Survey Indicates that Justice and Fairness is Not What is Expected (Natural Systems and Unwritten Rules)

Let us continue the conversation about the value of institutions and why they matter to society. Strong institutions depend on people who are willing to encourage growth, address long-standing problems, and make meaningful changes when existing systems fail. The issue is not how often a system fails—whether rarely or frequently—but whether it has the capacity and willingness to recognize failures and correct them.

As a society, we want institutions—especially the justice system—to be effective, fair, and accountable. They should distinguish right from wrong and protect people from corruption, hatred, bigotry, and abuse. Strong checks and balances are essential. It keeps judges less focused on their ideologies and political parties and more focused on their essential purpose as an institution as an extention of the people's will. 

The Allegory of the Clan, a learning thought experiment, illustrates what can happen when institutions protect insiders rather than the public. In the example, minorities are targeted, friends receive preferential treatment, victims and whistleblowers are undermined, and wrongdoing is excused. People are damaged and left to deal with the corruption on their own. 

Those who reported wrongdoing were allegedly placed on secret target lists, while individuals involved in corruption used intimidation, threats (i.e. A report of corruption leads to that same officer parked outside the victims home to threaten their safety or life), harassment, and false investigations to protect insiders, damage reputations, and enrich their associates. Even when misconduct was exposed, the hypothetical system continued to blame and dehumanize the victims rather than hold those responsible accountable.

We hear this story over and over and over and no lasting change so we better start thinking of who we are placing in leadership positions.......

The decision-makers in this example came to view anyone advocating for a stronger and more effective system as a threat who should be mistreated or removed. Fundamental principles—including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, constitutional rights of recourse, and the rule of law—were treated as though they had little meaning. The thought experiment example raises a profound question about what happens when institutions intentionally abandon the values they were created to protect. This is why we should elect the best and brightest who understand those values and minimize the influence of those who don't. 

One is trying to encourage its purpose and the other fosterer "unwritten rules" of hate and corruption. This is why courts should not be tools of politics, ideology, or social groups. They should be anchored true north in values. Most be that way but even if there are a few who don't then we need to find ways to improve.

The lesson is that stopping misconduct when it is discovered is not enough. Institutions must acknowledge failures, accept responsibility, and change. This is not a liberal or conservative issue. A fair and accountable justice system should matter to everyone. When institutions fail to correct themselves, the consequences can become generational and undermine public trust for decades, generations, centuries. The study below indicates there are natural systems are in place and checks-n-balances, and correction of wrongdoing are needed to raise trust levels. 

Institutions become stronger when they embrace ethics, integrity, impartiality, and accountability. Their purpose is not to protect themselves or their insiders; it is to protect the principles and people they were created to serve.

The Allegory of the Clan is a hypothetical learning thought experiment to see what a complete default and misuse of institution looks like. In the end it is reversed and justice with a focus on our generational values restored. Take with a grain of salt. There is no right or wrong answer. If you thought about it, whether you agree or disagree, that is enough. 

 Unequal and Unjust: Americans Question the Fairness of the Justice System

• A national survey by Equal Justice Works found widespread skepticism about whether the U.S. justice system delivers equal and fair treatment, with 79% of Americans describing the system as unfair. The survey included more than 1,600 respondents.

• Access to legal representation remains a major concern. Only 32% of respondents believe the legal system is fair to people without attorneys, while just 50% are confident they would personally receive fair treatment from the courts.

• Economic circumstances appear to shape public perceptions of justice. Sixty-two percent of respondents believe income affects whether people receive fair treatment, while nearly half believe race can influence legal outcomes.

• Many Americans misunderstand when they are entitled to legal representation. Respondents frequently believed that courts provide attorneys in civil matters such as discrimination cases, child custody disputes, and traffic court, even though the constitutional right to appointed counsel generally applies to indigent defendants in criminal cases.

• The findings suggest that improving access to justice requires more than reducing legal costs. Lack of information, uncertainty about legal rights, and fear of the legal system can also prevent people from seeking assistance. Equal Justice Works argues that expanding access to public-interest lawyers and improving public understanding of legal rights are important steps toward restoring confidence in the justice system.

Equal Justice Works. (2026, April 14). Unequal and unjust: Public perceptions of justice. https://www.equaljusticeworks.org/news/unequal-and-unjust-public-perceptions-of-justice/

What Do Employees Really Want in 2026

 We’ve thought a little bit about what characteristics make strong CEOs. Remember, the strength of a CEO is not simply what they can do individually; it’s their ability to build teams and leverage the skills and abilities of many other people. That leads us to the question of what employees want.

There has been a lot of discussion in the news, economic reports, and other places about employees having different views on technology, compensation, work expectations, and how effort should be distributed. Understanding these perspectives helps us gauge what employees value, and that is an important component of building strong organizations and, ultimately, a strong economic system.

The good news is that employee satisfaction remains relatively high according to the study below. We hear a lot about dissatisfaction in the workplace, but the data suggests that, for the most part, employees are reasonably satisfied. They value pay, work-life balance, and, perhaps most importantly, feeling valued.

Being valued means more than simply receiving a paycheck. Employees want to feel that their contributions matter and that they are part of a team—people working together toward a common purpose and looking out for one another. That is also why meaningful work matters. Organizations are ultimately collectives of people, and their success depends on how effectively those people work together.

Employees also want their voices to be heard. If they have advice or feedback, they want organizations to listen and take it seriously. They should, because some of the best decisions are made when leaders listen to a broader group of stakeholders and ask, “What’s working, and what isn’t?”

Technology is another interesting part of this discussion. Employees generally believe technology can work on their behalf, but they also want human interaction. Technology can make work more efficient, but it doesn’t necessarily replace the need for communication, collaboration, recognition, and relationships.

And then we have AI adaptation, which is becoming an increasingly important issue. Economists and business leaders are talking extensively about how AI will change the workplace. Yet around 30% of employees don’t believe AI is particularly useful or necessary in their current roles. That tells us something important: technological change may be inevitable, but adoption is not automatic. Organizations have to demonstrate how these tools actually improve people’s work and help employees adapt to a changing world.

What Employees Really Want in 2026: Pay, Balance, Trust, and Human Connection

1. Employee satisfaction remains relatively strong, with 71% of U.S. employees reporting that they are satisfied at work. However, nearly one in five employees are neutral, suggesting that organizations have an opportunity to strengthen engagement before dissatisfaction develops.
2. Pay, work-life balance, and feeling valued are the strongest predictors of employee satisfaction. Nearly half of employees say they would leave their current position for better pay, reinforcing the importance of competitive compensation, pay equity, and transparency.
3. Employees want organizations to act on their feedback. Only about one in ten employees believe their feedback always leads to action, creating a gap between employee listening and organizational follow-through that can weaken trust.
4. Technology is valuable, but employees still want human connection. While 61% say technology improves their workday, 38% want more human interaction, particularly in areas such as recognition, communication, and collaboration.
5. AI adoption requires a thoughtful approach. About 30% of employees do not believe AI is useful or necessary in their roles, highlighting the need for training, clear communication, and implementation that complements rather than replaces human interaction.

Nezich, H. (2026, January 13). New report highlights what employees really want in 2026. American Society of Employers. https://www.aseonline.org/News-Events/Articles/new-report-highlights-what-employees-really-want-in-2026

The CEO in Research: Power, Pragmatism and the Risk/Benefits of Overconfidence

Let’s explore what CEOs tend to look like from a personality perspective. There’s a lot of talk in business about “dog-eat-dog” competition, survival of the strongest, and the idea that business is war. Interestingly, some of that thinking fits with the research on CEO personalities.

CEOs tend to be more power-driven and pragmatic. They are often more extroverted, conscientious, open to new ideas, and emotionally stable. In many ways, they have a combination of traits that helps them function effectively in positions where they influence and lead other people. They must reach those levels through their grit and tenacity.

The research also discusses the risk of narcissism. Those leaders higher on the narcissim continuum can have difficulty accepting failure or recognizing when they have played the wrong card. This can lead to overconfidence and excessive optimism. Sometimes, a little reflection and humility can help leaders recognize risks, consider alternatives, and make better strategic decisions.

In any strategy, even when you are confident that you have the right answer, it is important to consider other possibilities. The more objective you are about the risks and alternatives, the more strategic your thinking becomes.

Ultimately, these personality traits are not inherently good or bad. Dominance, pragmatism, confidence, and optimism can help leaders get things done. But when those traits become excessive, they can also become liabilities. The key is understanding the quirks that come with each trait and knowing when they help—and when they get in the way.

Research on CEO Personalities

1. CEOs are more likely to be motivated by power and authority than employees at lower levels. Leadership IQ found that 11.5% of top-level executives were primarily power-driven, compared with 5.8% of everyone else.
2. CEOs are also more likely to use a “Pragmatist” leadership style, characterized by competitiveness, high standards, strong goal orientation, and a focus on results. About 9.8% of top-level executives fit this style, compared with 6.1% of others.
3. The broader academic research suggests that people who reach senior leadership tend to have higher extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional stability. These characteristics appear to help people emerge as leaders, although becoming a leader does not necessarily mean being an effective one.
4. Certain traits can produce both benefits and risks. For example, narcissism may encourage bold strategies and acquisitions but is also associated with greater performance volatility. Humility, meanwhile, is associated with stronger executive-team collaboration and better organizational outcomes.
5. The most important takeaway is that personality is not destiny. Industry, organizational culture, national culture, discretion, and tenure can determine whether a particular personality trait becomes an advantage or a liability. CEOs are not a single personality type; they are a diverse group with some statistically recognizable tendencies.

Leadership IQ. (2026). Research on CEO personalities. Leadership IQ. https://www.leadershipiq.com/blogs/leadershipiq/research-on-ceo-personalities

Donating Two Photographs to The Point Loma Association

The Point Loma Association helps keep Point Loma clean and green. They also do a lot with local art and landscape. These two photographs I took are going in their auction to help raise funds. . The Point Loma Association. You can bid on them at their event. 

If your interested in my other photography or paintings see below

Art Gallery (Painting and Photos)

$70 Purchase Painting Pay Pal

$60 for photos (Rights to Use or Printing)

Art Gallery eBay (Paintings)

How Corruption and Hate Can Limit Human Development and Engagement

Corruption and hate are harmful to society because they weaken trust in institutions and undermine the idea that laws exist for the public good. Yet some individuals attempt to use technicalities, personal interests, or prejudice to bypass shared values, rights, and social responsibilities. When this occurs, it often affects the middle and working classes most, because they rely on institutions to act fairly and impartially. But let us learn when they initially don't....

The Allegory of the Clan is a hypothetical philosophical thought experiment that explores what happens when justice fails in the presence of hate, corruption, racial prejudice, religious bias, partisanship and the misuse of legal technicalities. It asks an important question: What are the long-term consequences when harmful actions go uncorrected? The answer is found in outcomes. In the story, individuals within the system work to protect one another and undermine victims and witnesses. Although such behavior may provide short-term advantages, over time patterns of bias, favoritism, and dehumanization become visible. Victim dumping and tainted investigations the tools of silencing freedom of speech and undermining freedom of religion.

(Notice when you switch the lens one uses to view a topic you uncover new ways to look at old problems.)

This example illustrates a broader principle: when societies repeatedly create “out-groups” based on race, religion, ideology, politics or other differences, people begin to internalize unequal treatment as normal. Over time, this can create second-class citizenship, where some individuals no longer believe that institutions will protect them equally. They become the "undesirables" of society more on an unofficial level than an anything anyone would admit. This could be one reason why things don't always get corrected. Its just a little more acceptable to place it here versus where it should belong. 

Courts and public institutions therefore have a responsibility to pursue justice rather than personal gain, political loyalty, or favoritism. Especially if those things are inherently unjust. The most fundamental principles of fairness, equality, and human dignity should guide decisions, while technical rules should support, not undermine, those larger purposes. When institutions fail to uphold these values, public trust erodes. Good peole preserve trust by doing the right and more honorable things even when there is no personal gain. 

In the learning story, decision-makers eventually recognize the consequences of hate and corruption and begin to correct their actions. This reflects an important lesson: societies can improve through reflection, accountability, and reform. While people sometimes change only after misconduct is exposed, learning and correction remain essential. Failure to correct while aware is a type of neglect of duty and oath. Taking a minute to think about what we are doing can change everything in an instant.

Ultimately, human behavior shapes institutions, communities, and opportunities. If societies wish to maximize human potential and strengthen social trust, hate and corruption cannot become accepted norms. When left unchecked, they risk becoming unwritten rules that undermine justice, equality, and the common good. or not? 

*The Allegory of the Cave is a hypothetical, philosophical, thought experiment for learning purposes so take with a grain of salt. Come to any conclusion you desire so long as you thoughout about it. 

Corruption as a Barrier to Human Development

1. The study examines the relationship between corruption and human development across 135 developed and developing countries from 2005 to 2021, using the Human Development Index (HDI) and its components: education, life expectancy, and gross national income.
2. The researchers find that higher levels of corruption are associated with lower levels of human development. Corruption appears to act as a constraint on HDI across both higher- and lower-income countries.
3. The effects differ depending on a country's income level. In lower-income countries, education appears particularly vulnerable to corruption, while in higher-income countries, corruption has a stronger effect on the income component of human development.
4. Corruption can weaken the effectiveness of public spending by diverting resources away from education, health care, social protection, and infrastructure. This can increase costs while reducing the quality and availability of public services.
5. The study also identifies democracy, economic freedom, investment, social public spending, globalization, and information and communication technologies as important factors influencing human development. The broader implication is that stronger political and economic institutions may help reduce corruption and improve human well-being.

Neme Castillo, O., Valderrama Santibáñez, A. L., & Flores Márquez, H. (2024). Effects of corruption on human development: Evidence for developed and developing countries. Acta Oeconomica, 74(4), 507–541. https://doi.org/10.1556/032.2024.00024

Fed Chair Delivers First Jackson Hole Keynote

The Federal Reserve chairman’s discussion of the state of the economy is particularly interesting. In his speech, he focused on the integration of artificial intelligence into the economy and the significant changes that AI could bring to productivity, employment, and economic decision-making. He also discussed reducing the Fed’s reliance on forward guidance, which would give policymakers greater flexibility to respond to changing economic conditions. At the same time, this approach could encourage financial markets to develop more independent expectations rather than simply reflecting the Fed’s projections.

Summary of Transcripts

• AI Economic Integration: The Fed is evaluating AI as a potential new factor of production, establishing a task force on productivity and jobs to study how massive capital investments in AI infrastructure influence economic growth, employment, and monetary policy.

• Reframing Forward Guidance: The speaker argues for limiting explicit forward guidance during normal economic times to preserve policy flexibility and avoid a "hall of mirrors" dynamic where central banks and financial markets simply reflect each other's expectations.

• Core Policy Principles: Operational framework relies on contemporaneous data trends over isolated metrics, a firm 2% PCE price stability target, short-term interest rates as the primary policy lever, and careful monitoring of total money creation.

• Broad Economic Strength: General economic performance remains robust with strong consumer spending and rising corporate capital expenditures—over half of which is driven by AI infrastructure—alongside a stable labor market holding at 4.1% unemployment.

• Priority on Inflation: With the 12-month PCE inflation rate standing at 3.7% and over half of its component basket increasing above 3%, bringing inflation back down to the 2% target remains the Federal Reserve's primary focus.

The Bohemian Beach Style for Men-"You got that ...."

 Thinking about wardrobe, I recently started updating some of my clothes. Things get old, especially when you’re more of an outdoor person and your clothing actually gets used. Eventually, it gets to the point where you have to admit, “Yeah, these pants have had a good life,” and into the trash they go. As you get older, though, you also realize you need less stuff and more of the things you actually like. I pretty much know how many pairs of pants I need, how many casual outfits I need, and what works for different situations. As things wear out, I replace them with something new. I occasionally pay attention to what’s in fashion, too. I’m not exactly Mr. Fashion, although I can be—and have been—at various points in my life. It really depends on whether I’m interested at the time. For the most part, though, I like practical clothing that fits my outdoor lifestyle. Even when I’m dressing up for an event, there’s usually going to be a little outdoorsy flavor to it. Maybe it’s a vest, maybe it’s a slightly looser pair of pants, but there’s usually some practical reason behind what I’m wearing. Fashion is nice, but if I can’t move in it, I’m probably not buying it.

(Illustrative Only)
Sort of like this.🙃

Recently, I was shopping at one of my favorite stores: Costco. Yes, Costco. They actually have some pretty good clothes, and you can pick up nice stuff at a reasonable price (I was looking for coffee and jeans.). Every once in a while, though, you have to venture outside your normal shopping territory and see what else is out there. Anyway, I was going through the checkout when one of the employees looked at me and said, “Wow, you really have that Johnny Depp thing going on.” Apparently, I had accidentally wandered into a fashion category without even knowing it. Apparently, the Johnny Depp look is a little relaxed, a little bohemian, a mix of old and new, non conformist, slightly messy but uniquely stylish. In other words, I looked like I had a plan, even though I really didn't.

What I was wearing wasn't particularly complicated: a blue button-up shirt, not buttoned all the way to the top, brown linen pants because it was hot, and sandals. The piece that really pulled everything together, though, was a leather necklace. I actually know how to make these. A friend made this one for me, and after learning how, I made a couple for other people. They liked them enough that they still wear them, so I guess I haven't completely embarrassed myself as a craftsperson. I like homemade things because crafting is an art skill that seems to have faded somewhat in the United States. Previous generations made a lot of these things themselves, and I enjoy keeping some of those skills alive. This particular necklace is pretty simple—some beads, a leather strap, and a casual design—but it adds a little something to an otherwise ordinary outfit. Apparently, it adds enough to make somebody think Johnny Depp.

My hair probably helped, too. It’s a little longer than normal right now. I’m used to keeping it short, partly because of firefighting, outdoor activities, and just my general lifestyle. But I made a bet with one of my AMVETS friends, who is also a veteran. Neither of us has really grown our hair long before, so we decided neither of us would cut it for a year. The loser has to buy the winner a mini pitcher of beer, which costs about three dollars in Michigan. So, obviously, this is now a matter of principle. I refuse to lose a three-dollar beer bet. If necessary, I may have to endure another bad hair day—or several hundred of them—to protect my investment.

Put it all together—the longer hair, leather necklace, linen pants, blue shirt, and sandals—and apparently the outfit worked. The funny thing is, I wasn't even trying. Sometimes you just accidentally put the right pieces together and end up looking like you know what you're doing. I actually like this combination because it works in a lot of situations. I can wear it during the day, go to the beach, go shopping, grab lunch, or wander around town, and it doesn't look out of place. It's comfortable, practical, and still has a little style.

I probably wouldn't wear it to a really high-end restaurant at night unless it was one of those upscale beach-casual places where looking slightly beach casual is apparently a feature rather than a problem. But for everyday life, it works pretty well. And the best part? I didn't even have to try to be fashionable. Apparently, sometimes you just put on your clothes, walk out the door, and accidentally become Johnny Depp.

(Ok...I'm taking the complement, they are rare, so appreciate when they come :)

Dress and the Psychology of First Impressions

• Clothing, hairstyles, makeup, and accessories play an important role in how people form first impressions, yet dress has historically received less attention in social psychology than facial and physical characteristics.
• The authors argue that dress should be incorporated into models of person perception because people naturally evaluate someone's appearance as a combination of their face, body, clothing, and surrounding context.
• Dress can provide clues about a person's social identity, including perceived occupation, cultural background, gender expression, group affiliation, interests, and other social categories.
• Clothing can also influence perceptions of a person's mental state, social status, wealth, power, and aesthetic preferences. These perceptions are shaped not only by the clothing itself but also by the observer's cultural knowledge, stereotypes, attitudes, and experiences.
• The authors conclude that future research needs to examine dress in more realistic and culturally diverse settings. Understanding how clothing influences perception could improve our understanding of first impressions, social interaction, workplace judgments, and other everyday decisions.

Hester, N., & Hehman, E. (2023). Dress is a fundamental component of person perception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 27(4), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683231157961