratic turnout. Not only that, but they want to remove all inheritance taxes*** so that huge estates can be passed on to the chosen few who may or may not have ever worked to earn any of it. So much for a meritocracy, and the creation of a true aristocracy. It seems to the world's conservatives that "austerity" is for everyone else, not for the wealthy or their corporate entities. Sacrifice is for everyone else, not for them, or perhaps better said in another slogan like, "Everyone else sacrifice for us."

The Occupy Wall Street movement has brought increased attention to the income disparity in America, and spinoffs in Europe and elsewhere ("Blockupy") have taken the ball and run with it, often to the cries of "We are the 99%." Protests in Europe have been large and frequent, with occasional outbreaks of violence. Recent elections in Greece and France have produced dramatic results, especially in France, where a socialist was elected president. In Greece the situation has been much more polarized, with a new government being in limbo. New elections have been called. In local elections in Germany, conservatives have lost ground, making the next national election suspenseful. The common thread seems to be that less than wealthy people aren't just rolling over for the wealthy interests, but they are taking to the streets, often led by the younger generations, and, when elections come, they are voting their own self interests. You have to start some place, and this is the signal "We aren't going to take it anymore!" Will it work? Now the discouraging part; probably not; at least not in the way some want it to work. Some countries have unrealistic spending levels, but the necessary changes will have input from those to be affected the most, and that's all we can expect in true democracies. People will not allow the wealthy and their allies to dictate how much they will cut others, while taking more money in tax cuts for themselves; money they don't need.

These movements have a chance to get this country and other nations of the world back from wealthy and corporate interests, but they must court the middle classes. Anarchists and extremism will only scare the very people who are needed to enact positive change.
       
 * Federal Reserve policy has also been very involved in the economy, but I'll try to keep this already complex subject limited.

** Just an observation here, as American conservatives didn't say much about all of the debt accumulated during the Reagan years; for instance, when the "Gipper's" economic team said "deficits don't matter." Nor did they rave or rant when George W. Bush was in office and debts climbed into the trillions.

*** Republicans are working at both the federal and state levels to remove estate taxes, as there are separate taxes at these levels.

WORD HISTORY:
Austere-The ultimate origins of this word are unclear, although some believe it to be Indo European, but it traces back to Greek "austeros,"^ which had the notion of "harsh," which seems to have also been applied food and drink that were bitter; that is, "harsh tasting." Latin borrowed the word from Greek as "austerus," with the same basic meaning. Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited the word as "austere," and English borrowed the word from French in the early 1300s. The modern meaning still retains the notion of "harsh, severe," but it can also mean "plain, simple," usually in terms of "showiness," but this retains the "harsh" notion, as in "deprived of, restricted in adornment." 

^ Greek is an Indo European language related to English, but further down the family tree.

The World In Protest, Revolution or Civil War, Part Fourteen

This was first published in May 2012.


"The Battle Over Budgets" Part One/Overview

While technically the "Great Recession" ended a couple of years ago, the effects of the crisis continue to linger. In America, new home sales remain at low levels, thus keeping the home building industry, and its associated businesses, slow. Hiring has been relatively steady, but not robust, bringing down the unemployment rate at what seems an agonizingly slow pace, although it must be noted that government employment cuts at all levels have negated part of the gains in the private sector. Further, we can't forget that just as the economy turned the corner from severe downturn to the upside, the Gulf oil spill brought new economic problems, as well as a literal mess to the states along the coast there. Then Japan was rattled by a major earthquake, shaking not only that country, but bringing the economic jitters to many, especially the then recovering American auto industry. We have to remember folks, like it, not like it, nations, including America, are no longer just dependent upon their own economies and resources, they are all entangled to varying degrees of, well, "entanglement." If a major nation, or group of nations, sneezes, other nations catch cold too.

Further, the attempts to rein in the "casino-like" atmosphere of the banking industry has not been very successful, although higher reserve requirements mean banks have had to take money from other parts of their business to meet these requirements. Bankers undoubtedly argue that this reduces the number of loans they can make, thus limiting economic expansion, and there's certainly truth to that, but we can't have things both ways folks. This is what happens when we let things get out of hand, which is what happened. The banks went wild, the collapse came, and now we're trying to get the cat back into the bag, but it is a painful process. Attempts to regulate the banks more directly has essentially failed, as banks, along with largely, but not exclusively, Republican allies, fought tooth and nail to keep regulation as lax as possible. They succeeded, but common sense failed. The result has been a very recent new revelation that super bank J.P. Morgan Chase has suffered an admitted two billion dollar loss, which might actually be four billion (do I hear five? Six?), from risky investments.*

One of the effects of the "Great Recession" has been on government budgets. As I noted above, in the U.S., at the federal, state and local levels (including schools), contractions in revenue,** and rising costs for certain things, have brought great budget squeezes. Federal stimulus money helped some communities keep layoffs to a minimum, especially of police and fire personnel, but the money was really a one time, short term shot in the arm. Once it was gone, major decisions had to be made to keep budgets in balance, and many a worker lost their job. Meanwhile, similar has been happening elsewhere in the world, in particular in Europe.

* Okay, anti-regulation people argue that you can't have freedom if you have regulation. "Freedom," however, is in the eye of the beholder. In the 2000s, the banks went wild and laid their very solvency on the line in all sorts of risky investments, much of it based on an overheating mortgage business. The resulting collapse in 2008 brought America and the world to an economic crisis not seen since the Great Depression. Quick action by many nations, including the U.S., even initially by the "free market" Bush administration, contained the damage, although the aftereffects are still with us. Banks are not just playing with their own money, they are playing with YOUR money, and with the nation's (and the world's) economic security. If you boarded a commercial airliner and the captain decided to start all sorts of risky maneuvers, I seriously doubt  you would say, "Oh that's okay, it's a free country, you can't tell the captain or the airlines how to fly their planes. Keep government regulation out of my air travel." Be careful in this election year when you hear politicians telling you they want to cut or eliminate regulation. You might just get on an airplane with a crazy captain.

** There has been a "double whammy," if you will, in that lower employment and business activity have naturally curtailed tax revenue, but also tax cuts, enacted at the national level and also at many state levels to promote growth, have taken a bite out of income. Less spending has meant less revenue from sales taxes. The dramatic decline in home prices has meant less money from property taxes.  

WORD HISTORY:
Budget-This word goes back to Indo European "bhelgh," which had the notion of "swell, inflate, bulge." This spawned a number of forms in Indo European's offspring, including Celtic, which had "bulgos/bolgos," meaning "stomach, bag," and this gave Gaulish "bulga(s)," with the same meanings. This then was borrowed into Latin as "bulga," which meant "leather bag, pouch." A leather pouch was used to hold money. Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited the word as "bouge" (initially "boulge") also with the meaning "leather pouch/bag, often used for money." This later became "bougette," which meant "small pouch/bag." English borrowed the word from French initially as "bouget" in the early 1400s, and the word expanded in meaning beyond the actual pouch/bag, but also to its content. By the 1700s government finance people kept their financial plans in such a "pouch/bag," thus modern "budget." The verb form developed from the noun in the 1800s.

Donna Summer, Your Music Was "Hot Stuff"

Note, July 30, 2017: Can't believe she has been gone for five years. 

Donna Summer* gave the world some music to move to. If you like to "boogie," Donna, the "Queen of Disco," had the tunes for you! She made the lives of many people better, and that was just for the exercise. Her death is a blow to the world of music, but she left us with such memorable songs as: "MacArthur Park," "She Works Hard For The Money," "Last Dance," "Hot Stuff," "On the Radio," and "Bad Girls." Farewell Donna, this is our "last dance." R.I.P.

* Maiden name "Gaines," married name "Sommer" (German), used English form "Summer" in her career. 

WORD HISTORY:
Dance-The "possible" ancient ancestor of "dance" was the Indo European root "tenwe/tenweh," which had the notion of "pull." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "t(h)insanan," which kept the notion of "pull," but also in the sense "stretch." This gave Frankish, a Germanic dialect,^ "danson," which also meant "pull, drag, move back and forth."^^ Old French, a Latin-based language (see note below), took the word from Frankish as "dancier," by which time the meaning of "dance" had developed, which gave the Norman dialect of French "dauncer." This was borrowed into English in the 1200s, initially as "daunsen." The noun was derived from the verb. The word is widespread in other Indo European languages owing to French influence in government and high society. French was long used as THE diplomatic language among European nobility. Other Germanic languages borrowed the word, too, and for instance, German has "tanzen."
    
^ The Franks were a Germanic tribe that conquered  large parts of western Europe from about the 3rd Century A.D. (or C.E., if you prefer). Some Franks participated in the Germanic invasion of Briton in the mid 400s, along with their more numerous invading relatives, the Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes. A large segment of the Franks occupied what is now France (named after the Franks), where much of the population remained Latin speaking (the area had been part of the Roman Empire). Ever so gradually the Latin dialect(s) of the area absorbed the Germanic Frankish dialect, becoming "French" (simply a variation of "Frankish"), although a number of Germanic words remained in the Latin-based "French."

^^ Some related Germanic words meant "tremble" (thus the idea of "moving back and forth, pulling and dragging"), as well as "pull, drag."

They Can't Stop The Money Obsession

Some people are good at making money. Some people are great "wheeler-dealers," something I've never been good at. Some people just can't get money and making money out of their minds, EVER! A favorite television comedy of mine in the late 1960s was "The Ghost and Mrs. Muir," starring Hope Lange, Edward Mulhare, and Charles Nelson Reilly.* The show was "based on" the 1940s movie with Rex Harrison and Gene Tierney. Reilly played Lange's nervous, money-loving, tightwad landlord. Even after all of these years, I still remember one episode where Reilly believes he will die within a few days. He has accumulated a substantial fortune, but with death staring him in the face, he decides to splurge on his funeral. When he goes to the funeral home to make all the arrangements for his own funeral, the undertaker is stunned to find Reilly willing to spend so lavishly. After making the initial plans, he asks what the bill will be. When the undertaker tells him the amount, Reilly's money-loving obsession kicks in, and he starts to make cuts. The cuts finally make the funeral less than most poor folks get.

There have always been people like Reilly's character and there always will be. I suppose they're insecure and afraid, deep inside. Remember Mr. Thurston Howell III, from the 1960s "Gilligan's Island?" While a multimillionaire, he needs his Teddy bear so he can sleep. The thing is, egos and insecurities have to have some control. For the last three + decades there has been all sorts of deregulation, permitting some of the most insecure and egotistical among us to ravage the country, in my opinion. Just look at how the income gap has grown during this time. Back when there was more regulation, the rich were still the rich, but there was some balance to the system, now...... Remember, they NEVER stop! It is up to us to put curbs on
them.

* A few years after "The Ghost And Mrs. Muir," Charles Nelson Reilly became a regular participant on the popular "Match Game," which had both a daytime and nighttime version. Years later Reilly publicly said he was gay.  

WORD HISTORY:
Funeral-The ultimate origins of this word are unknown, but it traces back to Latin "funus," which generally meant "funeral, burial service, death." This then produced Latin "funeralis," which meant "matters associated with a burial," which then gave Latin "funeralia," "the rites of burial." This gave French "funérailles," "funeral rites, funeral service." English borrowed the word from French in the mid 1400s. 

Addition To The Great Depression

I should have added this during my original articles, but better late than never. In order to add some balance, it should be noted that not everyone suffered terrible job loss or financial hardship during the Depression. We do need to remember, that while unemployment was far above what would have been considered normal, more people had jobs than were unemployed. Further, the ranks of the unemployed tended to be "revolving," just to use a term; that is, many who lost jobs at some given point, found other jobs eventually, although perhaps at lower wages, but while they were finding new work, others were losing their jobs. The situation at various points during the Depression was, however, that more folks were losing jobs, than finding jobs, thus the unemployment rate kept increasing for quite some time. Of course, the reciprocal of that was also true, as there were times when more people found jobs than lost jobs.

If a person or household had savings, or if a person was able to maintain a decent job during those times, they actually could have lived a pretty decent lifestyle, since prices fell faster, in most cases, than did wages; that is, some people actually GAINED purchasing power. As noted in one of the articles, I doubt many people wanted the Depression to continue in order for some to experience this benefit.

WORD HISTORY:
Save-This goes back to Indo European "sol(h)," which had the notion of "whole, keep together, keep well, keep sound." This gave Latin "salvus," which meant "safe, healthy, sound." This then gave Latin the verb "salvare," with the meaning "to make (something) safe from harm, to save." Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited the word as "sauver." English borrowed the word from French in the late 1100s as "saven," but initially with the religious sense "save a person's soul from sin." The meaning gradually broadened to "save, rescue."

The Great Depression, Part Twelve

Between 1929 and 1933, the economy suffered some staggering blows. Business investment plummeted by more than 95% from the 1929 level, international trade declined by about 50%, Gross National Product (GNP), used to measure the sum of all goods and services produced by the economy, dropped by nearly 30%, construction spending fell by 78%, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) showed an overall drop in prices by 18%, and the unemployment rate hit 24.9%; that is, 15 million Americans were unemployed, and millions more had only part time work. Even with these stark statistics, in 1932, charitable giving by Americans hit a record amount.

Franklin D. Roosevelt brought a new demeanor to the White House. Unlike the moody, more intellectual Hoover, Roosevelt was smiling, confident and optimistic. Highly respected Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, after meeting the new president, issued a statement that has, more or less, labeled Roosevelt ever since, “A second class intellect, but a first class temperament.” Seemingly aware of his intellectual limitations, he brought into his administration highly competent advisers who devised a wide variety of plans to combat the Depression. Roosevelt reviewed their plans and then acted to “sell” the ideas to Congress and to the public. He wasn’t a saint, and he could be downright petty and vindictive; a trait that got him into some trouble with the electorate during his second term*, but the good will he had established with the American people trumped his personal faults. He had a knack for politics, a natural feel for what people wanted and what they would support. While Hoover had great difficulty conveying his personal concern for people, Roosevelt excelled at “connecting to people;” and during the Depression, this kind of “national hand holding” was important. Roosevelt had suffered from polio during the 1920s, and he was left essentially unable to walk or even to stand for long periods. His affliction seems to have given him a deep compassion for others, and he carried that compassion into the White House. For a nation suffering with a crippling affliction of its own, that compassion was much needed.**

Roosevelt took action immediately. He called Congress into session and presented a basic plan of action to try to turn the tide against the Depression. The banks were closed, in a bank holiday (a tactic actually devised by many states, not the Federal government), and Americans were assured that the banks that reopened would be safe, that they would have Federal inspections, new regulations, and that deposits would be insured by Uncle Sam, through the FDIC, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The stock market would have new regulation, too, with margin (credit) requirements being upped to 90%. (Remember in an earlier part of this series, I said that previously, if you bought $1000 worth of stock on margin, you only needed to put down $100. With the new regulations, you would have to put up $900, and thus you held a large equity in the stock, making “margin calls” a rarity.) Many mortgages were helped by the advent of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) in 1934, which gave Federal insurance to many homeowners. New public works projects, through the Public Works Administration (PWA), put the unemployed to work building schools, highways, and dams. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) cleaned up riverbanks and did reforestation. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) built dams to control flooding and to provide electric power to a large area of the southeastern part of the country where electric service had not yet been made available; thus opening new markets for appliances (you can’t very well sell electric appliances to places that don’t have electricity). Workers were given rights and protections, including minimum wage, regulated work hours, overtime pay, easier union organizing, and better Federal unemployment insurance. Not all programs proved to be politically popular, and the plan that paid farmers NOT to grow as many crops received harsh criticism at a time when many people lacked adequate food. This situation proved to be a tough one, as farmers had often been producing so much, that they were actually hurting themselves, and frequently they had to sell produce at a loss or at the break even point, at best. The Roosevelt administration opted to pay farmers not to grow as much, so as to bring prices for farm produce to the point where farmers would make a profit.

All of these programs and many more that I haven’t touched upon were enacted during Roosevelt’s first two terms. Many business interests and purist capitalists huffed and puffed and stomped about many of the programs designed to help average Americans, and in spite of the hand wringing by these folks, the country survived and Americans didn’t all go around wearing little hammer and sickle insignias, and a red flag was not run up over the White House. FDR helped save their basic system for them.

Roosevelt was not really all that far removed from Hoover’s beliefs, and he feared high deficits on a Keynesian scale. John Maynard Keynes was an economist who pushed the idea of countries spending their way out of depressions, even if they incurred huge budget deficits. Also like Hoover, Roosevelt feared the “dole” mentality; that is, that some unemployed people would develop a lifestyle of taking money from the government and then not wanting to return to work when work was available. In those times, it was called “being on the dole,” an expression seldom heard in our modern times. Unemployment remained very high throughout the 1930s, in the double digits, but life was made easier for the unemployed and low income folks by the new government programs. The basic plan for old age income security was taken from the Hoover administration’s never completed program. The plan was modified and expanded and enacted as Social Security. This was one of those programs that was never properly funded, and it was instituted as a pay as you go system, but it helped many older Americans with their incomes and their dignity in retirement and it continues as a highly popular program to this day.

Now all of this being said, Roosevelt’s program, termed the “New Deal, did NOT end the Depression, as even in 1939, ten years after the start of the Depression, the unemployment rate was more than 14%. The tremendous expenditures made to fight World War Two provided the final push that conquered not only Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo, but also the Great Depression.

* Roosevelt got into some trouble with Americans when he began to try to “purge” members of his own Democratic Party from Congress who disagreed with some of his programs. Further, he tried a move to circumvent the existing Supreme Court by proposing an expansion of the number of justices, a plan that came to be dubbed by the Press and the public, “a court packing scheme.” These unpopular moves and a downturn in what had been a gradually improving economy led to big Republican gains in both houses of Congress in the midterm elections of 1938, but the GOP had been so decimated, that even with these gains, Democrats maintained control of both houses of Congress by hefty margins.

** I recall reading and hearing about when FDR's funeral train or funeral procession (I can't recall the exact details) was passing by mourners, a man was asked if he had known the President, and he said, "No, but he knew me." That one statement tells how FDR related to millions of Americans.  

WORD HISTORY:
Dole-This word, closely related to "deal," goes back to Indo European "dail/dhail," which meant "to divide, to part." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "dailiz," with the same general meaning. This then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "dal," with the notion of "divide" giving the meaning "portion or share (of something)." This then became "dol," and with the more specific meaning "something given as charity." By the 20th Century, the term came to be used in England for "government support given to citizens," and thus developed the expression, "on the dole," to mean "someone receiving government aid." "Deal," from the same source, retained the more general meaning "divide, apportion;" thus later used also for cards. The verb form "dole" developed in the 1400s from the noun, and is most common today in the expression "dole out." Common in the other Germanic languages, but more so with the meaning "part, portion, allotment;" thus making these versions more directly related in meaning to "deal." English is the only Germanic language, to my knowledge, to use a variation to mean "government aid." German has "Teil," Low German has "Deel," Dutch has "deel," West Frisian has "diel," Danish, Swedish and Norwegian all have "del." Again, all of these forms generally meaning "part, portion." Icelandic has "deila," but it has come to mean "quarrel;" that is, "a division between people."

The Great Depression, Part Eleven/B

Hoover had great difficulty holding his own party together. He never seemed to be a big admirer of Andrew Mellon, and he had frequent disagreements with him, but he nonetheless appointed Mellon as Treasury Secretary, and kept him in that position far too long to placate the pro-business, conservative wing of the Republican Party. Republicans had a large pro-business, “conservative wing,” that had been in the ascendancy during the Harding and Coolidge era, but also a large “progressive wing” that had suffered from diminished influence since Teddy Roosevelt left the White House. In those times, the entire country did NOT have electricity. Many progressives were pushing for government funded, generated and regulated electrical power for the many, particularly rural, areas where electric power was not yet available. They thought Hoover, the former Teddy Roosevelt supporter, was one of them; that is, a progressive on this issue, but it turned out that he opposed Federal development of electrical power, favoring private business in the matter, and the progressive wing of the Republican Party was very embittered over this. Of course, the pro business, anti-government wing wasn’t terribly enchanted with Hoover either, as he criticized Wall Street and eventually took the government into the private economy by offering government loans to help hard pressed financial businesses, plus, his administration ran huge deficits, for those times.* For staunch Republican partisans, Hoover was almost anathema, as he preferred cooperation with Democrats, and almost appeared to be non-partisan, rather than just bi-partisan. It really wasn’t until AFTER he left office that the Republican label was anchored to him, as many Democrats, not nearly as endeared to bi-partisan cooperation as Hoover, fixed Hoover, Republicans and Depression firmly together in the minds of the American public, although not without reason. Hoover, always seeming to go against public sentiment, helped their efforts by critiquing the New Deal and serving as the “anti-Roosevelt” (Franklin, that is) for a time.

Much later in his life, Hoover’s reputation began to recover, interestingly with some help from Democratic president, Harry Truman. The two became good friends over time, and Truman asked Hoover to serve as head of a commission to overhaul the Federal government. Later still, Dwight Eisenhower gave Hoover an assignment for the government. Some Democratic politicians gradually developed a “guilt complex” for their political jibes at the former president, and one story I recall, had President Lyndon Johnson making a change in plans to visit the ailing Hoover not long before the ex-president passed away, in spite of Secret Service objections to LBJ’s diversion from his schedule. For much of his life, Hoover acted as the spokesperson for “The Boys Clubs of America,” which in more recent times includes girls. By all accounts, the kids loved the old man, and it hearkens back to that ball field scene I mentioned earlier in this series when he was president. Hoover died at the ripe old age of 90, in the fall of 1964.

Now, a new president occupied the White House, and Franklin D. Roosevelt and his advisers benefited not only from seeing Hoover's failures over three and one half years, but also from some of Hoover's basic programs, which they would take over and expand to combat the Depression, and then call them their own.

* Far worse deficits would come under Franklin Roosevelt during the 1930s and even worse during World War Two. It is interesting that Roosevelt criticized Hoover for deficits, but then proceeded to run even larger amounts of red ink. Decades later, Ronald Reagan criticized Jimmy Carter for deficits, only to run deficits that made Carter's debts look like a surplus. While this is a bit of "hairsplitting," Roosevelt was a politician who saw things "at the moment," rather than always as ideological. While this doesn't excuse Roosevelt's inconsistencies, Reagan "claimed" to be a conservative who supposedly truly believed what he said.

WORD HISTORY:
Bow-This is the word which rhymes with "how," and which means "front section of a ship." In a sense, it is really the same word as English "bough," originally "shoulder, arm," but now meaning "branch or limb of a tree" (see "The Great Depression, Part 11/A for the history of "bough"). It goes back to Indo European "bhaghus," which meant "arm, elbow," which was derived from Indo European "bheugh," which meant, "to bend." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "boguz," which moved the meaning upwards on the arm to "shoulder, upper arm." This gave the Germanic dialects and languages a number of related words, all with the meaning "shoulder" (usually in reference to an animal, not a human), but later with the sense referring to "the front of a ship" (and in more modern times often to "the front of an airplane"). English borrowed the word meaning "front of a ship" in the 1300s, likely from Low German "boog" or Dutch "boeg" (or both) as there was much trade between these related people, with closely related languages (English, German, including Low German, and Dutch are all West Germanic languages).

The Great Depression, Part Eleven/A

Political leaders are always important, but even more so in times of crisis. Hoover’s personality seemed unable to instill confidence or to inspire hope in a nation struggling with a terrible economic collapse. He was not a commanding public speaker, nor was he very good at articulating what he was actually trying to accomplish at times, nor in rallying the public to support his programs, and his shyness made him appear less than “warm and cuddly” to the public. Throughout his life, first in the mining business and then in public service, Hoover was used to being involved with relatively small groups of people dedicated to achieving certain goals. In helping the starving and dislocated in Europe, he was surrounded by many volunteers, most not prone to bickering and sniping. In the Wilson, Harding, and Coolidge administrations, he was a Cabinet Secretary, and while politics are always in play in such an office, it was on a much smaller scale than when he occupied the White House. Hoover was also a chronic “worrier,” and no doubt this showed through to the public.

Hoover misjudged the overall problems with the Depression and its severity, but he wasn’t alone. It became so severe; no one really knew what to do, including Democrats. Often Democrats in Congress went along with Hoover’s basic legislative proposals, sometimes even strongly supporting them, with many Democrats supporting the bill to raise taxes. On a public relations level though, Hoover was president, and he suffered the consequences, not the Democrats in Congress, when his programs couldn’t turn the economy around. He had a knack for choosing the wrong side of an issue, especially when he needed a “win,” if you get my drift, and when he needed to get the public onto his side. He approached many issues with “nuance;” that is, he favored or opposed certain things, but with qualifiers. With the attention span of many Americans less than the size of a centipede, trying to explain details of legislation can be difficult, even in the best of times, but with the economy in shambles, Americans just wanted some action that would right the listing ship, not explanations of why certain parts of legislation were considered to be good or bad by the President. Hoover was principled. (“Nuance” is a word now quite familiar to one John Kerry. Remember “I voted for it, before I voted against it?”) With a severe drought affecting a large part of the farm belt and adding to the economic misery, Hoover and Congress developed a relief package of many millions of dollars to help farmers buy seed and feed their animals. Hoover insisted that the money be given as a “loan,” and not an outright grant. Further, when some in Congress wanted to offer the farmers direct help to feed themselves and their families, Hoover insisted the Red Cross could take care of that. He maintained that if the government gave farmers money directly, it would be demoralizing to them. Farmers and others in the American public had a difficult time figuring out why accepting government money was “demoralizing,” but accepting money from the Red Cross was not. Later, it was much the same with government loans to banks and certain other financial entities. Troubled banks got money, but when one community asked for an RFC loan to pay some employees, it was rejected. Again, Hoover was seen as championing banks, but not people.

The public definitely had a problem with Hoover’s hairsplitting, and his inability to fully articulate his ideas compounded the problem. (Note: Like after 9/11, Congress voted to help out the airlines with billions of dollars, going against many members' own basic political convictions, but they saw this as the only way to keep many airlines in business and preserve competition. It was much the same with the banks during the Depression. If the government had allowed the banks to falter, the whole system would have come crashing down, along with everyone's savings, making a terrible situation even worse. Hoover's administration had little choice, but to loan money to banks and financial institutions, regardless of how bad it looked to the public.) Hoover had some tough issues to grapple with for those times; as the Depression was an unprecedented collapse of the American economy. America was founded on a basic skepticism of government authority, and he avoided, as long as possible, using the government in many roles; preferring voluntary cooperation and private charity, but when he found that these things just couldn't work under the conditions of the Depression, he finally gave in and used the government to intervene, but he received little or no credit for having done so. Conservatives could not say that he didn't give the old ways every chance to succeed, although he held out against using total government compulsion of business. As I noted in an earlier part of this series, Hoover refused to release his private papers from his White House days, even while he knew the papers would show many of his critics to be wrong about the charges of inaction against the Depression and an uncaring attitude toward the suffering of so many during those times.

WORD HISTORY:
Bough-This word, with the modern meaning of "branch of a tree," traces back to Indo European "bhaghus," which meant "arm, elbow." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "boguz," which moved the meaning upwards on the arm to "shoulder, upper arm." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "bog" (with a long "o"), with the same meanings, but including "arm," in general. The idea of "shoulder, arm" led to a secondary meaning, "branch, limb of a tree," which gradually developed into the main meaning of the word. To this day, English is the only Germanic language to have developed this meaning. The spelling changed to "bough," and the "gh" was once pronounced in English, although we now say "bow," which rhymes with "how," and the word appears in the famous bedtime lullaby "Rock a bye baby, on the tree top, when the bough breaks, the cradle will fall." (Hey Mom! What the hell ya doin' putin' me way up here? I mean, down here?) German has "Bug" (long "u"), Low German has "Boog," Dutch has "boeg," West Frisian has "boech," Icelandic has "bógur," Norwegian and Swedish have "bog" and Danish has "bov." All of these mean "shoulder (usually of an animal) or bow, as in the part of a ship," although the meaning "shoulder" is now in more limited use in some of these languages.