The Cyber Security Recruiting Dilemma - A Contractor Solution For Cyber Warriors

In the cyber world everything happens quickly. New technology, new threats, new regulations and new players are constantly emerging and in order for the United States to compete and remain secure, qualified people are required - and we don't have them.

In a recent article entitled Cyberwarrior Shortage Threatens U.S. Security (by Tom Gjeltin, the author makes the following points:

· The United States is the most vulnerable country for cyber attacks.

· United States cyber defenses are not up to the challenge.

· The protection of U.S. cyber assets requires an "army" of cyber warriors but recruitment of that force is suffering. Conservative estimates are that at least 1,000 "cyberwarriors"

Not only are new candidates hard to find but existing agency personnel are leaving. This problem is beginning to be recognized by the community at large. This is a serious problem and the solution needs to include the private contractor community as well as direct hiring by government agencies. As a recent study concluded:

The ability of government agencies to fulfill their missions is in peril, requiring immediate and thoughtful attention to the recruitment, hiring and retention of talented IT professionals. Without the right people in the right jobs, our government's ability to accomplish its mission will be hindered by failing projects and high attrition rates. By investing in IT talent, government will ensure mission success and maintain a safe and prosperous nation. (Source ISSUE BRIEF | BUILDING AN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WORKFORCE; Partnership for Public Service)

The United States Federal Government is remarkable successful in certain limited areas (e.g. defense and transportation) but recruiting cyberwarriors is clearly not in their core capabilities for a number of very good reasons:

· Cyber warriors are in high demand and the search process requires agile, innovative approaches. Government agencies are burdened with a great number of rules that inhibit the process.

· Government Employee hiring is notoriously slow. Turn around averages about 200 days and if high level clearances are required add about six months or 180 days to the process. Total time to recruit and hire a technically qualified person with required high level clearances (required by most of Cyber Command) - over 1 year.

· It is hard to change government employee status if requirements change or the employee fails to perform.

· Generally speaking government agencies don't expend effort on research and development required to keep up with technology and cyber attack strategy and tactics.

The above reasons are a part of the reasons that Government Cyber Security agencies (DHS and Cyber Command) look to contractors to supply cyberwarriors. Contractors add the innovation and facileness required to reduce the shortage for cyberwarriors. In addition, contractors add specific value in the following ways:

· Many contractors include aggressive recruiting in their business model and effectively use social networking for maximum job requisition exposure.

· Often, contractors recruit from existing staff, prior employees or through the use of social networking sites. These techniques are especially valuable when searching for candidates with high level security clearances. The turnaround on job requisitions averages 30-60 days.

· Each contract issued by a government agency has termination for convenience/cause clauses. The net effect is that if the government decides that it no longer needs or wants the cyberwarrior(s) provided - the agency can terminate the contract and fire the contractor. This gives the respective agency tremendous flexibility.

· Contractors generally engage in internally funded research and development (IR&D) and pass this on to government agencies in the form of better skilled experts and cyberwarriors.

Are Contract Employees More Expensive?

The answer is no.

Recently, contractor compensation has come under administration and media criticism as a waste of taxpayer dollars. Contractors have been portrayed as having an incestuous relationship with key agencies like those in the Intelligence community (IC). This criticism is unfair and not based on facts:

When contracts respond to agency Request for Proposal they must supply forward pricing and identify three levels of cost in detail: direct labor, fringe benefits (health insurance, paid time off, matching social security, workers compensation, unemployment insurance etc.), General and Administrative (Rent, office staff, executive salaries etc.) To the total of all the costs is added a "fee" which represents profit for the contractor (6-8%). A "fully burdened" hourly rate is calculated.

During the RFP process a Basis of Estimate (BOE) is prepared showing the number of hours required for a particular task (defined by the agency). To this estimate is multiplied the fully burdened hourly rate to determine the cost. If the contractor produces rates that are too high, it may lose the contract or, if it wins and costs are less that estimated, it must return to the government the excess. An agency called DCAA (Defense Contract Audit Agency.

As regards the elements of the fully burdened hourly rate the following should be noted:

· Direct labor rates (the amount of salary actually paid to the employee) of federal employees have increased dramatically as compared to contractor employee salaries. Some estimates are the government employee salaries are 25% higher.

· Generally speaking contractor employees are more flexible for overtime if required.

· Federal employee benefits are more lucrative than contractor benefits including separate health care (richer than the recent public health care bill passed), pension (richer than social security), greater paid time off and other benefits.

· The cost per hour per employee for Federal workers does not include any burden for General and Administrative costs - these heavy burdens for office space, utilities, office equipment and other support expenses are paid by the tax payer.

· The only area that use of Federal employees avoids is the contractor profit fee but when one considers the higher pay, benefits and the tax payer subsidized G&A costs, this is a relatively small item at 6-8%.

The bottom line is that the Federal Government needs highly qualified cyberwarriors and it needs them now in order to protect the welfare of the nation. When one compares this specialized need, and the need to protect the success of its cyber missions, the best choice is contractor provided employees.

Jon M. Stout is Chief Executive Officer of Aspiration Software LLC. Aspiration Software LLC is an Information Technology/Cyber Security services provider focused on the Intelligence Community (IC). For more information about Cyber Security and Employment Opportunities in the Intelligence Community go to http://aspirationsoftware.com

Reverse Mortgages Get Second Look Due to Meager Social Security Increase in 2009

Social Security benefits will be increased in January 2009 for 50 million people. The increase will be 5.8 percent and will be the largest increase since 1982 when Social Security benefits increased 7.4 percent. The 2009 increase will be more than double the raise that retirees received in 2008, which was 2.3 percent.

At first blush that sounds exciting, until you realize that what that equates to for the average retiree is a paltry $63.00 per month. Yearly benefit changes are based upon the amount the Consumer Price Index (PCI) increases from July through September from one year to the next. Unfortunately, the problem with using the CPI is that most consumers do not believe that the CPI accurately reflects the prices they are paying for crucial necessities like energy, food or medical care. This disbelief is particularly strong among those living on a fixed income.

Some argue that if the Producer Price Index (PPI) was used for the measurement for Social Security benefits increases, it would be more reflective of the "real world" for retirees. The PPI measures wholesale inflation. (Wholesale inflation tends to lead retail inflation.) The Producer Price Index (PPI) in June of 2008 set a 27 year record with a 9.2 percent increase in inflation over a twelve month period. The last time inflation was this high was the same year that Treasury yields exceeded 15%, and 30 year mortgage rates exceeded 16%.

Retirees Battered on Several Fronts

$63.00 extra per month seems woefully inadequate for millions of retirees that have been battered on several fronts this year. Not only have they seen huge increases in energy and food costs, but many have been assaulted by reeling stock market declines as well as plummeting home values.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that Americans' retirement plans have lost as much as $2 Trillion over the last 15 months, which represents more than 20 percent of their value, due to the upheaval on Wall Street. Real estate prices have dropped nationally by 20.29 percent. In some of the previously "hot" markets, like California, Nevada, Arizona and Florida the decreases have been even more severe.

More Are Turning To Reverse Mortgages For Help

Retirees worried about their decimated savings and stock market assets are turning in greater numbers to the idea of using a reverse mortgage to stabilize their cash flow and supplement retirement income. Luckily, the greater demand for reverse mortgage loans coincides with new regulations for FHA insured HECM reverse mortgages. The HECM reverse mortgage loan now has a higher National loan limit of $417,000. This is up from the previous loan limits that ranged from $200,160 to a high of $362,790 depending on what county the property was located in. Not only does the single National loan limit simplify the product but it allows approximately 30 percent more seniors to qualify and others to be eligible for even more money than they would have been with the lower loan limits.

If you are one of the many retirees that feel a personal disconnect between what the government says the inflation rate is and what your "real world" experiences are every time you go to the grocery store, the gas station or pay your utility or medical bills, then don't feel alone. The indexes that have been chosen are by design and unfortunately, will never be reflective of the "real world." Even with the conservative index that the government pegs the increase in benefits to, the system is still on target for insolvency by the end of 2011.

It is essential that we all take charge of our own destiny in retirement. If you thought you planned well and are now realizing that you could be short on money and long on time, you may have to take a look at tapping into home equity even though you thought you would never have to touch it and it would be left in your estate for your heirs.

Home equity does not have to be a sacred cow, never to be tapped into. Most adult children would rather see their parents live comfortably during retirement rather than sacrifice lifestyle in order to leave them a home that they don't want or need.

Senior homeowners 62 and older looking for comprehensive reverse mortgage information can do their research at http://www.letyourhomepayyou.com/ Consumer reports from HUD, FTC and other advocacy groups can be downloaded at this website. Free reverse mortgage quotes are available from, http://www.letyourhomepayyou.com/reverse-mortgage-qualification.htm as well as referrals to licensed senior advisers specializing in reverse mortgages in every state. Visitors are encouraged to use the free reverse mortgage calculator tool to see how much money they qualify for.

Happy Birthday Form the Social Security Administration

(The biggest ponzi-scheme ever perpetrated against the American Wage Earner).

Upon attaining age 62 and at the advice of a friend I went to the local Social Security administration to inquire as to the state of my social security retirement. I was quite surprised to find out from the nice lady that it would be a smidgen under $1,000 per month. However if I continued to earn the income I need to pay my monthly obligations that it would be nothing. If and when I reach the age of seventy years old then I could draw my retirement without being penalized for being economically and financially productive.

After working for forty six years I feel like I have been had. I am still paying on the last $15,000 that I had to borrow to pay my self-employment tax from two years ago. OK, I should have set it aside in a pre-paid estimate. I tried but was short because of an extra successful year. Now that times are thinner, I still am paying on the $15K and need to work an additional eight years too.

The nice lady at the Social Security office explained it to me this way. As I need $5,000.00 per month to pay my monthly obligations, the first fifteen percent of every dollar I make for SS tax, Federal and State income tax, health insurance (self employed), home payment, home maintenance, transportation and fuel, auto insurance, and so on. It was shown me as follows. Take the $60,000.00 and subtract $14,200.00. Divide the remainder by two. $45,800.00 divided by two is $22,900.00. Take that result and divide my SS benefits ($1,000.00) in to it, the results are equal to a little under 23. Now any result greater than 12 means I have the amount equal to my benefits subtracted from my SS benefits for the whole year. If the result had been 12 or less but greater than zero, then I would have the amount equal to my SS benefits subtracted from my retirement for the number of months equal to that number between zero and 12.

I will need to work past the age of seventy if I am to meet my financial obligations and realize social Security benefits. I would have been much better off with a force funded annuity to start drawing from. Bernie Madof went to prison for 120 years for less of a fraud than the US Legislatures have perpetrated against the tax-paying American public.

Well, that is enough of crying over spilled milk. All this to say that I need, in deed, all American wage earners need to provide for their own retirement years without dependence upon a government that has ponzi managed our retirement funds and driven the postal service into the ground.

I have outlined the problem, now for the solution.

There are many ways to develop an income that will dwarf most Social Security benefits. The grass root ability of the American consumer when they work together is an awesome force. Working together by virtue of networking together with each other can control whole industries. Just take a look at the premier national seniors origination as an insurance consumer group for example. If there were to be a consumer pharmaceutical base origination similar to the premier national seniors origination started, it would make drug producers set up and take notice. Likewise, many seniors as well as earlier aged people like to travel. There have been several travel clubs and origination's that have sprung up which allows people of all ages to get very favorable prices on cruises and resort stays as a result of banning together.

The point here is that when people ban together they can save and cut costs. Too, if utilized correctly they can also cut out a huge piece of the profit pie to put in their own pockets. Finally marketers are recognizing the fact that people will organize into like minded groups to achieve a better lifestyle.

Why not utilize the available resources to develop an income that will replace the supposed and weak at best retirement programs touted by government agencies. We can do better! We can work together, with each other and enjoy ourselves with purpose. Let us help each other by joining in union, one with another the develop strength in numbers.

The old parable of one old stick can be broken easily. A bundle of old sticks can be very very strong, much stronger than the sum of the individuals by themselves. Together they can lend support to others, influence with authority, and through their strength in numbers have and take control. This is not to mention the wealth of wisdom and knowledge possessed by that bundle. What a wonderful bag of tricks.

I am The Money Miser. Will you join me? Will you become part of the solution?

Like any other ordinary citizen I like to travel. My friends like to travel. But with activities being limited by financial means, it is hard to take the cruises and stay at the resorts like we desire. There is a way to travel and get paid too and do it for less. Just look at [http://www.I-Need-More-Money.com/]

My given name is Keith. I am known as The Money Miser. Come visit me at [http://family-and-child-safety.com/welcome-family-and-child-safety-objective/]. I have other family friendly safety tips on my blog there and many safety related items and products. These include "ATV and Yard Equipment Safety", "Grandma's House, Is It Safe?", "Holiday Kitchen Safe", and others.

Find other links for my blog comments on family financial matters and my opinion about segments of government waste. These include articles on "It's Going to Blow, Parts 1 through 4, It's Guaranteed!", Stop It, Buy Healthy Food, and "Bon appetite", "How Good A Deal It Is!" on cash for clunkers, Cash For Clunkers, Boon or Boondoggle?", Save Money at The Grocery Store", "Time is Money and The Government Squanders Ours", and so on.

Copyright January 23, 2010 Keith V. Loucks

Screen Actors Guild Aids Department Of Homeland Security In Patriot Act Violations

Screen Actors Guild and Screen Actors Guild Pension and Health Plans have been implicated in disclosing protected health information pertaining to Producer/Director BJ Davis, Screenwriter Julia Davis, their relatives and dependents to the Department of Homeland Security. Under the guise of protecting homeland security, Internal Affairs Agents of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Jeffrey J. Deal and Herbert P. Kaufer have requested and obtained medical, insurance and identification information pertaining to BJ and Julia Davis and their family members, whereby SAG/SAG PHP disclosed to Kaufer and Deal medical information pertaining to a total of eleven (11) persons.

Julia Davis is a former Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Officer, who made serious whistleblowing disclosures involving national security. Agents Kaufer and Deal have been instrumental in the series of unprecedented actions by the Department of Homeland Security, designed to discredit Julia Davis in an attempt to invalidate her terrorism-related protected disclosures, as reflected in the recently published book "Unsafe At Any Altitude" by Pulitzer Prize nominated investigative journalists Joe and Susan Trento.

The disclosure of highly private medical and insurance records by the Screen Actors Guild is the latest in the already long list of unconstitutional actions against BJ and Julia Davis by the Department of Homeland Security. In 2005, ICE and CBP misused government's anti-terrorism funding to conduct a Blackhawk helicopter raid of the Davis' residence, complete with twenty seven (27) Special Response Team (SRT) Agents armed with assault weapons, after subjecting BJ and Julia Davis to two years of warrantless surveillance, conducting warrantless searches and falsely declaring Julia Davis to be a "domestic terrorist" and a "murderer". The DHS was instrumental in organizing two malicious prosecutions and two false imprisonments of BJ and Julia Davis, although all charges against them were subsequently dismissed, BJ and Julia Davis were declared factually innocent, their arrest records were ordered sealed and destroyed and the government was ordered to return proceeds of both warrantless searches. Julia Davis won a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, which the agency is still refusing to honor.

Producer/Director BJ Davis is a thirty year signatory member with the Screen Actors Guild. In addition to releasing protected medical records to the DHS, SAG unlawfully released payroll, tax, medical, insurance and other information pertaining to BJ and Julia Davis to a group of actors formerly employed by Producer/Director BJ Davis in his latest award-winning film.

These and other related events are currently being investigated by the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Protection (CCCP), with a recent request for an official congressional inquiry. In an official statement, CCCP Chairman B. Harris stated: "There is a growing concern amongst American citizens as to the Law enforcement officials' misuse of the tools designed for fighting terrorism that are instead being utilized to compromise the constitutional rights and violate the right to privacy of all Americans".

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety". Benjamin Franklin.

B. Harris is the Chairman of the Citizens Committee for Constitutional Protection. For more information visit http://www.DepartmentofHomelandSecurityExposed.com

B. Harris
Citizens Committee for Homeland Security
2118 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 645
Santa Monica, CA 90403Tel: (310) 281-1831
E-mail: ContactCCCP@aol.com

Social Security - Part-1 - The Trust Fund is a Fraud

In the late 1930's the U.S. Congress established a Social Security Fund to provide for aging and disabled workers, through the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA). This fund is a payroll tax, which today is just under 7.65% of your wage, and it currently supports both Social Security and Medicare (Social Security is 6.2% and Medicare is 1.45%); employers must also pay just under 7.65% of your wage to match your contribution. Your monthly Social Security check will be calculated relative to your age when you retire and the amount deducted from your wages during your working years. Even though the amount anyone will receive is figured according to their contributions in the past, every Social Security check comes from the weekly and monthly payroll deductions taken from wages and matching money paid by employers in the present. This amount is just over 15% of the gross wages of almost all workers, up to a wage cap of about $88,000 annually (the Medicare portion is deducted to a higher cap). This is a little less than one-sixth of all wage income. If many are working, then one-sixth of that labor may pay higher benefits and take care of the elderly and disabled adequately; if few are working, then benefits will have to be reduced and many of the elderly without other income may live in privation. Obviously the ability for Social Security to pay benefits depends on the ability of our economy to produce income.

By law, any surplus FICA tax collected by the Social Security Administration is transferred to the U.S. Treasury Department and exchanged for government bonds. The accumulation of these Treasury Bonds is what the government calls our Social Security Trust Fund. This fund, however, is a complete fraud, because the Treasury Department does not invest this money in any manner that preserves it, or require that the government departments receiving it must pay it back in the future. Like all taxes, it is spent as part of the annual Federal Budget and gone forever. It makes no sense to even talk about repayment. Even though these bonds do earn interest annually (additional Treasury Bonds), the interest is a fraud also; these bonds, both principle and interest, do not represent a fund, nor is the administration of this fund a trust, as any dictionary will attest. This bogus fund is just an IOU from Americans to Americans.

In the Reagan, Bush-1 and Clinton years, the Congress and the President attempted to balance the national budget (after the Reagan tax cuts of the early 1980's) by raising FICA taxes beyond what was needed to fund Social Security. The government then took by statute (Borrowed!) these excess dollars to help fund our other government expenses: Housing, Education, Defense, etc. But these excess dollars are spent, and the bonds, along with the interest due, are just promises by government to raise the Income Tax in the future when these bonds are due. For the Social Security Administration to hold bonds, redeemable only by the authority of the U.S. Congress to raise the Income Tax to pay off those bonds, and to call those bonds a Trust Fund, is ludicrous and a fraud. The Social Security Administration would have you believe that it will cost taxpayers less to fund Social Security obligations in the future when these bonds are mature and redeemable. It is truly amazing that people this stupid can be given positions of importance and trust in government.

The idea that the Social Security Administration and the Treasury Department are independent entities with legal standing like citizens or corporations is bogus. The Federal government in its entirety has legal standing, but its parts are not similarly independent. The illusion of separation and independence between the SSA and the Treasury is maintained because the FICA tax is a regressive income tax, hitting the working poor harder than the wealthy. The Social Security tax was instituted 25 years after the Income Tax was established by Congress; it would have been simpler in 1938 to raise the Income Tax on everyone to fund Social Security, but then the wealthy would have objected to paying their fair share, so the politicians bowed to the demands of wealth and we are dealing with the continuing misfeasance of our tax structure today. If our society were just now developing a tax structure to pay our collective bills, Social Security would get its funding from the general Income Tax just as The Defense Dept., Education Dept., Health and Human Services, etc.; because we would require that structure to be fair, by being equitable, in how taxes are raised; and fiscally responsible by taxing our productivity to avoid any kind of debt or phony financing scheme.

When the government sells a bond to any citizen, business, or foreign entity, it is obligated to payoff that bond when due, even if that requires reducing other expenditures, including Social Security, or raising taxes; because government must pay its debts first and foremost. We often hear the term "full faith and credit of the government" with regard to guaranteeing the payment of government debt; without which the government could not entice anyone to lend to it. But the "full faith and credit of government" is irrelevant with regard to the Social Security Trust Fund, because when we the people both own and owe a debt, that debt does not exist; so neither government faith nor credit are applicable in dealing with this issue. It is a mistake for the Treasury Department to issue Treasury Bonds to the Social Security Administration in exchange for surplus Social Security Tax, because it confuses everyone into believing that they are real obligations for payment by the government and the taxpayers that support the government; BUT THEY ARE NOT!

The Social Security Administration has monthly demands on its cash flow, and when its income is projected to be less than its outflow, Congress will need to raise taxes (in one form or another), or reduce benefits to recipients, to keep the Social Security Administration books balanced. It simply does not matter whether Congress raises taxes and that income is given directly to the SSA to meet its obligations, or Congress raises taxes to payoff government bonds held by the SSA, and those proceeds used to fund Social Security. In either case taxes are raised the same amount to cover the cost of maintaining the Social Security system. The Trust Fund bonds themselves are baloney, because they have zero value and liability to we the people.

It should be obvious to all that courts will give trial to cases of debt between different persons, corporations, and countries; but they would not hear a case where a person, corporation, or country was suing itself to collect a debt owed to itself. If the SSA had used its annual surplus to purchase industrial bonds in U.S. companies or government bonds of foreign countries, it would have legal standing to have a court enforce repayment of its investments plus interest, such that the profits of those companies or the taxes of foreign countries could be used by the SSA to support our elderly. Such is not the case with the Social Security Trust Fund. The American people cannot sue the American people to force payment of a debt they owe to themselves. We will either tax ourselves to meet the contemporary needs of Social Security or we will reduce benefits to the level that we can afford.

Consider a village moron going about his daily life, being given menial tasks by several businesses so that he may have a supporting income. The particular act that determines that this person is a moron is that when he spends his wages he writes himself an IOU for the money spent. If our village moron decided to retire and cash-in his IOU's at some bank, what bank would loan him money wherein he was both the creditor and debtor associated with his IOU's? You simply cannot be in debt to yourself.

Amazingly enough the American people have a government that is operating in this moronic manner. The U.S. Treasury is the part of the moron that spent the money to support us, while handing out IOU's, and the Social Security Administration is the part of the moron that holds some of those IOU's, and thinks they are collateral for which the citizenry may redeem for future income. This part of the moron even accepts additional IOU's as interest on the IOU's that are non-existent spent money. The working citizenry are the bank (taxable income) to which the Treasury and Social Security Administration want to come and cash-in those IOU's in the future.

The United States Government cannot buy its own debt in any form, in any department or agency, and profit by, or receive income from such an action. Government does not invest in corporate stocks and bonds, or own industries to produce profits from goods sold to consumers. It taxes the productivity of commerce and spends those taxes yearly. There is not one penny of money in our so-called Social Security Trust Fund; we may only tax the productivity of the present; and the productivity of the future, when and only when it becomes the present.

The national budget was balanced for the first time in a generation in 1998. In fact, it produced a 70-billion dollar surplus; and 1999, 2000, 2001 had larger surpluses. The surplus dollars sent to the Treasury by the Social security Administration and used by the Treasury to pay our general expenses, amounts to another Income Tax; it is in no way an investment that can be redeemed to cover any future need. These budget surpluses are not all from Income Tax; they are mostly from the Social Security Tax, because workers have been overcharged for Social Security for nearly 20 years to balance Federal Budgets; not to build a trust fund.

It is impossible to protect future Social Security requirements with today's FICA surplus. We can only supply ourselves with more goods and services today, or reduce the taxes to be collected next year, or pay off a tiny portion of the principle on the National Debt. There is no difference in income to government, regardless of its name; Income Tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, Excise Taxes, Usage Fees for national parks, Import Duties, etc.; all are levied by government to provide income, and spent by government in annual budgets. Government does not tax the past or future and government does not save or invest for the past or future, only the present.

If it truly makes sense to over tax people to support one portion of government and give them an IOU that could be redeemed at a profit in the future, then why not change all of our Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax, etc. into FICA Tax? Such that the Treasury Department could borrow all of our government spending requirements from the Social Security Administration and issue many more bonds from which we would presumably become an unbelievably wealthy country as those bonds mature. We can all turn into morons and live off the interest, without disturbing the principle. Whether the government establishes two types of taxes to fund itself or ten types of taxes is irrelevant; if one or more tax streams take in more than they require, their tax rate is too high; and if one or more tax streams takes in less than it requires, their tax rate is too low. The moving of tax receipts from areas of excess to areas of deficit is internal bookkeeping, not an investment. Excess funds that are spent instead of being refunded are gone and irretrievable.

In our current economy the baby-boomers are moving into their most productive and profitable work years, a relatively large group of taxpayers paying relatively larger amounts of Social Security tax, as well as Income Tax. The current senior citizens are enjoying relative affluence in their standard of living. But a few years from now when the baby-boomers are retiring and swelling the ranks of the non-working, there will necessarily be a higher tax burden to support those retirees. The money that will be available to fund Social Security will depend totally on the ability of future workers to pay taxes to government. And the bonds piling up in the so-called Social Security Trust Fund are void and worthless. If tax income cannot be increased, there is absolutely nothing that government can do to change what is coming except raise the age of retirement and lower the amount of benefits to be paid, to match the amount of tax that can be taken from those who labor in our economy.

In 2005 the President and some members of Congress were proposing to "save" what is not yet in peril (it cannot be broke if it presently produces a surplus). Any truly surplus money will remain quietly in the government's accounts. It will simply be a reserve to defraud the taxpayers of the truth about the full extent of our deficit spending, while the Social Security Administration receives more worthless bonds (IOU's) in their fraudulent electronic trust fund.

© March 2009

Craig D. Hanks

This article is taken from a chapter of my book SOCIAL BENCHMARKS. Other excerpts can be viewed at http://beyondfarenough.blogspot.com/.

Questions to Consider When Procuring Professional Security Services

Why contract out security services?

I can immediately think of four reasons. First is the increased value an outsourced company brings to the table because of its professional staff and experience in the security industry. This depth and breadth of experience and knowledge is offered because of relationships with other clients that have faced the same or different challenges. The second reason is the cost. Simply put, because of the expertise and experience that the vendor brings, the financial weight of training, recruiting, hiring and providing benefits for the employees is considerably less to the client than administering these programs in-house. Third is the transfer of liability from the client to the security company. The security company bears the legal load and ramifications of particular incidents that could occur on your property. Lastly, and in my opinion, most importantly is the peace of mind an effective security company can provide so you the client can focus on the everyday business that defines you as a company.

Why Change Security Vendors?

Change vendors when the value is gone, plain and simple, but you have to know what's valuable to you as an individual client. If you have a small budget and need a low bill rate, know that's what you value. If it's superior management and executive accessibility, than know that's what you value. If it's a vendor that can accommodate a client on a national basis, than know that's what you value. When value isn't there anymore and when your vendor's program no longer represents you as a client anymore, it's time to change vendors. However, certain values have repercussions. Low bill rates will produce low wages. National vendors might not give you specific attention on a local level. And having a phenomenal program with high-end personnel combined with strong management will cost you more. You just have to know what you value the most and work off of that.

What are important things to include in an RFP?

First things first, an RFP must be designed to allow you to compare "apples to apples". This is especially important when it comes to the financial proposal from each potential vendor. To achieve this, the pricing structure must include the itemized list of costs to include wages, bill rate, necessary insurance coverage, employee benefits costs, as well as vendor overhead and supervision structure. A well defined scope of work included in the RFP will allow the vendor to completely understand the "job" requirements and price accordingly. When preparing the RFP, remember the more you specify; the more accurate and comparable the respective bids will be.

What comprises the cost of security services?

The cost of security is found in the difference between the client's hourly bill rate and the guard's hourly pay rate. That difference between bill rate and pay rate is the result of an equation based on the value of particular line items, which vary company to company. Examples of these variable items are liability insurance because it fluctuates due to claims against the individual company. Another is worker's compensation insurance which fluctuates in suit. Corporate and branch salaries, marketing, cost of bidding projects, and rent are examples of general administrative expenses that differ. Paid holidays, paid sick time, medical and dental benefits, and more are also factors. Therefore, it's important to know what the benefits are and how much they cost per individual per month in order for you to make a fair comparison of one company to another. Lastly is profit which will vary depending on the company's prerogative. Whether it's low, high or normal, it is a direct example of their business model. Security is an industry where the quality of service should dictate the cost of the program. Never should the cost of security dictate the quality of service.

What are good questions to ask security companies and why?

Four questions that quickly come to mind are the following: First, Who are your competitors? This is important because you want to know what niche a company serves. This will help you gauge whether they are the correct fit for you and your property. Second, what are the responsibilities of the salesman and his guidelines for selling work? This is important because it will reveal management structure and should address a well designed business model. You want to be treated as an appreciated client and not as a number of hours. Third, how many hours are assigned to the area manager? This question will give you an idea of attention you'll be receiving and how loud you'll have to shout to be heard. Finally, how many accounts has a company lost in the past year? This general question might be the tip of the iceberg in regards to attrition rates, wages, performance, and client satisfaction. The commitment to understanding your needs, defining them in the RFP, and asking quality questions of your vendor to produce a perfect fit is the difference between a long term value-based relationship and starting the process over and over again.

By Nick Sapia

The Guardian Force, Inc.

http://www.tgfinc.com

Nick Sapia is the Director of Business Development and an Operations Manager for The Guardian Force, Inc., a private security and concierge provider in Boston, MA.

A graduate of Northeastern Univerisity, Nick Sapia has previously worked for the Executive Office of Public Safety for Massachusetts, top law firms, and presidential campaigns. He can be contacted via email at nsapia@tgfinc.com or nsapia@sapiacorp.com

Cyber Insecurity vs Internet Security

Pandora's box has been opened and the explosion of information both personal and non-personal seems to be limitless and increases exponentially. And according to the National Opinion Poll taken in January of 2007 half the UK harbors a "deep mistrust" due to security concerns. Not only is there a deep public mistrust but, the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology are inquiring into the need for personal Internet Security because of the growing use of home computers, expansion of broadband, internet banking and commerce (Brent MacLean "A new look at Internet Security" Monday September 10, 2007).

Every one is talking extensively ( ISP Associations, Richard Clayton of the Cambridge Security Lab, John Carr of the Children's Charities Coalition on Internet Safety, as well as Johnathan Zittrain of the Oxford Internet Institute and many others), gathering evidence of information and compiling it all for what? Sadly, most businesses and citizens still do not take the threat posed by cyber-insecurity seriously.

You would think with dependency of economies relying on certain infrastructures involving the Internet and information exchange between key service providers, that a disruption would certainly result in loss of lives, loss of property, and the collapse of public confidence globablly. Today simple domestic hacking is not the issue that will bring on devastating destruction like those designed by terrorist activities directed at nuclear plants, banking systems, hospitals, air traffic control as well as domain name servers, the possibilities are limitless. However, it is imperative to remove these personal and public computers from the arsenal of cyber terrorists as well as cybercriminals. With 225 million Internet users in North America (Nielson-Netratings), the personal computer dominates the Internet and at the same time is the most vulnerable. Millions of PCs are under the control of "zombie masters". Red Herring, the technical business journal, estimated that in 2005 a 172,000 computers were hijacked and taken over each day and became "zombies" and under the control of a hacker. By 2007, Secure Computing, which tracks the Internet landscape, identified more than 500,000 new zombies per day that were hijacked and under the control of "bot" herders. Triple the level only two years earlier. The FBI says that because of their wideley distributed capabilities, botnets are a growing threat to national security, the national information infrastructure, and the economy.

The total number of compromised computers on the Internet is not known; however, Vince Cerf, Father of the Internet, estimates that about 150 million PCs currently connected to the Internet and are part of botnets. Based on FBI reports and other independent researchers the aforementioned number may be significantly higher. The typical home computer is attached to "always on" broadband facilities, severely compromised with malware (viruses, spyware, Trojans, keyloggers, etc.), usually without degradation of their ordinary capabilities and doing the bidding of their "zombie master". Hacking, virus dissemination, denial od service (DoS), theft of personal data, ID fraud, keyloggers, spamming, distribution of pornography, spying through webcams, click fraud and many other cyber exploits are all now almost wholly orchestrated via zombie networks.

Computers weren't designed for security; they were designed to perform complex work. As complex as computers are, each computer has 65,000 open ports (doorways) to the Internet; a simple element that leaves them vulnerable. You might wonder why an individual would want control of a herd of zombies, there are several reasons. For exploits whether it's a denial of service, to bring down the servers of banks, major corporations, or a competitor. Inherently, whenever a computer says "hello" to another computer, that computer must respond with a "hello" back. A "bot herder" with tens of thousands of computers under their control has all of them say hello at the same time to your computer or a network of computers, what do think happens. Most likely the responding PC or server is overwhelmed and crashes, it simply can't respond to that many hellos. A botnet can be purchased on the black market to carry out attacks. Zombie-making virus kits can be purchased on the net, requiring little or no technical knowledge and which provides the breeding ground for future international cybercriminals and the training ground for cybergangs (terrorists).

What are we to do? Implementing new laws when it's already difficult to pursue and in some cases unenforceable and with cross-border criminal investigations not to mention the resources needed are vast and costly with little results.

How do we secure the Internet now? One idea is to improve administrative, regulatory, and technical solutions to produce a safer Net and then apply resources to fortify banks, airports, power plants from the insecure internet we have allowed to develop. It begins with securing the end-user and creating an awareness that we are all responsible for the safety of the Internet and we all need to "Become Responsible Cybercitizens".

We the people have to make an effort to make sure our machines run clean and free of malware (viruses, spyware, trojans, etc.). That involves current patches, updates, upgrades, and professional software technologies. It also obligates everyone of us to make sure that we have not been compromised by having our computers serviced by a security technician and assured that there is no malware present. There is a service, the Invisus PC security service, that will provide a fully managed computer security service including unlimited security technical support plus several additional benefits that will earn you the title of a "Responsible Cybercitizen".

Requiring ISPs to scan data traffic going to and from computers attached to their networks for unusual patterns of traffic and then deny them Internet access until it has been determined they are not zombies. We can also ask the ISP to provide remote patches, updates and software updates. However, the ISPs will bulk at the cost, liability, autonomy, support, and delivery. Or have our ISPs provide a value-added service similar to subscription-based services offered by the Invisus PC security service which not only provides for a hassle-free computing experience but, is a total security package locking down the end-users computer for a minimum monthly fee.

In order to succeed we must meld security and convenience. The consumer doesn't want to be responsible for their security. All they want to know is how to turn their computer on and off. Unfortunately, we can't have our cake and eat it too. The time has come to learn how to maintain a safe and healthy computer (saving the consumer both time and money) void of infections that keep spreading and infecting other computers. It's not necessary to be technically savvy to operate a computer, like your automobile there's no need to be a technically savvy mechanic but, it is important to make sure your car is in good operating condition not only for its performance but, for the safety of others. We have laws to assure us the security of cars and their owners are safe. Those who are ignorant of how to maintain the safety of an automobile are required to perform certain responsibilities to insure the safety of their vehicle for others as well as the owner of the car. To insure the safety of others we require a certain level of education and knowledge of the rules of the road. You can't drive without insurance or a drivers license, which means that you have undertaken and understand some level of instructions.

You may disagree but, unfortunately as impossible as it may be practically, politically, and ethically, to require every consumer... including the ignorant, the poor, and even the wealthy, to be legally responsible for keeping their computer in a state of reasonable security, the fact is you are guilty until proven innocent. So, the next best approach might be to offer to try and educate them but we probably cannot impose a "computer-driving license". Again, we may be able to offer an alternative by requiring the consumer to take necessary steps to assure that their computers are serviced and up-to-date with professional security software and that they are checked and given a clean bill of health; free of malware.

Bill Wardell the Senior Editor, Creator and Developer of Online Security Authority, the Author of "Don't Take Candy From Strangers" NSM Director, ASC Certified Coach. Speaker and Radio Show Host, Publisher, Researcher and National Radio Guest! The CyberHood Watch

FOX News Logic Knows No Bounds, Even When It Comes to National Security

The recent uproar from the right over the T.S.A.'s tight security measures should come as no surprise, staggering as it may seem. When conservative commentators started calling Afghanistan "Obama's Vietnam" at the very beginning of his presidency, well before he even drew up his war strategy, it became clear to me that there's nothing he can do to avoid hypocritical and vicious attacks from the right. I loved to say at the time that theoretically, even if Obama were to embrace conservative policies, capture Bin Laden, kill every member of Al Qaeda and usher in an era of everlasting peace, conservatives would still paint him as soft on terror, a friend of terrorists, indecisive, and obsessed with expanding the reach of big brother.

As it happens, history has borne me out. The right has ridiculed him for implementing many supposedly conservative policies such as tax cuts, a hawkish counterterrorism agenda, aiding small businesses, building on Bush's No Child Left Behind, creating high risk insurance pools, cutting health care costs and organizing a bi-partisan budget deficit committee. Nothing matters. The only pretense of an exception is that the Republicans have largely voted in support of the Afghanistan war, but, true to form, they managed to do so in a way that opposes the President's plan by criticizing him for developing an exit strategy and pledging to withdraw troops as early as possible.

In this vein, a New York Times Op-Ed called "Politicizing Airport Security" describes how this form of FOX News logic is playing out in the pseudo-debate over the T.S.A.'s efforts to secure our airports. Mike Huckabee has called the scanners and pat-downs "unconstitutional," audaciously challenging the President to subject his family to the intrusive procedures, and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas thinks T.S.A. agents belong at the Mexican border instead of at airports.

In addition, a popular conservative talking point has it that we should implement racial profiling in place of the "degrading" practices currently in use. This idea has been embraced by Huckabee, Pete Hoekstra, who will become the chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence in January, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin. The latter, one of the most disgraceful figures America has ever produced, eloquently expressed her support for profiling via Twitter, as the Times reports: "TSA: why politically incorrect 2 'profile' anyone re: natl security issues? We profile individuals/suspects in other situations! Profile away."

I characterize all these "objections" as FOX News logic because they are all shamefully lacking in consistency and/or truth. Although there is a real debate over whether the T.S.A.'s behavior is unconstitutional, was it any less unconstitutional before Obama became president? Though the searches may be more prevalent now, the constitutional argument remains as strong or weak as it ever was, and the issue was never a mainstream concern for conservatives like Huckabee before.

As for Rick Perry's urging the T.S.A. to prioritize securing the Mexican border over airports, leaving aside the fundamental absurdity of such a suggestion, the government currently has 20,000 Border Patrol agents deployed (compared to 9,000 in 2001) as a result of Bush's Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which has added 2,000 new agents per year since it was initiated. In addition, Obama has not only upheld that total while cutting costs for the program but has also ordered 1,200 additional National Guard troops to help.

The racial profiling line is particularly laughable because aside from being abhorrent, the T.S.A. already engages in profiling, as The Times explains.

As always, the real issue is that conservatives will attack everything Obama does. There was once a time when politicians understood that national security should trump petty politics. But, as the Republicans' blatantly partisan resistance to the START treaty with Russia further attests, that ideal, much like the existence of moderate Republicans, is a thing of the past.

For source and more articles check out my blog:

http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/

A recent graduate of NYU's Gallatin School of Individualized Study, I consider myself a student of Melville and Shakespeare. Particularly, my fascination with Moby Dick has sparked a broader interest in many fields such as politics, history, science, economics, etc, since that novel deals with disparate disciplines and issues in an encyclopedic, yet accessible manner.

My blog is designed to direct readers to cool articles and books about a wide range of topics such as climate change, financial crisis, terrorism, Obama, etc that are well worth checking out. My commentary is meant to stand on its own, even for readers who have not looked at the works upon which my analyses are based. The ultimate goal is to generate engaging discussions...

[http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/]

Marketing to the National Security Agency - A Case Study

DPC Technologies was founded in 1988 and by 1993 was a supplier of high performance data technology products and services to the National Security Agency. At that time one of DPC's founders developed and implemented an aggressive plan to increase the company's footprint in the NSA. The goal was to become a trusted, reliable supplier in all major groups at the NSA and increase DPC's standing as a prime contractor.

After researching available information regarding the NSA, a number of conclusions were reached:

NSA was a well funded technical leader in the Intelligence Community.
NSA required the IT and IA products and services DPC offered.
High barriers to entry (clearances, security, tight technical specifications) created an opportunity for DPC.
The NSA buying patterns included opportunity for small business.

Strategic Plan

The strategic plan included eight steps:

Research and understand the needs and buying patterns of the program elements of the agency and Maryland Procurement Organization.
Unconditionally fulfill all commitments (never "walk away" from a problem).
Utilize the most effective contract vehicles.
Hire experienced, effective sales and support personnel that had the proper clearances and access to program elements.
Build an effective recruiting organization that could supply personnel to meet NSA specifications.
Strengthen relationships with key prime contractors.
Proactively search out new business opportunities as solutions for agency requirements.
Revise the strategy to meet current conditions.

Performance Results

The plan produced immediate and significant results. Revenue and profits doubled every year during the period 1994-98 and DPC became a well known and respected supplier in the major groups of NSA. In addition, DPC established itself as an important partner and teaming member for the Ground Breaker Project.

The Path to Ground Breaker

During the 1990's NSA determined that non mission critical IT efforts could be better managed through outsourcing. Since the non-mission critical IT needs of NSA were very large, Ground Breaker became a major effort. An integral part of the NSA Ground Breaker strategy was the utilization of the NSA existing talent pool of IT specialists already employed by the agency.

As a first step, NSA introduced the "Soft Landing" concept as a way to utilize existing NSA IT talent through commercial outsourcing vehicles. The Soft Landing concept allowed existing NSA IT personnel the ability to leave the agency and re-enter as a contracted employee. Since most NSA employees had a minimum of 30 years experience with NSA and government service, employee benefits became an import factor in the bid evaluation of bids for Soft Landing projects.

Soft Landing

There were a total of seven Soft Landing awards and large prime contractors won the first two (DPC did not initially bid) DPC won the next four opportunities and became a recognized contractor for this effort. DPC's strategy was to bid each Soft Landing RFP based upon a tailored benefit program in addition to competitive prices. DPC also invested in support personnel to ease the transition to the commercial world for the new employees. Word spread among the prospective NSA employees that DPC was an attractive Soft Landing Contractor.

Interim Contracts

There were other, traditional contracts that DPC won in partnership with major prime contractors and, by the end of 1998, DPC was considered a valuable team mate for the Ground Breaker effort by a number of prime contractors.

Sale to Northrop Grumman and the Eagle Alliance

In 1999, DPC was sold to Northrop Grumman Corporation. An important part of the transaction was the payment by DPC of over $1m in retention bonuses for key DPC employees. These individuals were instrumental in the winning strategy for the Eagle Alliance consortium as a vehicle for the awarded Ground Breaker contract.

Jon M. Stout is Chief Executive Officer of Aspiration Software LLC. Aspiration Software LLC is an Information Technology/Cyber Security services provider focused on the Intelligence Community (IC). For more information about Cyber Security and Information Assurance and Employment Opportunities in the Intelligence Community go to http://aspirationsoftware.com

Let's Lower Taxes to Get National Health Care, Social Security and Free College!

The key to financing National Health Care, solving Social Security's long term funding problem, and going to college free of charge is to lower taxes. As incredible as this sounds, it's true. This can be accomplished by eliminating tax deductions and a simple restructuring of the tax code.

Eliminating tax deductions is the key to tax reform. This is because tax deductions are the main cause of tax fraud and the inequities associated with our current tax system. It is the tax deduction that allows the tax code to favor some segments of society over others, decrease the amount of revenue the government needs to properly fund the programs our society deems important, and leads directly to waste, fraud and corruption.

No serious attempt at tax reform can take place without addressing this problem. Therefore, abolishing the tax deduction is the first and most important reform that must take place. When combined with a simple restructuring of the tax code, these simple reforms create a tax system that treats everyone equally. And, when everyone is treated equally three things happen: First, the current codes ability to favor some segments of society over others is eliminated. Second, tax fraud will decrease. And third, government revenue will increase.

For example, in order to increase tax revenue from corporations we must first change the tax structure that allows businesses to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed. Currently, corporations subtract from their gross sales those deductions found in the tax code and labels the resulting number the net profit. This figure is then used as the basis for determining the taxes owed. The first $50,000.00 of net profit is taxed at 15% and above $50,000.00 of net profit the tax increases up to 35%. This creates a very strong incentive to add as many deductions to the tax code as possible in order to reduce the net profit so that the corresponding tax liability is lowered.

The solution is to replace the tax on net profits with a small tax on the gross sales. By definition, the tax on gross sales means that there are no deductions. This reform eliminates the ability of corporations to use the deductions found in the tax code to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed, eliminates the corruption associated with the current tax code, and creates the level playing field that requires all corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. And, when all corporations pay their fair share of taxes, government revenue increases.

The small tax on gross sales also produces a very small corporate tax liability. In fact, the business tax corporations will now be required to pay is so small that employer payroll taxes can be expanded to include National Health Care and still produce an overall tax liability lower than what corporations are currently required to pay. This overall lower tax liability will be the basis for corporate acceptance of their expanded payroll obligation.

These same principles apply to individual taxes. When deductions are eliminated, the ability of individuals to reduce, delay or eliminate the taxes owed comes to an end. This means that the scenario that now occurs, where wealthy individuals end up paying less in taxes than poorer individuals, is no longer possible. This translates into increased revenue for the government.

The elimination of personal tax deductions also heralds the end of personal income taxes. The elimination of income taxes presents as a tax reduction and this tax reduction allows for the expansion of payroll taxes to include National Health Care and Public Education. These new payroll taxes will be readily accepted because individuals will still be paying less in overall taxes and yet will receive more in benefits. Most people will simply wonder why these reforms had not been implemented earlier.

The elimination of tax deductions and a simple restructuring of the tax code needs to be implemented as soon as possible. This is because government revenue raised under the current system is inadequate. For example, in fiscal 2007 the government collected $2.4 trillion dollar, however, it spent $2.8 trillion dollars. This created a deficit of $400 billion dollars and this $400 billion dollars was added to the national debt (which is rapidly approaching $10 trillion dollars). Contrast these amounts with the revenue generated by the reforms set forth in my proposal. Based on very conservative numbers, my tax reform plan will increase government revenue from $2.4 trillion dollars to a staggering $3.31 trillion dollars. This means that rather than running a budget deficit we will be running a budget surplus.

This budget surplus allows us to fund all current programs, create and fully fund National Health Care, resolve Social Security's long term funding problem and expand public education to include college, free of charge. And, as incredible as all this sounds, it was accomplished by lowering taxes!

Fishman's Framework for Tax Reform is available to read free of charge at:
http://www.serioustaxreform.com

Contact: mark@serioustaxreform.com