Recently I got into a fairly surprising discussion with someone on what we really wanted out of life. And I don't mean like wanting to be famous, or wealthy, or a Senator. But when all is said and done, what is it that we really wanted? Or in other words: what is it about being famous, or wealthy, or a Senator that we think will be beneficial to our life?

I even surprised myself a little with the simplicity of my answer (which I am not going to share). But I'll leave it at there are really only two things I want out of life. That's it. Two.

I have since had this conversation with a few other people to decide whether or not I am crazy. The verdict is mixed. But most agree that "knowing me" they don't believe my simplistic answer.

When I was in college, a relative of mine sent me a book to read titled Running on Empty: Contemplative Spirituality for Overachievers by Fil Anderson. There are two things I remember about this book.

1. How super offended and hurt I was that this person sent me the book. It sounds a bit overly sensitive (and looking back it probably was), but nevertheless it had some larger context to the feelings.
2. More importantly, the story of the fisherman and the businessman.

It's a bit long, but I read it 5 years ago and I still can't get it out of my head.

There was once an businessman who had finally taken some time off work to go on holiday with his family, whilst taking a walk on the beach one day he saw a fisherman rowing a small boat towards the shore and noticed that the fisherman has caught quite a number of big fish. The American was really impressed and asked the fisherman, “How long does it take you to catch so many fish?”

The fisherman replied, “Oh, just a few hours.”

“Then why don’t you stay longer at sea and you could catch even more?” The businessman was astonished.

The fisherman replied, “This is enough to feed my whole family,” he says

The businessman then asked, “So, what do you do for the rest of the day then?”

The fisherman replied, “Play with my kids, take afternoon naps with my wife in the hammock, go out in the village in the evening with my friends for a drink where we play the guitar and sing.”

The businessman offered a suggestion to the fisherman.

“I am a specialist in business management. I could help you to become a more successful person. From now on, you should spend more time at sea and try to catch as many fish as possible. And when you have saved enough money, you could buy a bigger boat and catch even more fish. As you go on, you will be able to afford to buy more boats, recruit more fishermen and lead a team of your own. Soon you will be able to set up your own company, your very own production plant for canned food and do direct selling to your distributors. At that time, you will have moved out of this village and to the City, and then expand your operation to around the world, and finally you can set up your HQ to manage all your other branches.”

The fisherman asks, “So, how long would that take?”

The businessman reply, “About 15 to 20 years.

The fisherman continues, “And after that?”

The businessman laughs heartily, “After that, when the time is right, you can go public and float your shares in the Stock Exchange, by then you will be rich, your income will be coming in by the millions!”

The fisherman asks, “And after that?”

The businessman says, “After that, you can finally retire, you can move to a house on an island, play with your kids, take afternoon naps with your wife in the hammock, go out in the village in the evening with your friends for a drink where you play the guitar and sing”

The point is that a lot of the time we think we are working hard towards a life that we want, only failing to realize what we really want might be right in front of us and attainable.

It's a question I ask myself almost everyday: what is it that I am working so hard for and how does that fit into what I want out of life?

What about you?

(And if you don't want to share your own, feel free to try and guess mine)

When I was in high school I dated a girl with the most amazing house. Although it wasn't until after purchasing my own home that I realized just how much I loved that house.

It was big, but not flashy big. It was nice, but not materialistic nice. It sat on 20-acres, just outside of the city, in a "developing neighborhood" (read: they had no neighbors).

But the best part about it - no homeowner's association (at least not that I knew of, so I am going with that there wasn't one for this illustration).

If they wanted to put in a pool, they could (and they did). If they wanted to let us drive a John Deere Gator or a Hummer around the backyard, we were allowed to (and we did). If they wanted to let us have a loud, outdoor party, they could let us (we never did that).

Fast forward 10 years. I have had some issues with my neighbors and homeowners association since moving in. I think - and could be wrong - but it stems from the fact that I am the youngest owner in the neighborhood and therefore they thought I wouldn't know any better.

But they picked the wrong 25,26,27 year old. And frankly, I got fed up with it all.

Now you might ask, why make a big deal? Simple. Because I bought the house with the idea that it was open to anyone. I installed finger print locks so people could come over with out me. People are free to stay over when they want. I want it to be place of warmth and welcome to any one.

So when something interferes with that, I get defensive. And even though I am the least private person in the world (I think I am the only person who's Facebook page is set to public and blogs about intimate details of my life), I will get defensive when someone in authority doesn't need to know something, but is assuming it is there business.

But what does this have to do with you? I find most people are pretty "afraid" of their neighborhood association. Even when I twittered the other day about it, a friend of mine replied, "uhoh. Sounds like you aren't friends with the HOA. Don't make them too mad, they have crazy power!"

But that is the problem. They don't. Assuming you are following all the rules (which I was), they do not have "crazy power," especially when if it is an invasion of privacy.

So I am including the letter* I sent as an example of how to deal with a homeowners association that has extended beyond it's power. I know many of you have purchased or are thinking of purchasing your first home. Hopefully this helps.

And here is to one day having 20-acres to myself and (hopefully) CJ and Andrea as a neighbor.

One of the largest affronts on our relationships, families, and happiness is "keeping up with the Joneses". It invokes pride and vanity, and it is subtle. I say this knowing full well that I am the worst of all.

More on that in a second.

After arriving in Hilton Head last weekend a high school friend who married a baseball player commented on my Facebook saying:

Honestly, I used to think there couldn't be anyone who travels more than athletes and sports wives...but I think the amount of traveling you do is pretty comparable to mine.

I certainly have been living up to my New Years Resolution that's for sure.

• February: Denver Ski Trip
• March: Hilton Head
• March: San Diego Visiting Sarah & Adam
• April: Orlando Visiting the Letters To God Movie Set
• April: Miami Visiting Erika & Patrick
• May: Key West w/CJ & Andrea
• June: Nashville Visiting Pat
• June/July: Indiana
• July: Hilton Head

On top of that, August is going to be Weekenders gone wild because soon I'll be working 6-days a week. The remaining travel is:

• Aug 6-8: Hilton Head
• Aug 13-15: Louisville Visiting Ashley
• Aug 20-23: Oregon for Lissa's Wedding
• Aug 27-29: Kentucky Lake Visiting Angela
• Sep 26-28: Chicago Watching Mike's Play
• Oct: Maybe DC Visiting Nathan
• Nov: Maybe Denver Visiting Mom & Cassie
• Dec: Maybe Indiana for Christmas

Or in interactive map form:

View a larger map

But what does this have to do with keeping up with the Joneses and Facebook? Simple: 170.

211 is the number of days from January 1st to today. Of those 211 days, I have "been on the road" 41 of them. Leaving 170 days that are just like everyone else's days.

Wake up. Shower. Go to work. Eat Lunch. Work Again. Come home. Eat Dinner. Watch TV. Sleep.

80% of my days are "boring" normal days.

But no matter how much I travel, I am still just as envious the friend backpacking through Europe, or spending the day at the lake. And I know about all of this becuase of Facebook.

I do know most people don't care about traveling like I do. But you could replace traveling with anything, and Facebook provides a 24/7 comparison of lives.

But wasn't that what class reunions were for?

Once every 10 years, you had one night where you were bombarded with the question: "how do I compare?" It was vain. It was stupid. But nevertheless it happened 3 times in life - and that was if you went.

But with Facebook, I am lucky if I go 3 hours with out seeing what everyone, and I mean everyone, is up to. Constantly comparing what they are doing to what I am doing (or buying, or living in, or driving, or marrying, or kids are doing, etc...etc...).

And even though most likely 80% of their days are "boring" just like mine, I still find myself comparing against the entire culmination of everyone's days.

This is not healthy. Constantly being bombarded in this fashion forces one to constantly pursue the next high: albeit trip, purchase, or (fill in the blank). This constant pursuit just took keeping up with the Joneses and gave it a steroid injection right in the quad.

It is April 16th. Yesterday was tax day. Sean Hannity was in town doing his tea party rally at the Capital - I decided against going - mainly because I feel it is a lost cause as income taxes as we know it aren't changing any time soon.

Obama and Biden released their taxes showing a rather pathetic charitable heart.

Although to Obama's credit he significantly increased compared to past years. Although now that I think about it, that might be to his discredit given the fact he knows people are watching now. So I guess I should be giving props to Biden for at least being consistent despite who is watching.

• Barack Obama made $2,656,902 and gave $172,050 (6.4%) to charity
• Joe Biden made $269,256 and gave $1,885 (0.7%) to charity
• Andy Borgmann made $60,246 and gave $5,249 (8.7%) to charity*

Now I know LC or Erik are out there skipping the rest of this post and going straight to the comment section to complain about how most charitable giving is given to religious organizations and how the government shouldn't give tax breaks to those who give towards religious organizations. And this might come as a shock, but I agree with them.

I would give the same amount regardless if I got to deduct it on my taxes - and frankly I think the government's control over the church due to the stupid tax clause actually hinders the church more than it helps. But I digress.

Even if you aren't a religious person, there is significant value in giving towards non-profit charity causes that aim to make this world a better place. Whether that is cancer research or poverty programs or heck PETA (even though we won't be friends).

As a Christian, I believe that 10% of my income should go to support the mission of the church. I practiced this when I made $1200 a year working at The Allen County Courthouse. I practiced this when i made $5500 a year while working through college. I practiced this when I made $35,000 my first year out of college. And I practiced this now with an salary of $55,000. Giving towards non-profit causes that make the world better shouldn't only be for the rich or when one's financial situation "improves."

So like the President, and like a pastor friend of mine who encouraged financial accountability from people in leadership, I too release my taxes each year. I also take it one step further and give access to my entire spending report for the year.

• 2008 Federal Income Tax 1040 (PDF)
  
• 2008 Income/Expense Report (PDF)
  
• All Income/Expense Reports Since 2001
  
• Also I have updated the infamous Presidential Giving Spreadsheet (PDF | XLS)

When the automakers first went to Congress months back and a friend asked for my opinion. My answer was a simple.

The government needs to help two of the three automakers.

But a far more interesting question was returned after my answer: ok then, which two?

Now there is the question Congress should be asking - unfortunately none of them are.

I answered that I would save Ford & GM and let Chrysler fail.

This week I got my issue of AdvertisingAge and I read a pretty well written article about Ford leaving GM, Chrysler in the rearview mirror.

Ford decided against bailout money. GM, Chrysler did not. Ford seems to be improving their cars. GM, Chrysler are not. Ford seems destined to survive. GM, Chrysler are iffy.

So at this point Congress should be asking, which one are we going to save: GM or Chrysler.

I think the answer is simple: GM. GM has more employees. GM makes better quality cars. GM is actually an American company, not a psuedo-American LLC that up until things were bad was a German operation.

But you may be asking yourself, why not save both? Simple: supply and demand and an over-saturated market.

The US economy for some time is only going to be able to sustain two automakers in a natural (read: non-Government supported) economy. Thus why try and let three struggle along when two could thrive?

Saving jobs isn't even really the answer, because in the long run a healthy automotive industry will create/sustain more jobs than a government backed automotive industry. Sure all of Chrysler's employees will lose there jobs, and some towns will go under. But GM and Ford will then need more employees. Of course it won't be a 1 to 1 transfer, but nothing in this economy is a 1 to 1 transfer anymore - with or with out a liquidation of a company.

I have been saying the same about airlines - who keep in mind have been going in and out of bankruptcy since 2001 - even though none of the majors have liquidated. The truth of the matter is we have an oversaturation of airlines in this country. This drives supply way beyond demand, throwing the price and profit structure out of whack. Thus no one is able to make a decent profit.

The same could be said about banks, retail stores, and just about any industry.

The problem lies in the baby-boomer mindset that no one should fail. My grandparents generation sure didn't feel that way. They knew that failure was a harsh reality, and therefore good, hard, and smart work needed to be done to keep one afloat.

But what I fear is like all other institutions baby-boomers have gotten their hands on, this problem won't rectify itself until the next generation of leaders have arrived because the ingrained and ridiculous philosophies of "every child should get a trophy" are too entrenched. To speak otherwise to them is absurd. The problem is letting three companies struggle along when two could thrive is the true absurdity.

Many of you probably remember the post I did about six months ago on Is It Time For Online Dating? Well I got thrown under the bus again last night as Allen decided to use my poor dating record in 2008 as a discussion point.

About halfway through the show I put up a Twitter / Facebook update that said, "Allen has been making fun of my dating hardcore on tonight's show. Some one call in and defend me..." to which my wonderful friend Lissa replied, "I don't want to defend you, you serial monogamist, you. :) But, now I DO want a copy of the show. That's hilarious. Right on, Allen. :)" It's good to know you got friends who love you.

But to give Lissa what she wanted - because after all I am all about meeting the needs of the women in my life ;) - I segmented my part up. Take a listen (or the entire show):



Couple observations after re-listening to myself.

1. I blamed my job a lot, but didn't discuss the other factors as to why I don't meet a lot of 20-somethings. Purchasing a house in soccer mom central, not really liking Church small groups, etc...
2. Allen seems to think that online dating means you date online. Rather for his terminology, I think most 20-somethings do "online meeting." The idea here is that 20-somethings are dating more online in a down economy because they want the security of a relationship and online is where you find singles; not that people are dating online because it keeps you from spending money by going out. In reality, the people I know who do online dating spend way more money on dating than anybody else I know.
3. For the record - this can't be stated enough - I still don't have a womb, nor do I think at all about my non-existent biological clock. As my roommate put it when I discussed this with him today, if it is any clock it is really more of a "lifestyle clock" than it is a biological clock.

But I did mean what I said in the discussion. If you would have asked me six months ago - which Allen did - I would come down very hard on personally using online dating. After exhausting pretty much all the options I had with people I'd be willing to date, and not meeting any new people; six months later I find myself being far more tempted.

My roommate thinks I should do it (actually he almost signed me up over Christmas break with out telling me - again, great friends) and then I could blog about the whole experience. I am SURE everyone of the potential dates would love that. Although then I would be able to at least write-off the online dating fees ;)

Well no great conclusion on this one. I'll just end with this hilarious clip from How I Met Your Mother. I love this show.


If that wasn't enough the full episode can be found here.

If you have read this blog for more than 10 minutes you know that I am pretty anal when it comes to my finances. No, that's not strong enough. What is beyond anal? Hmmm....got it. The large intestine. I am entering a new phrase into the English vernacular. I am large intestinal about my finances.

We learned back in March of '07 after the student loans were paid off that 4 years of college cost $148,671.84.

Want to know how much I have spent on fuel since 2001: $9,355.99

Or travel since graduating college (2005): $7,040.60

Or movies in 2007: $266.60

Have I proved that I am large intestinal?

But as precise as I get, I still have those months where I say, "Holy crap I spent too much money. How did this happen?"

Enter November.

I typically spend between $700-$900 a month on non-bill expenditures. This includes going out to eat, travel, fuel, movies, groceries, etc...

Now I knew November was going to be higher than normal because I spent one weekend in Chicago (figured it would push to the $900 range) and then Mom and Cassie came into town (figured it would push to the $1100 range).

Needless to say, after I entered all my receipts and realized I spent $1360.32 - I was a bit surprised.

Now as anal large intestinal about finances as I am, I don't really like budgets. This comes as a shock to most. But I find them too claustrophobic. I'd rather deal with "spendable income per day or month."

Now I do a pretty good job of keeping this in my head and controlling spending. But not in November. So what am I to do to make sure I stay within my present budget range? Duh...what everybody does right, build an iPhone app?

I enter the date my credit card bill recycles (January 3, 2009).

I enter the amount I want budgeted for the month ($700.00).

Then I enter my transactions - and it automatically figures out "where I am" in the month.

And I have it anywhere I take my phone.

So even though it is December - which means Christmas presents (done!) - I can stay on track to not have another November.

But this post isn't about my large intestinal habits that I should probably see a psychiatrist about. Nor is it about my nerdiness. Here's my question to all you 20-somethings (and probably beyond) out there: how do you keep your finances in check? Do you set a budget? Do you keep stuff in Quicken or Mint? Or do you just play it by ear and hope it turns out?

It amazes me how quickly money can go if I am not on top of things. And I am guessing we are all in the same boat on that one. Making sure your finances are in check is one of the best things you can do for yourself, your future, your marriage (or future marriage) and your family (or future family). Get in the habit now of spending and saving correctly - it will pay off in the long run.

It past by and I didn't even realize it. I was planning to realize it, but I missed. At the time of this writing it has been 1 year and 6 days since I closed on my first house. I still go back and forth every day if I made the right decision.

On a "head" side, I know purchasing this place was the right long-term financial decision. It set me on a path to have my house paid off by the time I am 55 - and that's a great thing - for me and my future family. Even despite the softening housing market, in the long term, it will be a positive financial move.

Also...I have been surprised how fun it has been to fix and install things around the house. Strangely enough, it has been really affirming.

Also...I have enjoyed that it has become a hang out hub for the few single friends I have up in the "Soccer-Mom Capital" of Alpharetta.

But on the other hand, the "heart" side, I have to admit I feel a bit trapped. Which is illustrated in a couple of ways.

The past seven years I have averaged 24,581 miles of flying when traveling or doing missions. This year I flew only a third of that: 8,312. I know some might not understand - and that's ok - but not traveling the way I have in the past has really made me feel claustrophobic.

Also...I bought the place knowing that Alpharetta was "older" than Buckhead/Midtown/Virginia Highlands, but it wasn't really until this past trip to see Michael were I realized what a difference living in the "younger" part of town can make.

Also...I am not planning on switching jobs. I love my job. But since purchasing this home, I do admit the complications that come with taking a job that is offered outside of Atlanta make that idea incredibly unattractive; no matter how good the job is. I sort of resent that feeling.

On the "let's smack Andy across the face side," I do know that there are literally billions of people around the world who would love to have the good graces to be able to purchase a home, and that I should consider myself fortunate (which I do). But that still doesn't help the back-and-forth in my head a year later.

You'll want to check back on the post starting Monday. I found some archived Post Secret's that I have never seen before, and everyday I am going to post a Secret on the blog that I personally relate to.

Some will be funny, some will be profound - but all will probably be telling as to why I am a bit nuts. To give you a little tease, I thought this one was somewhat relevant to the above post.

Tonight is the final Presidential Debate and I am not watching. In chief due to the fact that neither candidate either a.) knows what the current economic problem is, or b.) won't say it.

Everyone is saying that greed is the problem. Sure. But greed is nothing new. Blaming greed is like blaming boobs for affairs. Or, more generally blaming sin or evil. Sure, it might be the root of the problem, but it doesn't really say anything. So what is the real problem? Immigration and an unstable market since the tech boom.

The History.
Because of the economic policy of the mid to late 80s, there was a lot of generated wealth in the early 90s. But wealth can only go so far before even the extremely wealthy don't know what to do with it - so they become venture capitalist and invest in other companies. Thus generating more wealth.

Now in the mid 90s, the digital revolution was ramping up, so all the 80s generated wealth got pumped into tech companies. This created a bubble that ultimately burst on March 10, 2000. But just because an industry burst, doesn't mean there is less money out there per se.

So the hot new thing out there was real estate. Since everyone was making hand over fist in the tech growth, real estate values sky rocketed. Hold on to that thought for a moment.

Also due to the economic growth during the mid-90s, immigration from Mexico grew exponentially. This new "cheap" labor meant that building new houses was incredibly cheaper to do so.¹

The Perfect Storm
So the perfect storm for developers and lenders which allowed greed to succeed was a large influx in cash to the real estate markets and an equally large decrease in the cost of developing. Thus profit margins were widening by the day, thus spurring more growth and greed.

But the problem is that housing isn't a commodity for the most part and there is only so much demand. Thus, a builder can develop property very cheap, but sooner or later their isn't the demand for said property. Thus, we have the housing burst of lets say 2007.

The Future
So what's the next "burst?" Well, where is all money being driven to because of speculation in this unstable market: energy. Sure, we will have some advances in the next 10 years in the energy sector because of the influx of cash and the increased technology. But that sector currently is driven widely by speculation and thoughtless investing. This will lower oil and energy prices (*cough* like the mid-90s²) and thus potentially repeat the cycle.

The Presidential Race
So what does this have to do with the Presidential Debate. Neither McCain or Obama seem to understand economic policy. And this is where if McCain would wake up, he might be able to come back.

Economics 101 - practically on day 1 of class - will teach that economic policy takes anywhere from 8-12 years to mature. What does this mean?

• The good economic times of the 1950s were largely due to the economic policy FDR set in the 40s.
• The poor economic times of the 1980s were largely due to the economic policy of Nixon, Ford, and Carter.
• The good economic times of the 1990s were largely due to the economic policy of Reagan.
• The poor economic times of the 2000s were largely due to the economic policy of Clinton - (and not really helped by Bush - lets be honest).

I will say this. As a legitimately undecided voter, I will vote for the candidate who has the balls to recognize the above and actually put a plan together to address the situation.

My freshman year of college I took Psychology of Religion. It was one of the greatest classes I ever took. It assigned two books. One was my favorite book of all time, Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy. The other, a book by Erich Fromm, To Have or To Be.

Fromm's book had an interesting premise. He position was that a century ago we were a "being" culture. 100 years and an industrial revolution later, we are now a "having" culture.

One classic example was how a century ago, when referencing marriages, men would say that they are a husband or that they are married. Now, Fromm says, men have a wife. We went from a state of existence to a state of possession.

Same rings true with children and jobs and hobbies and pretty much everything.

And the problem is much larger than just a semantic one.

When I was in 7th grade I took French. The first verb I learned was être - "to be." The second verb I learned was aller - "to go." The third verb I learned was avoir - "to have."

It was far more important for me to know Je suis Américain² before I learned J'ai une voiture.³

Why? Because even at the core of language, being and existing is more fundamental to our human experience than having and owning.

The problem is that in our increasing materialistic world the inverse seems to be true.

Fromm explains the rise in divorce as one of an identity crisis. If marriages are possessions, then like all possessions, when we tire of the marriage we drop it for a new one. As apposed to the idea that if at our core, our existence is tied to that marriage, to drop the marriage would be to drop one's existence - which we would be far less inclined to do.

It truly is a challenge to overcome the social pressure of the "having" culture - and it doesn't get easier with age. I find myself comparing myself to the neighbors and friends far more than I ever did before.

Henry David Thoreau once wrote, "It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly." I think that is a sentiment Fromm would agree with, and one I should pay more attention to.