As all prognosticators look ahead to this new year, it is clear that the place to look for our financial future for the next couple of years is Washington, not New York .

Politicians of both parties and most U.S. citizens are so scared or nervous about the economy melting down even further that there seems to be wide support for the Federal Government to spend whatever is necessary to get us out of this mess before it becomes even more catastrophic.  I find it interesting that economists of all stripes have come together is a loose consensus that the way out of this dangerous economic situation is massive spending by the government.  I certainly don’t disagree, but I have significant reservations about what Congress will pass and President Obama will ultimately sign.

The position here is that if the U.S., and therefore to a great degree the global economy is ...]]> It is interesting that central to the U.S. view of the global economy is the inauguration of President Obama and the passage of a historic stimulus package by Congress.  Given that the world is awash in economic fear the potential for hope and a sense of direction has been hard to find.  Since the current economic meltdown is something we want to change, and since that word has been synonymous with Obama, there is a lot of hope for a good start to his Presidency, and in his stated desire for a $1 trillion dollar stimulus package over the next two years.

As all prognosticators look ahead to this new year, it is clear that the place to look for our financial future for the next couple of years is Washington, not New York .

Politicians of both parties and most U.S. citizens are so scared or nervous about the economy melting down even further that there seems to be wide support for the Federal Government to spend whatever is necessary to get us out of this mess before it becomes even more catastrophic.  I find it interesting that economists of all stripes have come together is a loose consensus that the way out of this dangerous economic situation is massive spending by the government.  I certainly don’t disagree, but I have significant reservations about what Congress will pass and President Obama will ultimately sign.

The position here is that if the U.S., and therefore to a great degree the global economy is to exit this great recession before the end of 2009 the stimulus package must be a uniquely crafted effort.  There are a number of dynamics that must be considered.

Speed If the stimulus package is to have any benefit in 2009, it must not only have a significant part of it passed in the first quarter, but that part must be deployed toward an immediate use of funds for job creation in the short term.  Of course there is much work to be done on the traditional infrastructure type of projects.  Much of this can be deployed at the state and local level, giving federal funds for major projects that are ready to go but lack funding.  Of course the old adage that haste makes waste is never more applicable than when politicians fund massive projects quickly.  The country cannot afford to waste money on traditional earmarks and pork barrel projects.  How to do this fast and intelligently is a major issue.

Transformation not Recovery. As stated here in the last two columns, we are in a transition between the Information Age and the Shift Age which means, ultimately a transformation to a new order, a new type of economy and a new vision.  What is lost can not be recovered.  The stimulus package should not be about just reversing the massive contraction into expansion but also about laying the ground work for new infrastructure and innovation, one that will set the stage for the transformative economy to come.  Such things as an infrastructure for the 21st century, focusing on high speed connectivity, a national electrical grid, and transfer and storage of renewable sources of energy must be included if this huge investment is to have any long term effect.

The issue with this of course is that this will take years to put in place and will not be part of a quick fix. However it is essential that a long term focus on the future economy of the U.S. must be addressed.  Innovation, promising new technologies and the development of IP related to technology and energy technology are America’s future and the future source of millions of jobs.  While this investment may not affect economic metrics in 2009 and even to a degree 2010, it is essential for the future of the country. An intelligent and future oriented balance must be struck.

Funding The need for the U.S. to sell hundreds of billions of bonds to fund this stimulus package comes at a time when the usual buyers are becoming much more reticent.  China will need to keep its capital at home more than in recent years to deal with its own economic slow down.  Saudi Arabia will need to monitor its investments given the collapse of oil prices.  This will mean that the U.S. Treasury may well have to offer higher than desired rates of interest to obtain the money.  This of course will put a long term pressure on both inflation and on our national debt and financial obligations which is fast approaching $58 trillion.  If we are going to significantly add to this unprecedented mountain of debt, we must invest wisely.  To not do so will just add to the economic probability of worse economic collapses in the future.

Oversight This is extremely important.  If this once in a lifetime stimulus package is not closely managed, highly transparent and constantly being recalibrated, then the U.S. may well be stimulating itself into a rapid national decline.  Just look at what has happened to the TARP program where some $300 billion has been spend, with things only getting worse and the banks given the money refusing to lend or support business who need the funds for growth.  The entire debt and credit economy on which the country lived for the last three decades is being cleansed and it will not come back for several years.

Tax cuts. While it is always a politicians dream to give tax cuts, at this time it will have much less stimulus affect than ever before.  Simply put, most Americans will take any tax cut to pay down debt, get caught up on mortgage payments and save for college and retirement.  After having lost jobs, having savings eviscerated and lost hope of retiring soon, tax cuts will not, as in the past, go for new bright shiny objects.

The short term economic health of the U.S. depends upon a speedy passage of an intelligent stimulus package.  The longer term economic health of the country can be greatly aided by a vision oriented stimulus or investment package that lays the foundation for the innovation based, renewable energy, ever more connected American economy of the future.  This, in the long run, will be the greatest contribution to a bright future for the country and will also provide the greatest economic benefit and greatest number of jobs.

Let us all hope that the 2009 stimulus package does not look back to 20^th century institutions, models and ways of doing business and try to recover them.  Instead let us see a commitment to the future, to the millions of jobs and hundreds of billions of wealth that will be created by looking ahead and investing in a 21^st century vision of what can and will be the source of a long term economic prosperity.

What makes me think of this once again?  The Bush EPA blocking California and 16 other states from enforcing states laws to protect the environment and their citizens. EPA stands for Environmental Protection Agency, yet the Bush EPA has nothing to do with protecting the environment and everything to do with turf battles and giving in to special interests.  As we all know, the Bush administration has shown no respect for the environment and has shown a total absence of leadership in the area of CO2 emissions.  It actually fought and lost a court case where the court ruled that the EPA does have jurisdiction over the issue of green house emissions.  Who does the Bush EPA protect?  Not the environment.

The signing into law of the energy bill last week allowed the Bush EPA to deny California and the other states from enforcing laws that have more stringent regulations regarding CO2 emissions and automotive fleet MPG.  The emissions standards California adopted in 2004, which were never approved by the federal government, would force automakers to cut greenhouse gas emission by 30 percent by 2016.  If ...]]> The Bush Administration has always made me think of George Orwell and his novel “1984” from the point of view of language.  While all politicians and all administrations I can remember have been somewhat loose with language and the truth, the current administration has realized the vision of Orwell in that language means nothing and is to be used to manipulate the citizens of the country.

What makes me think of this once again?  The Bush EPA blocking California and 16 other states from enforcing states laws to protect the environment and their citizens. EPA stands for Environmental Protection Agency, yet the Bush EPA has nothing to do with protecting the environment and everything to do with turf battles and giving in to special interests.  As we all know, the Bush administration has shown no respect for the environment and has shown a total absence of leadership in the area of CO2 emissions.  It actually fought and lost a court case where the court ruled that the EPA does have jurisdiction over the issue of green house emissions.  Who does the Bush EPA protect?  Not the environment.

The signing into law of the energy bill last week allowed the Bush EPA to deny California and the other states from enforcing laws that have more stringent regulations regarding CO2 emissions and automotive fleet MPG.  The emissions standards California adopted in 2004, which were never approved by the federal government, would force automakers to cut greenhouse gas emission by 30 percent by 2016.  If you have ever been in LA on a bad smog day you can understand the relatively easy passage of that bill.  As I wrote here in a column titled “Once Again it Starts in California”, that state has, in contrast to Washington D.C., shown consistent leadership in the area of issues pertaining to global warming.  A Republican governor and a Democratic legislature came together for leadership; what a concept!

There of course is no precedent in what the Bush EPA did last week and the states are all going to take it to court as there is a lot of precedent on the side of the states.  In fact, this year alone courts in California and Vermont upheld the California standards against legal challenges from the auto industry.  The attorney generals of New York, Connecticut and California all said they would challenge the decision.  They should all win in court, but once again leadership and taking constructive action is being resisted by those in the Bush administration.

This of course makes me think of Orwell again.  I always thought that conservatives and most republicans believed in ‘states rights’.  That was often a way to avoid taking a stand on a difficult issue such as integration, moral issues and taxation, but true conservatives felt that a big Federal government was not good and that states had certain rights.  So here we have a “conservative” “republican” administration overruling states rights to protect their respective environment and citizens.  Hmmmmmm, makes you think even more of the language the Bush administration, and many others in Washington D.C. use.

Big government and government spending is bad according to Bush, which was a significant part of the rationale to pass tax cuts. That’s what conservatives and republicans have always said. However not only has government spending grown more under this administration than any other,  the national debt has increased more under this administration than any other.  As the www.truthin2008.org site points out, the true national debt is more than $54 trillion.  Yes trillion.  More than half of that, some $30 trillion has been racked up since Bush came into office.  But hey, we are spending ourselves into disaster because we are “fighting to protect freedom”.  Freedom from what?  Debt?  Dependence upon foreign oil?  Freedom from states rights and fiscal responsibility?  Freedom from pollution? Freedom from fear?

I write this column as a futurist.  I am concerned about the future of this country.  There are half a dozen major issues that the U.S. must face, and soon, if it is to remain a great country. I will address these in 2008. The Bush administration is not looking at any of them.  Not only are they not looking at them, they have taken George Orwell’s “1984” playbook and made it policy, whatever that might mean these days. 

As a futurist, I have accepted that we will have to wait until there is a new administration to roll up our sleeves and face our country’s future. That is why the 2008 presidential election is the most important one in at least a generation. If the Bush EPA protects the environment, then a four letter word for peace must be Iraq.

Will America continue to be the great nation we still think it is?  As a nation will we be able to adjust to the rapidly changing realities of the world?  As we move from the Information Age to the Shift Age will we have the resolve to make some really difficult choices and rise up as we have in the past to meet our national promise and legacy? 

In just the last 18 months the awareness and acceptance of global warming has gone from a minority to a majority of us.  This issue is one that we now see is something that while not greatly disrupting our lives today, might have catastrophic effects for our children and certainly for our grandchildren.  The question for America is how and how quickly we can move from a society and economy based upon formerly cheap fossil fuels to one that is based upon renewable energy sources that are sustainable and non-polluting.  We now see we are at risk and we are starting to take action. 

The issue we must now also face is the alarming issue of ...]]> Thinking a lot about the future as I do, I keep coming back to the fact that there are five or six fundamental and critical issues that face America in this still new century. The degree to which we begin to face these key issues and to start to do so right now will determine whether our greatness as a nation will continue and build upon our magnificent history. 

Will America continue to be the great nation we still think it is?  As a nation will we be able to adjust to the rapidly changing realities of the world?  As we move from the Information Age to the Shift Age will we have the resolve to make some really difficult choices and rise up as we have in the past to meet our national promise and legacy? 

In just the last 18 months the awareness and acceptance of global warming has gone from a minority to a majority of us.  This issue is one that we now see is something that while not greatly disrupting our lives today, might have catastrophic effects for our children and certainly for our grandchildren.  The question for America is how and how quickly we can move from a society and economy based upon formerly cheap fossil fuels to one that is based upon renewable energy sources that are sustainable and non-polluting.  We now see we are at risk and we are starting to take action. 

The issue we must now also face is the alarming issue of our national debt.  It is nothing less than a financial cancer growing inside our country that will, in the foreseeable future force us to react to it or risk the tearing of the fabric of our nation. We may not immediately feel its’ negative effect, but our children will. It is the other inconvenient truth we face.

In the past few years I have become alarmed both by the mounting national debt and the absolute non-acknowledgement of it by those that seek office.  It is the great ‘wink, wink, nod, nod, say no more’ problem that politicians know about and completely avoid addressing, except for a few brave individuals.  Many politicians perhaps are even unaware of the problem.

About six months ago I had the good fortune to meet a wonderful woman named Sheila Weinberg.  In the early part of this decade she decided to make the federal budget her summer reading.  What she found out was that it had no correlation to the basic rules of accounting that we as citizens and companies must live by.  She closed down her accounting practice, founded the Institute for Truth in Accounting and dedicated her life to bringing awareness to this issue.  We met because she was looking for a way to amplify this issue in time for it to become a central issue of the 2008 election year.

Sheila further educated me on how bad the national debt situation really is.  Having seen the national debt clock, with its rapidly increasing dollar amounts, I thought that our national debt was somewhere around 9 trillion dollars.  The real number is closer to 59 trillion.  The difference is all the promises made regarding social security, medical care, veterans benefits and other entitlements that, guess what, the government does not look at as obligations.  Don’t you believe they are obligations?  Aren’t you expecting the government to honor them? 

Let me make the national debt personal to you.  Every man woman and child is now responsible for more that $190,000 of debt.

There has never been a budget surplus in our lifetimes, regardless of claims made.  To use a household analogy, the government accounts for the budget as we look at a checking account.  Money comes into the account, we pay our bills, and if, at the end of the month there is money left over, there is a surplus (and we know how rare surpluses are in government).  What this check book version of cash accounting does not take into account is our mortgages, credit card debt and other loan obligations, all of which are very real. When speaking of the budget, the government does not account for future payments of obligations.

The Institute for Truth in Accounting, with some generous individual contributions, has just launched a web site, www.truthin2008.org .  The goal of this site is to mobilize citizens, journalists and anyone concerned about this issue to make the national debt a central issue of the elections in 2008.  The hope here is that this web site can become the catalyst to make the nation, and those that want to lead it, face this issue now.

If you want a bright future for America, if you want a bright future for your children and grandchildren, please visit www.truthin2008.org to begin to learn the truth.  It is scary, and we need to face it now.