Apron Strings
I've come to a very pointed decision today. This isn't going to shatter any notions or ideas, it's not going to shake the foundation of life for most people, but, after several weeks on the phones with a division of Fidelity that specializes in investments for tax-exempt companies, I've decided that people, in general, who work for non-profits are not comfortable with taking control of their lives. The majority of people I come across want to be told what and how things should be done and, in being told this, they also want someone else to run their lives for them.
We get a lot of calls from participants' parents or spouses. The participant isn't interested in making the phone call and, often, cannot be bothered to actually come to the phone to go through the process of setting up their plan, managing it, or even worrying about rolling the money somewhere else when, invariably, the participant changes employers to work for another not-for-profit company. This is interesting not in that it happens, but rather that many of these people are in their late thirties and early forties and are still not taking control of their lives. They certainly aren't going to make a fortune working for a company whose sole purpose is to NOT make a profit, but to break even. Instead, many of these individuals will merely eke by for the bulks of their lives.
I'm not suggesting that money is king and that everyone need work for a hefty salary. That's impractical and would suggest that everyone has the same priorities. Money is important, even I have to admit that, but insane salaries and lots of money isn't my thing – though I wouldn't complain if someone wanted to pay me more than I may think I am currently worth. Won't make that mistake a second time. However, what this does suggest, to me, is that some people never want to take control of their lives. Is it possible that some people work for who they do because they are comfortable only barely making it or because they are married to someone who will support them (or because they're still being awarded an allowance by their parents)?
It doesn't matter where the person works. Harvard University seems to be about the same, to me, as The Red Cross, which is the same as any other not-for-profit institution. Teacher, administrator, tailor, spy, if you work for one of these places one of the ideals is that you will be taken care of. Maybe it's because you are helping to take care of someone else, or a lot of someone else's as a result of the position; the outcome is standard, people can't be bothered. They don't want to be. It must be enough that they are altruistic; the individual shouldn't be required to do more than that. Often they are not.
What is interesting to me is that parents call for someone who is in their middle years. Think about it, someone lives until they are about 76.5 years old, on average, and that person, around 37, has their parents call in to set up the plan, invest the money, and manage the assets; seems like there are apron strings still attached, somewhere.
One of the major differences I've come across, in divisions, between who I worked for in New Hampshire and where I am at now is that 403b's and 457's allow for a LOT of alternate contacts on a plan. You can, literally, set up a limited power of attorney for your parents, husband, wife, children, uncle, guy down the street, or bum on the corner and they can do a lot of things on your account. Granted, not everything can be done, but in the case of some of these people, some damage can be inflicted. I'm convinced this is an extension of the type of customer that is drawn to civic service: They want to help but they don't want to be in control.
There is a special kind of person who not only wants to help but is comfortable being in control. Personally, I want to help, I am reluctant to be in charge, but man don't you dare tell me I can't handle it. Don't tell me what I can't do because you are telling me what I am going to be doing. I want to know what my investments are doing. I want to know whether or not I am making money or losing my shirt. I want to be in some measure of control over my life. Civic minded people don't. Bureaucracies dictate that you trust an entity and not an individual and in order to succeed in a bureaucracies you have to extend a level of personal control over to someone else. This is probably why most bureaucrats don't make good politicians. A politician wants to be in charge and wants to be involved. Someone who doesn't want to be in control doesn't care what happens until after it happens and then it is someone else's fault.
The issue at hand is that there are people out there who look as though they are in control of their lives and are not. There are people out there who get up, go to work, and appear to be in charge of their destinies, and they are not. These people, though not dangerous, pose a threat to themselves in not being bothered by their own futures. At some point in the future parents die, marriages crumble, spouses die, and things will change – not necessarily for the better. As long as these people are determined to remain oblivious they will be dangerous and will leach off of the system later on. These are the people who feel that something is owed to them; these are the ones who feel that someone else should do it; these are the ones who can't handle reality and live in a world of their own making; and ultimately, these are the ones who appear to contribute and don't.