What If We Win?

Joe Lieberman might be the only democratic leader to survive if all of his colleagues are wrong. Democrats have now worked themselves into a position that the only way for them to succeed is for us to lose in Iraq. Even my friend and your columnist, Ed Cone (normally a voice of moderation) has now joined the Monday morning quarterback crew stating, “the State of the Union is strong…the weakness that bedevils us is the speaker of those words.” It was once true that the leader got a little credit when things went right, but not today.

The three things that the anti-war crowd have failed to acknowledge are: (1) their short memory, (2) their short list of ideas and (3) their failure to see our soldiers fighting a righteous cause, a cause that was once their own. It was 2003 and 9/11 was still painfully close. Saddam himself thumbed his nose at the world and particularly the United Nations, and virtually everyone in America said this was a righteous war against a tyrant of evil. He was the salesman that proved he had weapons of mass destruction because he said and acted like he had them, like kicking out UN weapons inspectors. Even Hillary said we should take him out, even if we have to go it alone. Times change!

So now all the quarterbacks have said we are fumbling “but we still support the troops.” How can that be? Their only idea is to pull out and they only disagree on when. How can losing the war support the troops? What about the troops that have died and been maimed? Was their ultimate contribution for nothing? Many politicians and the media have a grave leadership responsibility here and they have failed. Why do our enemies remain emboldened? It is not their military victory, it is their emotional victory in the hearts of Americans. Who has given them this emotional victory? The Commander in Chief has never wavered from the goal: to win in Iraq so their people, once oppressed by Saddam, can be free and have the same rights as you and me. In 2003, 90% of Americans had this righteous objective. Today, lead by anti-war politicians and mostly by the media, 70% of Americans want to succumb to a beaten enemy.

So what do our men and women in harm’s way think? They certainly have more at stake in this fight than you and I. According to Oliver North, this is a new type of soldier. He says, “I have never seen as many soldiers in Bible study and prayer.”

They are enlisting and re-enlisting to provide a huge volunteer army, the best in the world. They are capable of adapting to fight, then training, then nation-building, then security for elections, then back to fighting. They loved their straight-talking Secretary Rumsfeld and they still support their Commander in Chief. Even though the press rarely portrays their success, they are still willing to die to protect the views of dissenters. Do you think they sense defeat or can they see victory? To them, they now see 20 million free Iraqis who have produced several free elections, a new constitution, and leaders with hope. They also must fight desperate men of terror - men willing to kill civilians and even their own countrymen to stop the spread of freedom.

If these brave men and women succeed in the next year and a half, then only one democratic politician can take some credit - the only true statesman who continues to stand by his word, his troops, and his Commander in Chief, Senator Joe Lieberman. Never discount what God, a willing army, and a few steadfast leaders can do when faced with a righteous cause.

Lottery Update (and a new educational tool)

According to reports in the Charlotte Observer and the Raleigh News and Observer, the state lottery is well behind projected income expectations. Projections were to be 35% of gross income and a net of $450 million or more for education initiatives. Now it looks as though $300-350 million might be the figure, which is still nearly a million dollars a day that we didn’t have before. According to Tom Shaheen, the lottery’s executive director, this is still “hugely successful.”

Apparently, the scratch and win games aren’t as popular as officials hoped. Players complain there aren’t enough winners. If scratch rewards pay on a 1 in 4 rate, it means you should win 25% of the time, but what do you win? Usually it is enough for another ticket as bigger prizes are rare. Other states have a 1 in 2 or 3 ratio which gives players a slightly higher win rush. The Powerball and Cash 5 games seem to be growing, but not enough to make up for the lower participation in the scratch games.

So what can we expect of our state’s foray into the lottery? To their credit in the beginning, they did prohibit excessive and aggressive advertising which would have increased sales. However, in my opinion, advertising is the most egregious part of the lottery due to its successful exploitation of the public. Advertising works. Remember that most people who wager lose, so with more advertising they lose more. Plus, for our state to take from the gamblers (who are usually poor) to give to the children for education has always seemed like a poor message. It seems our country will continue to struggle when government encourages attitudes of entitlement and a lottery mentality instead of hard incremental work and independence.

Most state lottery revenues slide incrementally lower each year. They usually start advertising more to increase results. We expect that to happen here. In Michigan, I remember one ad where a lady goes to the mailbox and is buried by cash that gushes out of the box. Now if Merrill Lynch were to create an ad like that, all the employees would go to jail and the state would be the prosecutor. That irony should not be lost on us. If it is, then we deserve the exploitation we receive.

My fight is over; the lottery is here to stay. If we think it will fix education, we are kidding ourselves and sadly our children. I believe our new hope for education will be in technology embraced by a new breed of educators.

Consider a new product - a small computer with a power lever (instead of a battery). This small computer is being designed for remote places like developing countries. And what does it bring to those remote peoples? Your right, education! For only $100 per computer brings an education to anyplace in the world (Mars too)! So with that type of inexpensive technology available, tell me again why we are building expensive schools all to get a mediocre and declining result. It costs $6,000-$8,000 a year to educate one student. $100 versus $6,000. Sorry lottery, we don’t need you after all.

The Elephants that Trample America

The creation of big bureaucracies in America is as natural as the two party system. Take a good idea like Social Security, simply add money and time and sooner rather than later you have a bureaucracy. Voila! All great bureaucracies started as good ideas and usually provided a net good for the citizenry. Over time, however, almost everyone (outside the named bureaucracy) will question its overall value to society.

So why are bureaucracies so bad? Two big reasons: (1) they lose sight of their original purpose and importance and (2) they began as competing ideas (to something) then worked hard to eliminate all competition. For example, the purpose of Social Security was to provide a small amount of retirement subsidy while taxing the public a very small amount. There were thirty payers for one small retirement benefit in the late 1930s. Now there are two workers paying for one retiree. Any talk of competition or private accounts turns grey hair white for fear.

Free enterprise in America is predicated on competitive forces. Competition breeds innovation, efficiency, and hard work. Bureaucracies, through their size and thinking, destroy competition and end up as a huge cost burden.

In our near future, the great Health Care debate will resign us to the ultimate bureaucracy unless we see the competitive light in time. We have all been reading the plight of local and regional hospitals showing miniscule profits and at the same time our patient costs and health insurance are increasing 5-10 times the rate of inflation. How can this be? Like Wal-Mart, health care providers need to address the middle man. If some of the costs of the insurance bureaucracy could be sidestepped, there might be more profit margin left for providers. In health care, the idea of insurance only for the catastrophic event needs to be revived.

So how can bureaucracies returned to the life-giving efficiency of competition? First, competition should be embraced. We can’t be drawn into social protectionist thinking. We just have to learn to embrace the bloodied results. Second, bureaucracies will never evolve slowly into something better. A single or collective will for revolution is required for things to change. Over a ten year period, the embattled Donald Rumsfeld revolutionized our military from low-tech to high-tech.

A healthy amount of competition can also be the driver to end bureaucracies. Think of how communication has moved from landline to cable and now to wireless. Ironically, federal anti-trust broke up AT&T into the baby bells and now AT&T is coming back as a wireless player.

Whether health care, education, or government, most of our fiscal challenges in America can be directed toward the elephants that trample competition. And we are not just talking peanuts here.

I’m interested in what you think. Your thoughtful opinions are appreciated and may be printed in my next Chip Shots column!

Fed Up with Elections

I have an idea about who is at fault with the current election debacle. If you’re a Dem, Karl Rove must be the culprit. If a Republican, it must be the media. Perhaps all can take the fall, but the real villain is misinformation spread by big money. This problem is systemic and no one will dispute that fact. Huge dollars are taken out of our economy and paid for slanted political information or negative attack ads. What do we need them for?! Oh sorry, media companies need the cash flow rush every two years. Sorry!

There was a recent news clip which touted early voting and voting by mail as the wave of the future. Sounds like a reverse tsunami to me. If electronic voting machines or traditional voting booths aren’t the answer, maybe e-voting’s time has come. Certainly with technology and the internet, we could make a fast, fair, clear, just and informative system. If we had election week online just think of the productivity gain for companies having a work day instead of an election day.

Here is how it might work. Every election year there would be a week in November when a ballot just for you is found on USVotes.com. Between elections, local election boards for your district will be preparing their site using a national template. The information needed to make an informed decision regarding candidates and the ballot issues will be generated locally. The ballot itself would contain the information needed to make an informed decision and because the voter could take as much time as they want (voting week versus day) on any computer, the information could be quite detailed. The voter is identified by their social security number and the software would be sophisticated to catch fraud (dead voters need not apply). Certainly if credit cards can be protected, so can the voting process. In fact, the credit card protectors would be a good choice to build this system, privately with official federal election supervision.

On the ballot, each candidate would answer the same questions, again as part of the process (i.e. What is your stand on social security, healthcare, or taxes?). Questions the board of elections felt were pertinent for the district, state, or nation. Each candidate would have an essay question like: What strengths do you and/or your party bring to this contest? Maybe the most important component on the ballot would be the voting record and qualifications for office – information that would be prepared by a non-partisan group of volunteers who will no longer be needed at traditional polling sites.

Folks who do not have a computer at home or work could leisurely vote at their traditional voting sites equipped with computers and staffed with helpers. They could also vote in coffee shops or on their child’s laptop or PDA.

The key to this system would be the consistent information available to make an informed decision. Certainly, if WebMD can give good information on our health, someone can devise good information one week a year on a few American citizens.

Maybe more good candidates would agree to come forward if the rules were simple, accurate, and fraud free. Who wants to run against a flame thrower? With the advent of around-the-clock news, the media thrives on the juicy stuff that rarely means anything yet ends up swaying the vote. Each voter would have the same information prepared ahead of time and they would be less dependent on media bias and timing.

Here is a new career: highest ethics needed, not a spin doctor, soft spoken, likes getting the facts straight (former media folks and actors need not apply), needs some web competence. Job Posting: Guilford county election official and future political candidates.

Thoughts To Provoke

The following four topics will help to resist being a Monday Morning Quarterback. You know, “if only the Republicans had done this or the Democrats done that?” These are just ideas which will hopefully get you to think about your own ideas and solutions. Rather than finger pointing, let’s think about what can be done in the future.

1. Iraq
Since the world media calls the war a quagmire, President Bush could call for a referendum of the Iraqi people every quarter or so to see if they want us to stay and continue to help them fight for their freedom or leave. Let their purple fingers speak to us and the media.

2. Media Control Your Appetite
A time will come soon when eager attorneys will target the press, accusing that free and open coverage of horrific events can cause more copy-cat terror. One self policing change would make the world a better and safer place. Our laws say that we are innocent until proven guilty. No one should be tried in the press! The press should restrain itself and never publish names or pictures of suspected criminals (no cameras in courtrooms as news generators). Criminals crave attention. If there was no attention paid there may be less criminality. If the media for their own appetite and profit, open the story naming names at or before the indictment level and before trial confirmation, they could be open to slander and malpractice. They are in effect slandering innocent people. The media can and should report the news of the event, just not the suspect’s name and picture. There may be times when a picture and name could be released by authorities to help in apprehension (neighborhood watch, ten most wanted, amber alerts), but once caught, closed press through trial.

3. Baseball and the Other Pastimes
One of the great things about our athletic heroes is the positive impact they have on our young people. Our children are impressionable and looking for role models to help them grow up with character and the ability to make good choices. Enter performance enhancing drugs. Pete Rose has paid the price for his gambling misdeeds, so string the druggies up by their shoe laces, and fine the owners so much they will never risk again. Either that or face your son or daughter in their bedroom as they hang up the poster of your (and their) favorite hero. “Dad, I want muscles just like those!”

4. To Fence or Not to Fence
To fence our southern border may be useful for public perception and could be a helpful deterrent; however, we must also deal with the millions of illegal immigrants already here and the reason they continue to come. They want a better life and they get it by taking a reasonable risk.

Government and then business must get tougher with this issue. We can’t give away tax payer treasure and reward illegal activity by giving away healthcare, education, and citizenship benefits. We also can’t penalize companies who need low cost labor to compete on a world stage. Guest workers that receive minimal benefits seem logical and maybe their first job is fence-building. Workers could be drawn to these construction sites to start the documentation process. If they don’t come forward, the risk of deportation goes up significantly. For the majority of folks that are already here, they should be given a safe route to guest worker status and again without the benefits of citizenship.

For clarity, please number (1,2,3,4) your response(s). Thanks!!

It is Not the Law that Made America Great

Five or six years ago, our local Rotary clubs hosted six attorneys from the old Soviet Union. They were here to see what makes America great. Unfortunately, what they heard wasn’t quite right. How many times have we said that we are a nation of laws, as if that were the litmus test for greatness? It is not, nor was it ever intended to be by our founders. John Adams said something like, “this Constitution was only meant for a moral people, it was intended for no other.” The Constitution was meant only as an outline for governance of a people that already knew how to live together. Morality was only mentioned in things like preambles. The words, “Under God” covered the morality part and everyone knew what they were talking about. Unfortunately, we have forgotten.

The problem with living (the moral part) under laws instead of under a supreme being is that we, and even the best lawyers, have an agenda. The agenda is self-interest over the interests of others. This interest tends to trump over basic right and wrong because it introduces the question of whose right and whose wrong are we talking about? When “Under God” was the arbiter, He was the authority on right and wrong, and believe me, discerning between the two was much easier then.

Let me give you an example: A couple active executives at Enron created a scheme to take losses off the books so the company looked better financially and the stock price would stay high. Their accounting firm and lawyers said they couldn’t find any law against the idea (I’ll bet they all felt queasy about the deal). Had they run their company by a simple moral law, let’s say the Golden Rule, “do unto others..,” someone would have stood up and said, “this smells, it is just not right for our stockholders and employees even though it doesn’t break any laws.” What made America great was our heart, not our laws. I wish the Russian attorneys had received that message.

Will we be great again? When you consider the devouring power of self-interest in business, politics, media, and law it will be difficult. Self-interest is not bad if it raises all boats. A foreign policy that promotes freedom, for example. But if the self-interest has losers, it is destructive to someone, and that takes away our greatness.

Soon after the Enron scandal broke, Larry King asked Walter Cronkite, “what are we going to do?” Walter said, “I guess we will have to make new laws.” Honk!!! Smart people make the laws. Smarter people stay ahead of the law; ie. Enron. Laws try to control self-interest but they can’t always. What we really need is an underlying positive morality. This is a heart thing. It is what used to be called “doing business with a handshake.” It is being truly more interested in your customer than your own company. It means going to your vendor, customer or competitor and solving the problem instead of talking to your lawyer.

Self-interested business can build adversaries. Moral business builds relationships. Millions of these moral transactions build wealth for owners, employees and countries. An economy fearful of laws or criminal disobedience takes capital out of the productive economy to pay for security. Security is not just cameras and barbed wire. It could also be high insurance costs, high interest rates, and most glaring, high legal and accounting expenses. Sarbanes-Oxley may be the most oppressive big business legislation of our time and is a direct result of Enron, Worldcom, and Tyco and Walter. Those very smart people will look forward to the challenge of getting around it, and then we will seek a new or revised law.

So what is the answer? If you agree that this is a morality issue, an issue of the heart (this will be a big stretch for the self-interested), do you think we can legislate morality? Many think we can teach morality in public schools!! Maybe, but here is the first question to be answered: whose morality? “My dad says a little drink at home is better than out carousing” versus “my dad says I’m too young – end of story.”

America’s formula until 1948 was to choose a Judeo-Christian ethic where a benevolent God gave us the heart morality. Our laws were based on this foundation. Forty-eight is when the “high wall of separation between church and state (business too) began to take hold. Over time, our only fallback was “the law.”

My prediction is we have gone too far to go back. It would not be progressive to go back, would it?

What if - W.I.

W.I. the national media saw the war on terror from a different perspective? As if the Muslim extremists were real and wanted to carry out their stated desires to eliminate Israel and us in the West. W.I. the journalists saw their children at risk? W.I. they called our troops “freedom fighters” instead of “insurgents?” Wasn’t that our stated objective after 9/11? Wasn’t that the mood of the country and George Bush? Almost 80% of Americans saw Saddam Hussein as part of the axis of evil (along with Iran and North Korea). The fact is, we easily toppled Saddam, but then things got tougher. We all hoped America would be perceived as liberators; however, we were not. Even now at home we are not. But what if the press still thought our motives were pure? Which, I believe, they are. Does anyone really think Democrats or Republicans really want an extended conflict in Iraq? Don’t you think everyone in America, especially George Bush, would like to succeed in Iraq and bring our troops home?

So what could be the motive of the press for discarding patriotism to show us all the warts and trauma of the war without much of the success? And more importantly, when the straight news turns to editorializing about the news, we are much more likely to hear criticism of our leaders and their handling of the war. I believe the reason is three fold:

First, it is easy. The simple thing, no matter in sports or in news, is to criticize the play calling. This is the most natural of human tendencies. Unfortunately, it is unprofessional and borders on treasonous behavior since the media’s unpatriotic dialog emboldens the enemy. Joe Lieberman is a Democrat, but I know he is a man of character and conviction because he stood up for what he thought was right in Iraq even though it did not follow his party’s position.

Second, standing in lockstep and encouraging others editorially (through the news) doesn’t sell newspapers. To make money in today’s media world, you need to be provocative. The successful organization can’t just report, they must create sides and be balanced by reporting all sides. Unfortunately, the sides are biased and the bias is rarely disclosed.

Third, according to all analysis, it is relatively undisputed that major news organizations (FOX excluded) would rather be called progressive versus conservative.

As a result of these three media failings, you, me and most importantly, the heroes dying in Iraq for freedom could fail against terror just because the media thinks the current leadership is wrong. An exhaustible amount of energy is being expended across party lines, while it could be focused on fighting our determined enemies. These enemies gain hope and strength from our division.

W.I. the terrorists around the world could see a different America? An America that stands up like Joe Lieberman and Zel Miller and say: “We as a diverse nation of Republicans and Democrats stand up against terrorism in any form we see, anywhere around the world. We believe everyone’s right to be free is worth taking the risk of spilling our own blood. We will continue our pursuit of this freedom for Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon. We will unleash the cause for freedom against Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba if necessary. We do this not to aggravate the world or to implant our economic or religious beliefs on others, but to embrace freedom from tyranny and terror.”

If this was the message from America to the terrorist leaders and press, we could win the war against terror. Bully nations will not stand against righteous power. On the contrary, when 60% of us don’t support our foreign policy, and our leaders are undermined for political gain, our enemies are emboldened and will ultimately take us down. This is what Joe Lieberman can see and the rest of us should realize. I hold the press and media mostly responsible for this failure to see beyond their own profits and political interests to perhaps the greatest disservice ever to our beloved country. W.I. we fail against terrorism?

ISRAEL VS TERRORISM

It has been fascinating to follow the news over the past few months, watching what I will call pure nationalism. I know when you are a superpower, things are complicated. Every move America makes has consequences and will appear different to every friend and foe inside and outside of our country. When Hezbollah and Hamas stole from the sleeping bulldog - Israel, they found something unexpected in the world today. They found single-minded self-interest showing their teeth, ready for a fight. At the same time, they are exhibiting compassion for innocent non-combatants. Every other Middle East country seems to be allowing the Bulldog room - probably because to do otherwise won’t do any good. Israel has the power and more importantly, the national will to stand up to terrorist bullies.

If you think Israel over-reacted – it was by design. Put yourself in their position. They are surrounded by countries that want to see their destruction. They have an ongoing feud with the Palestinians. Their strong military leader, Ariel Sharon, is in a coma and his peace process (through strength) was at a stand still until now. When rockets started raining and soldiers were kidnapped and killed, Israel acted immediately and the world is on the edge of its seat. I believe this will bring us closer to peace than anyone realizes. Israel’s clear objective to stand up and defend herself using all her power should tell us something. This clarity of purpose could create a safer world. You know where they stand. If you send 10 missiles, the bulldog sends back massive retaliation. This strategy tends to shorten wars, a mini Hiroshima effect.

The U.S., on the other hand, demonstrates the opposite to our enemies. We are a country in conflict with ourselves. Political parties reflect the division in our country. Our solidarity after 9/11 has been replaced by a wishy-washy electorate who does not have the stomach for a long-term war against a determined enemy. We are a superpower, but out of political correctness and concern for our world image we rarely exercise our power and when we do, we feel guilty.

As an alternative, what do you think would happen if the U.S. said to North Korea and Iran, "If you want to launch missiles or build a bomb against the will of the world then on such and such a date, we will destroy your capital city. We will give your people time to leave, but those will be the consequences of your decisions."

That kind of clarity is what Israel conveys to their neighbors and consequently they have survived and are respected in a very dangerous Middle East. To some extent, they can be bold because they have a powerful and supportive Uncle Sam. But, we should look to their courage and singular purpose as a guide for our own foreign policy. One strong disciplinarian in a school yard cannot only make the place safe and secure, it can also spawn peace and contentment. The fact that ISRAEL is a chosen people is not lost on God-fearing people around the world. Even the broad Muslim world respects strength as their terrorizing fanatic fringe try to exploit the weak-kneed. We must understand superior strength will always be questioned, many times hated, and rarely beloved. With our power and wealth, the U.S. is not only the policemen in the world, we are the firemen and Red Cross too. It would be nice to get some credit for this good among men. But we won’t. We can only hope that our reward will come from the higher power upon which all power comes, and the gift of a peaceful world obtained through strength and resolve.

A Hint of What Could Be

Recently, a glimpse of what America could be was mildly covered by the press without a hint of seeing the possible potential. Warren Buffett, the founder of Birkshire Hathaway Inc. (a very successful high-end mutual fund) offered to combine his $40-50 Billion with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which would then close in on the $100 Billion endowment figure. Buffett was apparently attracted by the Gates’ big vision perspective for their foundation. Rather than doling out small grants to a large number of worthy beneficiaries, the Gates organization looks for large world-changing projects that need huge funding.

America has thousands of foundations (Corporate, Private, and Community) with professional board members working hard to build their communities. These are rich people quietly leaving their wealth behind for the good of you and me. Individuals who have worked hard to make or preserve generational wealth. They chose to keep it working for their benevolent cause or in combination with other even greater causes.

Where as most of us are spenders of our own (and others) money, these philanthropists find joy in saving and preserving. These are also the folks that are battered by politicians "lower taxes for the rich," as if their group is the scum of the earth and surely they deserve to be taxed to the hilt just to be fair.

On the contrary, I say honor those who have worked hard (or smart) and encourage their wealth creation in hopes they are savers, not spenders. Here is a vision: If private wealth building could continue on a grander scale, at some point a huge corpus could help diminish the need for government to grow. Remember the beauty of endowment is the preservation of the principle, only the interest is spent. If Federal and State political vision, including tax policy, could see this opportunity, it might happen more quickly and in my grandchildren’s lifetime.

What is your vision? What big idea do you have and would like to share? Comment on this blog or give your vision and maybe see it in print in BIZlife Magazine.

HOT or Not?

I may be one of the biggest promoters of regionalism in the whole Triad area; but, on a recent trip to Scotland, I was surprised to find myself, never mentioning the Piedmont Triad. How could this be? And more importantly, what does this mean for the success at marketing the region? When I moved to the Piedmont Triad 17 years ago, it was named the Triad. For me, it was not High Point or Greensboro before the Triad, yet when describing my home I fall into the same habit as a life-long resident.

Would this be a common response for all of us? I guess our minds are trying to make it easy for others to recognize our home and naming a city comes easier than a new region. What a disadvantage this is for us when trying to promote our region.

One More Chance

RTP, over time, has earned enough recognition to energize the Triangle. If we move forward with HOT (Heart of Triad), we may also get some "Triad" reach. We should really use expert help when naming this effort permanently. HOT is catchy, but, hot what? It is an adjective. RTP is a noun. RTP describes a research park in the Triangle. What does HOT describe? If HOT materializes, and I hope it does, then a naming exercise by professionals should be employed early on. We cannot afford another faux-pa like, "Triad."

Since we live in the Bible Belt anyway, I like the name "Heaven." Who wouldn’t like to move their company to the place we all want to end up anyway? "Back in Heaven, we have economic incentives which are just out of this world!"

Presidential Power

We did a brief interview with colonel Oliver North and a few of you went ballistic because of the Iran- Contra affair. Rather than re-hashing that event, Let's discuss a current issue that is relevant to the powers of a President. Further, can we revise history and assume that 9/11 happened in the last years of the Clinton administration( just to diffuse partisanship).
If the head of the N.S.A. came to President Clinton and said,"We have a war on terror. There are things we can do with technology to help find terrorists, ie. Wiretapping offshore conversations, and logging domestic phone calls to look for patterns. These are not clearly legal because war powers law is always behind advancing technology". What should we do Mr. President?
I think ( and hope) President Clinton would have said that the security of the country and its citizens is more important than the legal or political consequences of obtaining this intelligence. Don't we want a President that is willing to maybe skirt the law to protect us... during war? You say, " well , why not go to congress or the F.I.S.A. court and make it legal"? Think about that. Millions of calls are made, going to the court ahead of time would be a waste of time 99.9% of the time. In the other .01%, hurry , you are trying to catch a terrorist.
If President Truman had gone public with the Atom Bomb, wouldn't the mere disclosure have created enough national and international up- roar to ever prevent its use there-by prolonging WW-II. Haven't we now seen that taping conversations is futile, the terrorists have been alerted and some advantage has been lost.
Aren't we use to business monitoring our phone calls to assure good service. Wouldn't we want the bad guys to get caught by opening our own (boring) lives a little to scrutiny? I know this isn't comfortable and I am a huge privacy rights advocate. However this is War and the risk today of me being prosecuted in error is remote in America. Why? Because the same technology and speed of information would help me exonerate myself. Let's say I get picked up by the F.B.I. because the N.S.A. heard me talking on the phone or read my blog. My first call would be to an attorney and my second would be to C.N.N. or Fox News. Our society is so open that even a small town citizen can use the power and hunger of the media to tell their true story.

Global Warming

Some interesting developments this month. At a global warming summit in Wales there were a bunch of oil executives. It seems that as the great ice flows melt, great new fields of oil are being discovered underneath( North of the Old Soviet Union). The Global warming crowd is saying,"Ah-ha! The industrialists want more warming so they will find more fossil fuel to sell and then we will warm even faster.
Sounds logical, but wait? Fossil fuels come from decaying vegetation. Under the ice cap there must have been trees which means it must have been much warmer. So could our warming trend simply be the back and forth of the earths life cycle from warm to cold, cold to warm?
Another myth. How many times have you heard from scientists that as the polar cap melts the level of the oceans will rise, take over valuable land, causing great economic harm. Do this experiment with your elementary student. Fill a glass full of ice, then fill to the brim with tap water. Come back an hour later after the ice has melted. Is there water everywhere outside the glass? Hum! Truth. Ice takes up more volume than the same amount of H2O in its liquid form. During Global warming it is more likely that the beaches will expand not contract. Beach erosion, That's another story and this blow hard is done for the moment.

Immigration- The vacuum a wall can't hold

Is anyone like me, thinking we need some out-of- the -box ideas for these difficult issues. Though the subject is overwhelming, let's get the dialogs going. Why are people eager to come across the border in the first place? Certainly wage differential on the other side of a fairly porous border generates an incentive. In our country we have an arbitrary $6.00/hr minimum wage. Their wages are much less(if there is work). That alone will get folks moving. Combine this with the stigma of " the minimum wage job" here, and you create a vacuum at the bottom of our pay scale. There is no honor being a burger flipper or a dish washer( both jobs I have done). Will a wall stop the flow, when the suction is sooo great?

THE WALL AS A FUNNEL TO AMERICA LITE
How about a wall that has fifty inviting doors spaced along the border at high traffic locations. The invitation is for a job and maybe a home. The first home might be mobile because the first job is the wall itself. Since the lure is work and there is a willing labor force, let's organize better. Why couldn't companies like Manpower make a nice commission finding jobs for these workers. The key will be that this zone needs to be different than middle America. No minimum wage , no frills, but a life with advantages over where they came and an opportunity for controlled transition to middle America. The transition would include documentation, schooling, health care at a lower level, and taxes to help pay for the services. We will call them AMERICA LITE zones and maybe President Fox can provide some land on his side of the border to help. These zones can't have all the frills and infrastructure which need to be covered by high taxes. These AL zones wouldn't need to be just on the border. They could be created where the jobs are ie. Big cities, migrant farm areas, disaster sites. New Orleans becomes America Lite. These attractive zones could lure current illegales who are struggling and uneducated to a place that was designed for their needs. If food, housing costs, and taxes were low perhaps others down and out or on welfare would see the benefits for themselves in America Lite. A little competition in the inner city might be interesting to watch. OK how about your comments and ideas.

Things that bug me- How about you

Find a "Commerce Business Daily"
Have you ever heard of a government entity that reduced services? In the Presidents budget proposal he recommends shutting down hundreds of programs. The reason! They don't work. Can you come up with a program or three that you could do without? One problem is that we don't have a clue about all the programs that have come into existence. If you would like a hint, find a copy of a "Commerce Business Daily". This is not a list of programs but you will get an idea what your tax dollars are buying in one day. Yes, you can sell a hammer for $170 if it is packaged properly and we have also paid for a study on the mating habits of honey bees. Find someone that does government work for a copy and prepare to be furious.

Bug me- Bug you

NC State lottery
Can't you just feel the excitement? We will be buying and scratching and millions will be flowing. I can't wait to see the ad campaigns that will be used to get you to buy. I heard the odds of winning $3 on a $1 dollar scratch was 80 to 1. Win a million? Same odds as getting hit by lightning 6 times. Bet we don't see the truth in advertising that we have come to expect.

Bug me-Bug you

Politicians can't commit
Why would Republicans fail to maintain a Contract With America? In 1994, this one idea gave them the first congressional majority in 40 years. What is wrong with putting up a sign that says: This is what we believe and what we want to accomplish. If the Democrats were smart they would come up with their own contract. What should these contracts say? I will send the leaders your responses both Democrats and Republicans.

Bug me- Bug you

Iran- Nuclear aspirations
Why would a country that is floating on crude oil look to spend Billions developing nuclear power(for peaceful purposes). Do you think they are looking to preserve their air quality?

Things that bug me- How about you

The Ports Flap
Why would a country, or a company, or an individual spend billions for a legitimate business (managing five or six ports in the United States) and then use that platform to blow-up the port or something close by? Logic would say their must be a less expensive and easier way to promote terror. It will now be much harder for Dubai, Moscow, or Peking to trust us because this deal demonstrates we can't first trust them.
The great thing about world trade is the trust and good will created between the trading partners . What greater way to showcase freedom and free enterprise than to have foreign investment here. Ownership is a key ingredient for improving neighborhoods, and international relationships.

Interviewing Colonel Oliver North

Today, I have the opportunity to meet and ask questions to one of the most interesting and controversial individuals in recent American History. Colonel North is in town for a fund raising breakfast for the Boy Scouts. I have a few soft ball ?'s for him and I will be asking him about the importance of Faith in the Military. Maybe you have a question you would like me to ask? Look for any shocking answers in future posts and as always we look for serious opposing views.

Sometimes Our Dollars Vote Loudest - 780

Sometimes Our Dollars Vote Loudest - 780

I have had dozens of conversations with business folks who, like us, have supported three or more Chambers of Commerce to uphold our region. This year, we have decided to support our local Chamber and invest only in regional initiatives that might be started through regional efforts like the Chambers 3 process, H.O.T. is a good example. This month we have provided a full-page (see page---) to promote the upcoming H.O.T. Charrette (Public Meeting).

Over the last months we have showcased the opinions of many leaders about the state of our community. Most all have agreed that if there was one guaranteed solution, one fire starter that could reverse the status quo, it would be a consolidated Chamber of Commerce. We would support a consolidated Chamber (with a higher member fee) that brings board input, communication, and ideas together each month for a regional vision. People who co-labor together will also think of others interest and not just their own.
So many point their finger at the Airport as the problem or why would Winston build a Coliseum when the Greensboro facility was under utilized. Or why should we care about the Furniture Market or the Golf tournament, “that’s their problem”. Sometimes these are actual comments; mostly they are stated under breath or with “no comment” and certainly no finger lifting to help. With these attitudes, our community will continue to be out paced by other cities that have a common vision.

H.O.T. could be the kindling that gets things going. In June or July the H.O.T. process will need new and renewable funding. They will have a land use plan in hand and hundreds of dream ideas, all with a regional focus and a Guilford/Forsyth footprint. I encourage each Chamber board representative to consider the benefits of joining hands, maybe through the Chamber 3 process. Think what a H.O.T. Triad could be like. A thriving cooperative business community finding new partners and customers right over the county lines, a group working together to beat Las Vegas at their own game, building a new PGA stadium course near the county line with a destination Marriott complex, home of the Carolina H.O.T. Classic and more. Tiger shows up because Richard Petty invites him for a ride of a lifetime. Hundreds of new companies coming because they like to live in a smaller town yet do business in a top 30 MSA. Envision a bullet monorail carrying vacationers and workers alike quickly to each city and eventually to Raleigh, Charlotte, and Asheville from the H.O.T. Center Station.

All this and much more is just waiting for that tipping point, that moment when a few risk takers turn up the heat and then…. It’s HOT.

Here are more sound bites from local leaders –

People have talked about regionalism but they could not act on it. H.O.T. gives us an opportunity to act. Local governments must take their appropriate roles and by-in along with the business community. We, in Winston Salem, know how important the furniture market is to our region – Chuck Greene, Bell South, Winston Salem

We have been a Triad in geography only. When the three cities realize that there is truly mutual benefit to be gained by cooperating, as we saw with Dell, then the Triad will become a regional force and attract more major businesses. – Joe Carroll, Furniture Today – High Point

We have made great strides. The key to moving forward is backing regional activities like I-74 and I-73, FedEx, GTCC and Forsyth Tech. With victories wherever they locate, success is shared, even if the adjoining county gets the deal. – Bob Leak, Winston Salem Business, Inc. – Winston Salem

In Greensboro, we can’t get the respect we deserve because we can’t muster a consistent voice and a long term vision. We tend to know where Winston and High Point are going but we don’t have our act together. Development and site selection folks must wonder how to approach Greensboro and the Triad. – Mike Bumpass, Greensboro Merchants Association

We are too focused on the tree instead of the forest and therefore leave the full pie behind. We tend to be too focused on where we are instead of where we should go. Envision our progress if Chamber board members could meet and communicate regularly. Friendships would result, then business and then vision. – Lida Hayes-Calvert – S & L Printing – Winston Salem

Your comments might be published in the next issue of BIZlife.

Regionalism is HOT

A few months ago, we started asking local leaders for their insight regarding road blocks to regionalism. We continue this month by sharing these sound bites with you.

Our inability to compete well behind bigger regions and more competent communities is becoming painfully clear. Does our region have insurmountable shortcomings that will always hinder our progress? I say, “No!” The problem is of our own making; with the right leadership and will, we can fix it.

We are a top metropolitan area with three separate communities, with different cultures and heritages – and we don’t co-operate much. However, a company could move here, have a large customer base, great transportation options, short drive times and live in a smaller family oriented community. We do have some structures that will be difficult to overcome – like multiple governmental jurisdictions (police, fire, education) – each with their own bureaucracies.

Like Indianapolis, those are difficult to fix but “oh” the benefits. I agree with Jeff Horney, “When Tom Devault came to the High Point Chamber, he started talking to his friend David Jameson, and now they are talking to Gayle Anderson, Chamber president of Winston-Salem.”
If leaders could convince their boards that a consolidated chamber could be the most important catalyst of change, then we would see progress at all levels, including economic development. Now that David is stepping down as Greensboro’s chamber president, will there be any thought or movement to consolidate at this time, when top leadership obstacles are eased?

The business community must drive the vehicle of change. Government officials have too many constituencies to please. It will be business owners, on chamber and similar boards, who need to raise the clarion call. They have the most to gain and lose.
Maybe a “HOT” idea will spark the debate. Hopefully you have heard of the Heart of the Triad initiative? Airports, FedEx, Dell and baseball have all added to the divide. Maybe a multi-use park, between Dell and FedEx, could be the springboard – our own Research Triangle Park.

What would it take? City leaders must be willing to:

1. Give up control to an important piece of real estate for the common good.

2. Give up the tax revenue related to this real estate for a deferred unknown gain down the road.

3. Provide services to the park without creating a whole new jurisdiction (and bureaucracy).

4. Give up the area that is not currently developed due to watershed issues. This will take delicate state negotiations and Guilford County can’t be seen as stealing Forsyth County water or worse, contaminating their supply.

5. Listen and consider the factions who will oppose development for environmental and 100 other reasons. These are stakeholders too.

6. Be patient.
Thanks to each of you working behind the scenes to seed and fertilize this idea. I challenge our media and naysayers to relax, let the ideas percolate without a million eyes of scrutiny and let capital flow in, without the risk of public disclosure.