ADVERTISEMENT

Bill Mays passes away.

C

crazed_hoosier2

Hall of Famer
Mar 28, 2011
12,240
4,805
113
Heard last night that Bill Mays, founder of Mays Chemical Co., had passed away. Bill, an IU alum, was a native of Evansville and an acquaintance of mine (mostly by way of his board service at Vectren).

With all the racial strife making the news (and the Cooler) lately, I thought it appropriate to mention Bill's passing -- particularly in the context of a recent study by a UC Davis economist which has also made news essentially declaring the death of the American dream: that is, most of us are destined for nothing better than the life into which we are born.

Well, if that's true, then Bill Mays was a glaring exception. He's being remembered as "Indiana's best black businessman." While I don't think Bill would bristle at such a characterization, I think it more appropriate that he simply be remembered as one of the most successful entrepreneurs in Indiana history....and a great role model for anybody who might want to flip the bird to the "you ain't goin' nowhere, chump" paradigm.

Bill founded his company in 1980 as a one-man shop. Thirty-four years later, it turns almost $200 million in annual revenues and does business all over the world. White, black, or otherwise -- there aren't too many people who can tout that kind of success.

Hat's off to a remarkable man who leaves a remarkable legacy from which, I think, we all can take some guidance and inspiration.
 
A great role model

Several years ago a black friend of mine who was a foreman in the automobile industry told me something about which I had never thought.

He said we (we meaning black folks) have never had much experience in running businesses. We just naturally think of ourselves as workers and not entrepreneurs.

Obviously Bill Mays is an exception to my friend's rule and became a role model for anyone in the black community who otherwise might have thought becoming a big time entrepreneur just cannot happen for a black person willing to think big and work hard. The final Bill Mays chapter, of course, being dedicated to giving back to the community.

This post was edited on 12/5 1:16 PM by hoot1
 
All true. However...


...leave it to me to find nits to pick -- even in a thread paying tribute to a man we both justly revere. But we gotta debate something!


First, it's a shame that we talk about these matters as exceptions and rules. OK, yes, people like Bill Mays are exceptional. He's an exception -- and not just among black people. The vast majority of us will never start companies from scratch that go on to turn $200 million in revenues -- not to mention all the other things this man has accomplished.

It's not that I don't understand why we look at such people as exceptions to the rule....but I think it better to look at them as what's possible. There's a really key difference here, even if it's subliminal: to look at somebody who's hit it out of the park as an "exception" is to, sorta kinda, tell yourself that it couldn't happen to you.

In other words, it instills the very self-limiting paradigm espoused by your friend: "We just naturally think of ourselves as workers and not entrepreneurs."

I can believe this is more true of blacks than whites. But, really, I'd imagine the same holds true for most people in general. And that's a shame. Of course, we're not all born to be entrepreneurs -- and there's nothing the least bit wrong with working for a paycheck. Quite the contrary.

But I would say that one thing that probably distinguishes people who become prosperous (however that's defined) from those who don't is that the former would look at somebody like Mays as somebody to emulate for those desiring similar outcomes....and the latter would look at him as somebody who beat the odds.

Bill Mays did beat the odds, yes. But the most important thing to take from that is that beating the odds ultimately has less to do with chance and circumstance (things beyond our control) than it does with actions, beliefs, choices, behaviors, etc. (things within our control). Chance and circumstance do, of course, factor. Anybody who says they don't is naïve. But they aren't determinative. And, likewise, anybody who says otherwise is not only naïve, but somebody probably best avoided.


Also, I always cringe when I hear the term "giving back to the community." That word "back" insinuates that what's being given to the community once belonged to the community...before it was taken. The community had it, this guy took it, and now he's giving some of it back.

I know that it's not usually really meant that way. But that's what the words themselves, taken literally, express. Giving to the community is a great thing -- and people who can afford to should (and by and large do) give to their communities in lots of ways. But, unless they're actually reimbursing people they stole money from when they do this, then it really isn't accurate to characterize it as "giving back."
 
Giving back to the community...

...in my view simply is a recognition by some that they didn't make it entirely on our own, and that the community and country we live in along with other citizens contributed to their success. It is similar to the idea that a company's economic success depends on serving its customers. I think my view represents the Bill Mays philosophy as I understand it.

In others words, Mays didn't make his money stealing from consumers but instead made it by satisfying their needs.

Finally, the personal satisfaction of helping others and the community is its own reward and can be even more gratifying than making lots of money.
 
A super guy

who did super things. Had the chance to visit with him occasionally and with his niece regularly.

He was determined, committed and most generous. Lot to learn from Bill Mays. The loss is far, far to early. He was just 69. But in those 30+ years, he laid hands on an awful lot of success in Indianapolis.
 
I have considered the term "Giving Back" as


'providing in turn opportunity, for the opportunity the positive aspects of community provided me..

My take on the term....no references provided.
 
I don't completely understand the emotional reaction some have to the

concept of "giving back to the community". If Bill Mays parents with Bill as a toddler were set down in a remote region with no "community" and isolated there, he certainly would not have attained the success he did. Being a part of a community affords us enormous benefits and opportunities. The economic organization and the infrastructure are a base requirement for an organization like May Chemical to exist in the first place. The existence of the communities we (all coolerites I assume) live in provide us with an advantage that most of mankind throughout history couldn't imagine.
 
OK, then....

....what, then, do people who had access to all these same infrastructures, parenting, etc. -- but who don't become multi-millionaires -- owe to their communities? Nothing...because they didn't get rich?

Or, what about somebody who becomes wealthy in a place that doesn't have the same kinds of infrastructures and such? What about, say, Jack Ma...or GM Rao? These people became very wealthy in nations that are far less developed than ours.

And, besides, aren't many of these the things for which we pay taxes? If the appropriate taxes were paid for those communal things necessary to prosper, what else exactly do those who prospered owe? Because I certainly agree these things you're talking about are necessary. But it's not as if these people gain benefit of them for nothing.

This really isn't all that hard to understand, IMO. And I don't think it's just a semantics thing, either. If I give Apple 3 grand of my money, what they actually owe "back" to me isn't any more than the Mac I purchased from them. If they made a $1000 profit off the deal, they don't owe me any of that. They do have to pay taxes on it, and rightly so -- taxes are necessary to a functioning society and economy.

But, beyond that, they don't truly "owe" anybody any portion of that gain. If they choose to give some of their bounty to others, that's great. They absolutely should, in accordance of their own volitions.

But let's not pretend they owe it to anybody. They don't.
 
Personal satisfaction, yes. Of course.

I think prosperous people should be charitable. Indeed, most prosperous people I've known are.

But it's a matter of will, not obligation. People give to others not only because it brings personal satisfaction, but because they can afford to, and others need it. That's all true -- and I don't want you to think I'm knocking charitable giving. Because I'm not.

I'm knocking the notion that it's something owed -- to "the community" or to their long, lost uncle Joe who once changed their diaper, or whomever.

To say that somebody is "giving back" implies that it was first taken from whomever they're "giving it back" to.
 
Don't know Bill Mays, but on "giving back"

I have a similar reaction to that expression as you do, but to me it doesn't imply that one "took" from the community but, rather, that the community "gave" to the individual first. IMO it is a figure of speech that has evolved over the years in order to induce people to give out of a false sense of guilt.

That's not to say that we shouldn't give, and give generously, even sacrificially.

But if I feed the homeless it is not giving back, it is giving. Similarly, if I cloth the naked, I am not giving back, simply giving.

After all, if all we do is "give back", we should not pat ourselves on the back as if we have done more than we were obligated to.
This post was edited on 12/5 7:29 PM by DougS
 
We've hit on the problem.

I was talking about "giving back to the community" and you turned it into a discussion about what is "owed". Two very different things. You are right, as long as I am current on my taxes and don't owe anything for a parking ticket I don't "owe" my community anything.
 
Giving something "back" implies the debt, while...

merely giving something does not.

If you agree with me that nothing is owed, and you're a fan of the English language, then I'm not sure why you're taking issue with this.
 
No it doesn't . . . it implies gratitude . . .

for all of the benefits received during one's life. Not a "debt" at all . . . an "overflow" shared. Very different concept . . . .
 
Only if we twist the language, Sope.

Kids understand this better than we do. If one kid takes another kid's toy, what's he going to say? "Hey, give that back!"

In other words, that's mine you took it (or, to use Doug's version: I gave it to you). The whole point here is establishing the right of ownership.

What you're describing is giving....not giving back.

This post was edited on 12/6 9:48 AM by crazed_hoosier2

This post was edited on 12/6 9:50 AM by crazed_hoosier2
 
Enh . . .

that's a pretty jaded perspective, IMO. There are many opportunities, and those require far more investment of time, energy and talent to realize on than than what real "giving" is.

Your comment reminds me of the local lore about Martha Hathaway Berry, who saw the destitution in the north Georgia woods back in the late 1880s and started a school there. To expand and improve the school she got on a train to New York to ask Andrew Carnegie for a monetary contribution. When she met him and asked, he reached into his pocket and gave her 50 cents, saying "here, see what you can do with this first". She took the 50 cents, went back to Georgia, used the 50 cents to buy some watermelon seeds, and had the school kids start a watermelon patch on her family's plantation, the proceeds from which she used to expand and improve the school. Then she later went back to Carnegie, and he (along with Henry Ford, the Roosevelts and others) agreed to fund the expansion/operation of the school.

I think what you're concerned about is that the money you give will be wasted. That's certainly understandable. But not all investments pan out . . . the trick is to figure out which investments are likely to do well and invest in those even if some don't make it, since the overall benefit received outweighs the 'losses'.

BTW, Berry College is a well-respected institution in Rome, GA now, with the largest college campus in the world - 27,000 acres, and it still has agricultural operations - field planting and harvesting, milk production and horse barns - planned and run by the students.
 
PAYING back implies debt, giving back does not.

I agree with Sope.
 
No functional difference between those words.

Let me ask you this: where does simple "giving" fall into your equation?

In other words, what's the difference between "giving" and "giving back"?
 
Kids also say bang, bang you're dead.

It's hardly ever true so I guess the little shits are wrong about that too!
 
Thank you for the compliment . . .

but SSB is actually much better looking than I am.

I think you're full of crap regarding "giving back to the community". Nobody thinks of it in terms of a legal debt; it's always an internal, not external, impetus that causes a wealthy person to fund a hospital, or a college library, or homeless shelters. "Giving back" really IS giving, because as most wealthy people realize, they haven't achieved what they achieve all by themselves, and they want the community that fostered their success to be ready to foster the success - or at least the health - of others.

IMO funding a hospital and/or hospice to provide outstanding quality of care to someone dying of incurable cancer is a where "giving back" is neither repaying a debt nor investing in someone else's future career success. It's a gift acknowledging the needs of another human being, without strings attached in either direction. That's giving back in its truest form.

Successful people often realize that they have the rare capacity to "give back" in a volume that few ever have the privilege of having. But that doesn't mean they're the only folks who "give back". There's gratitude everywhere . . . and the irrational behavior of giving one's wealth, what little there may be, or one's time to others is an expression of that gratitude . . .

. . . and all of the religions, all of the wise people, tell us that it's in this expression of gratitude that we really do achieve a momentary peak experience as a human being. That's not "hey, give that back to me" . . . .
 
It's in the depth of understanding . . .

where one's success is grounded. Your approach is that it's all the result of only the individual's own actions. And you're just dead wrong on that point.
wink.r191677.gif
 
Heh. But they aren't wrong in my example.

If Joey has a toy and Johnny takes it from him, he would be using proper grammar to insist that Johnny "give it back." It rightly belongs to him, not to Johnny.

Of course, he's also free to relinquish ownership by just giving the toy to him of his own volition (not that any kid I've ever known would do such a thing!). In that case, it's just giving.

But, when Joey insists that Johnny give "back" a toy he took, he's correctly asserting his right to that property.

When we use that term to describe charitable giving to "the community" (however defined), we're -- intentionally or not -- implying that it actually belongs to the community...or, at least, once did and is now being reverted back to its rightful owners.
 
So answer my question.

I noticed that in all your depth of understanding, you dodged it.

What's the difference between giving and giving back?
 
C2, I think Sope answered your question

"Giving back" acknowledges a sense of gratitude to say the community while "giving" implies a sense of charity without showing thankfulness. Giving back is like saying to your neighbor, "I want you to have this for watching my house while I was on vacation". Just giving would go more like this, "Take this money".

Since Bill Mays is the subject of this thread only he could explain why he gave so much time and money to help others in his later years. My guess is he would express a sense of gratitude to others in explaining why he spent so much time being active in community affairs without compensation, except of course for the personal satisfaction which I mentioned previously.

Mays giving a lecture to black youths in order to inspire them into becoming more successful was using his life story and time, and didn't didn't involve gifts of money. I would bet part of this story included people who inspired and helped Mays. Isn't helping each other really what a community should be all about? I think Mays believed this and acted accordingly by giving back to his community.
 
If you look at your career, judge yourself successful,

and feel a desire to build a wing onto a hospital or provide scholarships that is giving back. That motivation started with you judging yourself a success and feeling a desire to help based on that.

It isn't a debt you owe, it is a need you feel.

This post was edited on 12/6 10:49 AM by SSB
 
You know, for a conversative . . .

you're not a bad guy . . . and better looking than I am too!
 
Thanks Sope, but it not that I'm good looking....

"Chicks dig me, because I rarely wear underwear and when I do it's usually something unusual. But now I know why I have always lost women to guys like you." Just thought I would work in a Stripes reference this Saturday morning!
 
I can see where you are coming from....

The important thing is that those who are able to do so should give freely. If giving back in gratitude works I'm OK with that. It giving works, I'm OK with that too. The important thing is to give, ant to not be looking for excuses not to.
 
Now we're getting somewhere.

In your example, if your neighbor watches your house for you while you're on vacation, if you do something or give something to him, you're exactly right: you're giving back. This is a transactional situation. If this guy made the effort to watch your house, you wouldn't show your gratitude to him by making a pie for some other neighbor who didn't do anything. Now, he may say (and sincerely so) that you don't owe him anything for watching your house. But the reality is: he did something for you and you're paying him for services rendered.

Somebody who goes out and makes millions is ostensibly settled up -- assuming they properly paid their employees, suppliers, taxes, lenders, etc. what they rightly had coming. There's not really anything owed. Any charitable giving they do beyond that is just giving. But your example of the grateful neighbor is giving back -- because, whether you call it that or not, you're paying your neighbor for his services. And that would still be the case of the way you repay him is by doing the same for him when he goes on vacation.
 
Not really . . .

as much as I like hoot and appreciate his effort, his post is not representative of what I actually have been saying.

Please see the post linked in the post above hoot's for a better explication.
 
That's a different conversation . . .

regarding whether "success" results from exploitation . . . we don't need to go there in this conversation though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A

Posters of the Water Cooler, unite!

Replies
1
Views
1K
The Water Cooler
outside shooter
outside shooter
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back