Would you rather be a dog in peaceful times? Or a human in chaotic times? When asked this, most people of course pick “human in chaotic times”.
But when offered to pick one of two — risk or uncertainty — most pick “risk” over “uncertainty”. To an extent, risk is definable, quantifiable, often tangible, possible to plan mitigation of.
Brexit is a risk. We know the British public will make its choice on June the 23rd, 2016. Both “remain” and “leave” campaigns are trying hard to get people on their side. The “remain” side is trying to mitigate the risk by highlighting possible losses Britain can incur if Brexit happens. The “leave” campaign calls their mitigation strategies fear-mongering and baseless.
But a juicier example affecting us all this year is from across the pond.
That Trump could become President of the United States is a risk, as he inches closer to the required delegate count. What he will do, as President, about foreign policy, international trade, immigration, job creation etc is an uncertainty. As on the date of writing (April the 27th, 2016), his policy positions are at best unclear, at worst rhetorical. That may change. Or not. Further, all of the members of the Congress and a third of the members of the Senate are also up for elections this year. So it is hard to say what the balance of power will look like in the final outcome. That exacerbates the uncertainty.
My startup clients seem unfazed by Brexit although Jeff Lynn’s warning about how Brexit will damage the UK’s startup ecosystem should give them pause for thought. Folks at larger company client firms are adopting a wait-and-watch stance. In practice, this means there is much inaction around. Countrywide has sounded a warning bell over housing prices. All said, the economy in limbo is slowing down and Brexit is expected to hit the UK’s growth numbers.
It is, however, an altogether different discussion when it comes to the US presidential elections. Almost everyone I speak to, both in the UK and the USA, is secretly wishing for Mrs Clinton to become President, even though the GOP is traditionally seen as the party good for business and business people. I rarely have occasion to call a situation brimming with bathos. This is one such. I am also not unaware of the filter bubble effect in this finding, because I overwhelmingly speak with people who are educated and in well-paid white collar jobs.
But that is how we often deal with uncertainty. We try and wish it away. We conjure favourable scenarios. We discuss fine detail over which we have no control.
Mostly, we bide time till the uncertainty crystallises and transmogrifies into a risk – risk we can delineate, measure, plan to mitigate for, or just accept.
Back to my dog v human question. “Better to be a dog in a peaceful time, than to be a human in a chaotic (warring) period.” This is the Chinese curse we have bastardised for the Anglophone world as: “May you live in interesting times.”
As political chaos goes, I cannot recall a year more “interesting” than 2016 in my entire career of over two decades. Can you?
Answers on a postcard, please.