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

What is Universal Health Care? The Real Solution!

The real answer to what is universal health care is that people all over the world must decide they want to be healthy and well fed. We don't have to convince the impoverished peoples of this, it's more than an answer it's THE answer. When you are starving the focus of everything you do is on just getting a something into your belly. The industrial nations who have plenty of food available, must start putting a high priority on living a healthy lifestyle. There is simply too much disease that can be prevented. Simply put, universal health care should include a huge dose of prevention. Actually what I'm talking about is more than just prevention. I'm talking about two things here:

That we in the industrialized nations of the 21st Century have the knowledge, technology, and the communications networks to be able to eliminate an enormous percentage of diseases and have a healthy and fit human population. Of course there are no stats on this, but I'm going to say 90% of the diseases of the industrialized world can be prevented with the knowledge we have today.

People worldwide must make the conscious decision to take charge of their own health. We must all WANT to be fit and healthy. We don't have to be weight lifters, or fitness fanatics, or super athletes to be fit and healthy. We have to simply say to ourselves, "I'm not going to depend on doctors, insurance companies, governments, or anything else to keep me healthy. I'm going to focus on BEING fit and healthy."

The technology is there, the knowledge is there. The great need now is to spread the word -- create a worldwide movement to raise awareness of these two points I just raised. There are many organizations now that are involved in doing just this. We have the ability to spread the word rapidly around the world. The industrialized world has flirted with fast foods, processed foods, and nutrition deprived foods for several decades now. At a time when we have the knowledge of what we need to be fit and healthy, there are are so many diseases that are preventable with the right kind of awareness. Rich nations are overloading on junk food, while poor nations are starving.

The processed food companies have been ruling the food supply for the last few decades. Only a worldwide demand for healthy foods and sustainable agriculture can change that. They respond to what people buy. We love to blame them for what they produce, but they WILL respond to CONSUMER DEMAND. Get involved. Spread the word. Join a group. Be active. We can do this faster than we think. Look how fast just a few people in the right places were able to get people to stop smoking and expose the unscrupulous tactics of the tobacco industry. The communications technology of today is amazing. There are tons of resources. Kudos to Jamie Oliver for his "Food Revolution" TV series.

Ken Shuey believes that having and maintaining a fit and healthy lifestyle is not just for athletes and fitness fanatics. It is a concept whose time has come for everyone.

The industrialized world has flirted with fast foods, processed foods, and nutrient deprived foods for several decades now. At a time when we have the knowledge of what we need to be fit and healthy, the world has hit rock bottom in disease and ill health. Rich nations are overloading on junk food, while poor nations are starving.

The time has com to turn our advanced technology toward getting health and fitness a worldwide priority. And that also includes a sustainable food production, supply, and distribution system. He has authored an indepth report on the controversy over whether vitamin and mineral supplements really work for your health or whether they do nothing. http://4wellnesssake.info/

Economic Recovery: A Financial, Political, and Feasible Solution to the US Economic Situation

This paper was prepared in order to outline key factors, and the writer's perspective, of the current economic situation in the U.S., and provide a potential solution that might improve that condition. This potential solution offers a method to reinvigorate spending activities among individual citizens; increases the workforce; allows for a small reduction in the cost of government; and provides the argument necessary to shift the current tax burden, with no opposition.

One may claim the solution offered can be viewed as a "Keynesian economics" approach to addressing the ills of the economy. However, that approach has been proven, historically, to be a practical one. Government intervention is desirable, expected and - in view of a clear lack of alternative actions - necessary as the catalyst for recovery. However, this does not mean wholesale government spending. Our current economic situation requires austerity measures as well - and government must take that lead also. This solution therefore proposes that government, as the provider of leadership in the reinvigoration of the economy, is the only viable approach.

Situation

The U.S. economy is faced with a basic problem; simply put, there is not enough money flowing - which is causing a near shutdown of the economy. Shrinking markets, no real growth in the economy, uncertainty, restricted lending, high unemployment, economic problems in Europe, national debt, and a severe downturn in the traditional business sectors that have, in the past, driven our economic prosperity, have all caused a severe drought in the availability and free flow of funds throughout the economy. When combined with the need of government to receive revenue, and in turn use that revenue to stimulate activity, we face a difficult and challenging environment.

In the past, the ability and willingness of government to provide this economic "spark" was all that was needed to jump start an economy in this condition. Without that ability, government is left searching for that jump start without further exacerbating an already tenuous situation. History tells us that the business sector, alone or as the "lead" in this effort, is not a realistic possibility. With a current unemployment rate in the 8.0% - 8.6 % range, the private sector cannot support the hiring of additional workers to reduce that rate to an acceptable level. Not even a relaxation of regulations by government or the reduction of business taxes can provide this sector with the ability to turn the tide. What is the one simple reason? It takes consumers - the buying public - to create the demand that leads to business expansion. The current level of unemployment in the U.S., the disastrous conditions in Europe and the inevitable slowing of the economies of stronger countries like China and India - in total - do not support the type of consumer spending environment needed to generate and sustain U.S. business expansion.

In addition, we know that this unemployment rate does not accurately capture those unemployed individuals who would like to be employed but, did not file an unemployment claim in the last 30 days. That number is more likely in the 15% -17% range. The principles of free enterprise strongly encourage the drive for profits but, they also encourage survival - not an altruistic desire to help the overall economy. Business expansion, automation upgrades, even new product development is curtailed... if not completely placed on indefinite hold. In this environment, businesses instinctively wait, reduce to minimum effort to survive, and essentially conserve cash in order to hold out until the economy improves. Consequently, the wait is still for government to take the lead.

As it turns out, the business sector is finding that it actually has the ability to operate with a smaller labor force because automation upgrades do reduce the need for humans. Thus, businesses are not realizing a dire need to increase staff sizes - and the associated costs.

Exacerbating the problem are the spending habits of individuals and families in this environment, which is very similar to businesses. Given the economic climate, currently employed individuals and families retreat as well. The same uncertainty and fear that businesses and investors possess are held by these individuals - further reducing the amount of money flowing through the economy. They just do not spend, because they are fearful that they might need it tomorrow. They see the foreclosures in their neighborhoods, they see the market indicators dropping, they read the news about the conditions in Europe, and they stop spending freely.

Ignoring the approximately 22-24 million "real" unemployed worker population, or the true affect on our economy as result of the European economic condition is unproductive and unrealistic. The unemployment rate of 8.0% - 8.6% is both unrealistic in its true reflection of those out of work and it is misleading because, even with some adjustment, it does not reflect the seasonal employment surge from the holiday season - and this will bear out to be true as we see the future jobs figures in March, April, and beyond. At the very best, job growth is not at a volume or pace that will turn the economy around in the short term - which should be the only realistic goal. Likewise, decoupling is not feasible. Every M.B.A. student since the 1970's understands that we have been a world economy for decades and that cannot change quickly. Even China will begin to show signs of weakness in the face of a globally weak economy. Even if it were possible, the U.S. economy, perhaps combined with China and India, cannot support the sustainment or growth of U.S. businesses. We comprise somewhere in the neighborhood of one fifth of the world's consumer spending, therefore, our ability and willingness to spend must be present for the U.S. economy, and the world's economy, to rebound. We are truly the world leader.

The question becomes, where does government find the resources to provide this leadership? This white paper provides a potential solution. The premise of this solution is partially built on the resources that the government currently has in abundance - the federal government workforce and the policy tools it has at its disposal. It is also built on the belief that a compromise can be reached politically, if each party can present a plan to their constituencies that reflect an equal sacrifice for all - and not a perceived contribution of one over the other. This political compromise will allow both parties to sell this solution without damaging their position - which is the basis of the current partisan disagreement. Shared pain is acceptable - selective pain will not sell. And finally, it is built on the unemployed, potential workforce - and what we know about that population.

Solution

Government Sector

The current federal government workforce is slightly over 2 million - excluding the military. There is obviously a strong desire to resist any further reductions to that workforce because of the damage it will do to the economy. More people out of work is not what the economy needs. Government historically understands that the basic hiring of more individuals into the workforce is, in itself, a stimulus. But without the funds to do so, that is currently not an option. A change in a fundamental premise of our work requirements can provide this ability to hire. One must fully consider this possibility - and the entire argument - before dismissing it as a potential solution.

A temporary reduction of the standard workweek to 36 hours will free up funds to use to reduce the debt, shrink the annual cost of government, and allow for hiring of new workers. The 36 hour change is proposed so that it will allow for those currently working both a 4/10 work week and a 5/8 work week - the two most common weekly work schedules. Now consider this situation: Out of the current federal workforce, approximately 2 million work one of the two weekly schedules mentioned. For every nine "5/8" and "4/10" workers the government gains the hours needed to hire one new employee (4 hours deducted from 9 workers = 36 hours, or enough to hire one additional worker). The savings from the 10th worker reduces the overall cost of government, and provides savings to retire the national debt. In addition, there are other possible uses of these savings that will be discussed later in this paper as well as the opportunity - in limited situations - to simply not hire the 11th worker, thus creating more savings.

As for the productivity affect on the workforce, it would be negligible considering that a supervisor of 10 workers currently producing 400 labor hours during a typical week will now have 11 workers producing 396. Flex time is already a standard practice in the workforce; therefore, the supervision of more people, with flexible schedules would result in virtually no productivity change given the overall work unit loss of 4 labor hours.

In effect, government will get larger in manpower, but smaller in cost. Of course this represents a sacrifice in income (10%) to those employees losing hours but, as I will discuss later, it will be a shared sacrifice and it is, and will appear to be, a viable alternative to those employees, given that total job loss is also a very real future possibility in the absence of such a strategy.

Although the possibility for mandating this change down to state and local governments does not exist, the feasibility and the options that it offers, should be enough to encourage those governments to follow suit. In addition, there are ways to strongly urge these changes through other political means available to the federal government and its leadership.

Please note, this practice of hour reduction is already being employed by some local and state governments. However, they are reactionary measures, stop-gap measures. They are utilized and viewed as a way of closing the deficit gap between current revenue and current costs - as opposed to a component part of a much broader economic recovery strategy. This is a lost opportunity.

Given the relatively small numbers that this effort will affect in government alone, this approach - on its own - is clearly not intended to address the employment needs of those unemployed in the entire U.S., but, it is intended to represent the lead in that effort. The private sector will have to support that greater re-employment effort.

Private Sector

Of course there are fewer options available to government to encourage the private sector to adopt this new option, but the most powerful incentive, legislation to provide temporary tax relief, should and would provide the necessary encouragement. I will not propose a type or amount because that is a political decision and an accounting decision based on the practical affect on tax revenue and is beyond my ability with the limited information I have access to. However, the point is clear - an incentive of this type can encourage a more widespread use of this strategy and it will encourage the employment of more workers.

For the business sector, it will provide a financial motivation. This is a feasible incentive in line with their profit goals and it provides a visible appearance that they are doing their part to reinvigorate the economy through hiring.

Incentives will also encourage the movement of workers back on the "official rolls" - which in turn would be an increase in income tax revenue to the government. Of course this suggests that an illegal activity is occurring now and, although I cannot support this suggestion factually, it seems fairly obvious that a good number of businesses are utilizing the labor of workers who are not officially carried "on the books". This practice is reducing the impact on payrolls, and allows these workers to continue to receive unemployment compensation. It is a "win-win" for the employer and the employee, but it prevents the collection of income taxes and further drains the availability of unemployment benefits. Incentives that encourage hiring, will lessen, if not totally eliminate this practice.

But the main point here is that, in the absence of practical, viable incentives, the business sector will resort to practices that benefit them and allow them to survive and be profitable - to the exclusion of all other factors. This is not an anti-capitalism statement but rather an accepted behavior under the free enterprise system. A business must first survive before anything else is possible - therefore a business will do whatever it must to survive. Consequently, the adoption and utilization of such a practice will most likely be detrimental to efforts made by the government to raise revenues. Be they illegal, borderline, or loopholes, a void in directing the behavior of businesses in a way that benefits the economy as a whole will cause a proliferation of such individual business and business sector actions. This is the worst environment for uncoordinated action in the business community, but, survival will encourage and demand it - unless government leads and directs this effort.

The Top 1%

This group has, to date, been in the center of discussion as a source of needed tax revenue. The resistance has been largely based on an argument that they should not be asked to do more than any other taxpayer simply because they have been successful. This economic recovery strategy, however, leaves them as the only group not visibly and actively involved in making a sacrifice to help improve the economy. When faced with this possibility, even the most ardent opposition would reconsider their position. Politically, they would lose the current support that they have, and would have to accept an increase in their tax burden that would be seen as commensurate with the sacrifice in income made by all other working Americans.

Outcome

As previously explained, the goal of this strategy is to stimulate the economy. The principle methodology evolves around a temporary reduction in the work week, accompanied by new hires. The rationale for this methodology is based on the spending requirements that we know will exist for newly re-employed workers. The current crisis has caused millions of individuals and families to become delinquent in payments on taxes, mortgages, car payments, insurance, credit cards, utilities and a host of other household expenses.

If a realistic view is applied to the current unemployment condition in America, the real number of those unemployed long and short term is somewhere in the 24 million range if you assume the "real" percentage of unemployed is in the 15-17% range. This percentage represents the "U-6" unemployment rate as opposed to the more often used "U-3" rate. For the purpose of this paper, it is assumed that the employment of 18 million of these individuals is a target that will reintroduce sufficient spending in the economy. At a median net wage of $27,000 (Social Security Administration, 2010), this represents nearly $500 billion in additional payroll for the public and private sector. This additional income is the targeted amount that is needed, and will be spent by the newly employed.

Those who are newly employed and re-employed must spend vigorously to catch up on their mounting debt. These expenditures represent the burst of monetary flow that is needed to restart the economy. It essentially takes a little from those who are currently holding tightly to their reserves, and redistribute it into the hands of those who must spend. Every business sector would benefit from the "new" purchasing power introduced by this new group of customers, and governments at all levels will realize an increase in tax revenue.

There are several keys to realizing this outcome:

• accepting the "out-of-the-box" thinking in reducing the traditional work week,

• convincing individuals that a real, shared sacrifice by those currently in the workforce and those richest individuals is ultimately in their best interest,

• creating a suitable incentive to encourage all levels of government and the private sector to duplicate the strategy and,

• moving as quickly as possible to implement all components of the strategy on a large scale because partial implementation will not show the impact needed to cause the economic change desired.

Challenges

The challenges are numerous, varied, and for the most part, obvious. I will attempt to note several challenges that I recognize, with full understanding that this paper does not speak to all that might arise.

Politically, the ability to gain collective acceptance of the strategy is critical and necessary. That point will not be discussed in great detail in this paper but, it does require mention. This challenge includes the initial introduction to key stakeholders, and the more official announcement to the country. How the strategy is presented is of equal importance to what is implemented.

Operationally, the current work week for most organizations, be it government or private, are "hard wired" into an automated payroll/time and attendance system. Although a change to the standard hours for straight pay versus overtime hours requires a technical solution, it is not an insurmountable barrier. Most systems in place today allow for temporary changes to individual and group timekeeping. In addition, work schedules will have to be recreated to allow the necessary service coverage in order to maintain normal operating hours. Again a management challenge - but not a daunting one - especially given the series of staff reductions experienced over the past few years by almost all employers.

Another operational challenge is the consideration of retirement and other related benefit calculations. Although changes to the work week and all connected issues can be forced on the work force, it might be in the best interest of a successful implementation to continue the calculation of retirement based on the assumption that every 36 hour week is equivalent to a 40 hour week for retirement purposes. Another option is to consider it equal to 40 hours for retirement if the employee completes an additional four hours per week providing an acceptable public volunteer service, for example in a local public school. Regardless of the solution, retirement, vacation time accumulation, and sick time accumulation will need review and possible adjustment.

Contractually (and legally), some union and other employment agreements may require amendment if a guaranteed minimum is stated as an agreed upon item. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable in labor law to speak to this challenge but I believe it may arise. It is not unreasonable to assume that a court challenge or ruling may result or even be required for implementation. But this may not be a bad thing. It may, in fact, afford government the opportunity to renegotiate the benefits package that is currently a significant cost.

There are volumes of federal and state labor law, and there have been historical attempts, since the implementation of our current labor laws, to reduce the work week. The U.S. Supreme Court has even ruled on it. In addition, at least one bill, in the past, has made it through the U.S. Senate but failed in the House. However, a cursory review of labor law suggests that most of it protects employees from the establishment of more than a 40 hour week/8 hour day - not less. Finally, several states have already either implemented or are investigating a reduced work week. Given this environment, the overall economic situation, and the already lower comparable work weeks of most developed nations,, this is the ideal condition to reconsider this item - at least a change with a short-term sunset.

A more practical challenge involves the issue of setting a "floor" for this strategy. With nearly two-thirds of the workforce earning $27,000 or less in net wages it makes little sense to cut the hours of every potential worker. Some exceptions should be made. For example, the strategy would do more harm than good if applied to a person making minimum wage. A 10% reduction in hours for this person would put their annual wages dangerously close to the poverty level. Consequently, some occupations - and perhaps some industries - should be exempt from implementing this strategy. At the very least they should consider a lower reduction in work hours.

Conclusion

The current climate affords decision makers very few options. The nation's sudden loss of wealth has caused a severe shortage of currency available to flow through the economy. In addition, the government's ability to push reinvigorating funds into the economy has been severely hampered by the associated loss in revenue. This is largely due to the loss of taxpayers and other taxable entities that contribute to that source of government income.

The private sector cannot reverse this course alone, because it needs consumer spending to do so. We already know that this is not occurring and will not be occurring, on its own, in the near future. And, additional revenue gained abroad is not a realistic possibility because of the even more severely reduced purchasing power of the international consumer market as well as the associated strengthening of the dollar against foreign currencies. And ultimately, the private sector is not designed, focused or motivated to address the needs of the country.

Under these circumstances, one of the few options available is re-distribution of wages into the hands of those who are forced, by their circumstances, to spend quickly and substantially when the opportunity presents itself. That opportunity will come only when they are employed and re-employed. The need of the re-employed population to spend is clear and unquestionable - they must move to quickly reduce mounting debt. This influx of payments to debt holders, utilities, etc., combined with the newly hired employees' ability to purchase goods and services - previously gone without - will provide the stimulus necessary to reinvigorate the economy. This strategy accomplishes that desired goal.

In addition, it presents a sufficient argument to reduce any opposition to the additional taxation of those who can most afford it - the ultra wealthy. Witnessing the sacrifice of the middle class will force any opposition to higher taxation for the ultra wealthy to wilt. They will be forced to join in and provide their part to the effort.

What should be clear to all is that the current conditions are, in fact, a moment in time of a continuous downward spiral. If a strategy such as this is not implemented, it will lead to a further reduction in wealth and more uncertainty and fear. This will result in a tighter hold on spending by those who still have that ability, and ultimately the need for further reductions in the size of the current public and private workforce - an evolution that we can no longer withstand.

The final argument is that none of the components of this strategy are new, nor are they unique. All have been implemented or considered, at different times in our country's history, as an approach in reversing a sluggish or stagnant economy. The New Deal had a government led stimulation of the economy - principally through hiring - as its foundation. Increasing tax revenue by taxing a specific population deemed more capable than others to withstand such an increase has been done numerous times. In most of those instances, the increased revenues were, in turn, used to create a healthier economic climate for the nation as a whole. Cutting staff hours and reducing salaries is also a previously used strategy to reduce costs; thus, preventing a more drastic and destructive widespread layoff. State level governments and the private sector are currently utilizing this strategy. As an example, California has over 1.5 million workers who are still employed only because of their continued work at reduced hours. And finally, the consideration of a nationwide change to the standard work week of 40 hours has been undertaken in our past - by both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate -albeit never implemented. Nonetheless, several states have implemented (in addition to the example), or are considering, this very strategy today.

Perhaps the most inviting aspect of the overall approach is that it can have a "sunset" if tied to achievable and measurable goals. Most, if not all, components are linked to the two major domestic issues that government faces - federal spending and the deficit. If the strategy is implemented under the condition that it is tied to a target reduction in those two areas, the strategy becomes even more acceptable, success more measurable, and a timeline more transparent.

The unique aspect of this combined strategy is that the conditions we are currently experiencing suggest and support the use of all three principle components in unison. There exists a population of taxpayers that can clearly absorb a tax increase - without significant impact to their lifestyles - that other taxable categories cannot. There also exists a need to reduce the annual cost and the accumulated debt of the federal government - but an achievement of this through workforce reductions would be further detrimental to the broader economy. And, there exists a need to re-employ a large segment of the eligible workforce.

Each of these conditions can be resolved through the implementation of the component parts but, the implementation of them in concert. No one component will address the overall picture but, a coordinated strategy possesses the synergy necessary to reverse the present conditions. Make no mistake about it, the present condition is a crisis. Regardless of attempts to frame this in a political way, it is an economic issue. It must be resolved in those terms or it will devastate all other structures - be they political, social, or financial.

A close examination of this strategy will reveal its use of opposing notions:

• national debt reduction can occur concurrently with business tax breaks;

• government can cut costs while increasing its workforce;

• cutting labor hours can lead to an expanded economy.

It is actually possible - under a particular scenario - to raise taxes, cut taxes, increase the size of the workforce, reduce government spending and expand the economy. Government led fiscal expansion can coexist with austerity, and long term debt reduction needs can be achieved along with short term stimulus. As uncoordinated actions it cannot work - but as part of a broad, articulated strategy, it can.

Basically, we have to radically rethink how we operate in this challenging environment. The thought should no longer be how we can do more with less people, but rather how we can employ more people with the amount of labor hours government and the business sector have at their disposal. The solution is tied to the number of people employed - not the number of people employed at 40 hours per week. Every effort should be made to achieve that end - even through the sacrifice of hours for the existing workforce and higher taxes for a small segment of taxpayers.

Investing In A Developing Economy - A Possible Solution To Global Financial Crisis

INTRODUCTION

If there were security problems in Nigeria, no businessman would go to the country to explore opportunities, companies like Celtel, MTN, Etisalat, would not have ventured into security risk country to do business. Those who spread rumour about security and corruption problems in Nigeria are saying so to stop others from making money in the country. Figures don't lie. They are the biggest testimonies for how conducive Nigeria's environment for business and opportunities are. If you want to do business in Africa and record good returns on your investment, I welcome you to come to Nigeria. The political environment in Africa, particularly in Nigeria is tremendous.

Dr. Hamadoun Toure,

Secretary General,

International Telecommunications Union,

Cited in the Punch Newspaper, May 13, 2008)

What is happening currently with the Nigerian financial system is far from being affected in any way by the global credit crisis. At global level currently, the banks are under-capitalised, but Nigerian banks are over-capitalised. And I do not think this is a problem at all. I believe that Nigerian banks are under pressure from other economies within Africa continent that are affected by the credit challenges.

- Gordon Smith,

Head of Research, Africa and the Middle East, International Consilium,

(Reported in the Punch Newspaper, June 30th, 2008).

The foregoing statements aptly connote two understandings of the state of Nigerian economy. These understandings show that, the economy is one of the fastest growing economies in Africa and in the world. Although Nigeria has had hash economic history, it has undergone and still undergoing economic reforms, which are aimed at making Nigeria the Africa's financial hub and one of the twenty largest economies in the world by the year 2020. Needless to say that the country has experienced political instability, corruption, and poor macroeconomic management in the past, this was responsible for unpleasant and harsh economic situation. The government relentless efforts to reposition the economy have translated into a remarkable economic growth and development. Several mechanisms have been put in place to sustain this growth and development, capable of balancing the interests of stakeholders. Perhaps, this view must have influenced Gordon Smith submission. He described Nigeria as the most dynamic market in Africa, which is under severe pressure from some countries in Africa to serve as a cushion against the effects of global turbulence. He also noted that some countries like Ghana, Malawi, Mauritius, among others were depending on her at the moment due to global risk exposure and that the country's economy, led by the consolidated banks, was far from being affected by the global credit crisis currently rocking the world's financial giants. He stressed further that foreign investors, who will be patient enough to weigh the Nigerian financial system on the credit risk perspective relative to global events, will find the nation's financial sector more interesting to invest and raise capital from.

Faced with numerous challenges, Nigerian government is determined to strengthen, diversify and make the economy attractive and investment-friendly to both local and foreign investors. The government has adopted total liberalization and globalization as the economic policy, instituted privatization and commercialization programmes of public enterprises, provided total security for business and people, extended invitation to domestic and foreign investors, abolished laws inhibiting competition, embraced and fine-tuned policies to ensure quick realization of growth and development of all sectors of the economy. The effort is already paying off as Nigeria is now the focus for foreign investment thereby increased exponentially Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Scores of economic missions and delegations from developed and developing countries have visited Nigeria, thus accelerating the growth of the economy at a very fast rate.

It becomes pertinent to direct the course of this discussion to embrace the second understanding of the above statements made by Hamadoun Toure and Gordon Smith. However, it becomes more pertinent to enumerate the inherent investment opportunities in Nigerian economy before discussing the issue of security as raised by Toure.

INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND SECURITY ISSUE IN NIGERIA

No doubt, Nigeria is an investment haven with countless and lucrative investment opportunities including oil and gas, solid mineral, agriculture, tourism, telecommunication, power and steel, transport, trade processing zone, financial sector, real estate / property, manufacturing, sport and entertainment, and fashion industry. Investors have a wide range of opportunities to choose from. It is important to note that the rate of growth of investment is fantastic and exponential in any of these sectors. Investors are at advantage of presenting their products and services to already-made market taking advantage of the population of over 140 million.

In telecommunication, statistics reveals that mobile phone users in Africa were about 280 million, overtaking United States and Canada with their 277 million users in the opening quarter of 2008. With 70 million connections in 2007, the Continent became the fastest growing region in the world, representing a growth of 38 per cent, ahead of the Middle-East (33 per cent) and the Asia-Pacific (29 per cent).It was also revealed that the fastest growing markets are located in northern and western Africa, representing altogether 63 per cent of the total connections in the region. The record showed that Nigeria, Zambia, Tanzania, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Algeria, Tunisia, Ghana and South Africa are highly competitive markets in the Region. The record further contends that two-third of Africa's telephony are in their early phase of development, with penetration rates below 30 per cent at the end of 2007.In percentage terms, it was noted that Africa is the fastest growing market in the world, but also the second smallest in terms of connections after Middle-East.

As Nigeria accounts for 57 per cent of the West Africa mobile phones, the country is acknowledged as the leading and the fastest growing telecom market in Africa. With mobile phone users at 44,932,181 and 734,444 for GSM and mobile CDMA respectively, her contributions to West Africa and Africa's telecommunication growth can not be overemphasized. While the overall economic growth rate stands at 7% per annum, the mobile telephony is about 35-50%. Assuming that each of these connections was busy for a minute in a day, the country telecoms market has the capacity to generate over USD 16 million per day (USD16, 666,667) and close to USD 6 billion per year (USD 5,833,333,300). This is why telecom companies such as Visafone and Etisalat quickly joined the likes of MTN, Globacom, Celtel and other telecoms service providers in exploiting opportunities in the country.

Early this year, one of the main GSM service providers with a subscriber base of over 15 million announced a profit after taxation of USD650 million (78 billion naira) for the year 2007.Putting all these together, one can easily understand Toure's submission describing Nigerian telecoms market as the best investment destination in Africa.

Recognizing the fact that the Nigeria telecoms industry is enormous and there is need to further exploit the sector to its fullest, the Nigeria Communication Commission (NCC) and the Ministry of State for Information and Communications have made their positions clear by extending invitation to global investors for active participation in the sector as they are willing to grant pioneer status and license for prospective applicants for various undertaking such as Fixed telephony, Mobile telephony, Fixed satellite (VSAT),Paging, Payphone, Internet and other value added services.

With the above facts, one can safely conclude that Nigerian telecom sector offers fantastic and lucrative investment opportunities to global investors. And putting into consideration 40% GSM market growth rate in the first quarter of this year (2008), there is potential for high return on investment in this sector.

Agriculture, the dominant sector of Nigeria economy, engages about 70 per cent of the population directly and provides nearly 88 percent of non-oil foreign exchange earnings. It contributes about 41 per cent of the GDP of the country. The sector recorded an overall growth rate average of 7 per cent in the last three years, a major improvement from under 3 per cent in the 90's.

Statistically, 91 million hectares of the country's total land area of 92.4 million hectares is adjudged to be suitable for cultivation. Approximately half of this cultivable land is effectively under permanent and arable crops, while the rest is covered by forest wood land, permanent pasture and built up areas. Among the states, which have the most abundant land, areas are Niger (7.6 million hectares) and Borno (2.8 million hectares).

Agriculture crops in Nigeria are grouped into cereals, root and tuber crops, grains legumes and other legumes, oil seeds and nuts, tree crops, and vegetable and fruits. Governments and the Ministries of Agriculture have made land acquisition easy, encouraged agricultural practices, extended (still extending) invitation to foreign investors and have put in place several incentives to stimulate growth in the sector. Despite, the agricultural potential of Nigeria is barely being tapped and this explains the inability of the country to meet the ever-increasing demand for agricultural products and her rank as 55th in the world (although first in Africa) in farm output.

As the world experiences food crisis and persistent rise in fuel price, the country's agriculture offers unlimited opportunities for foreign investors and the world at large to provide solutions to these crises. Foreign investors will find investments in cultivation of sugar cane, sugar beet, sweet sorghum, starch (corn/maize), palm oil, soybeans, jatropha, and algae. These products are lucrative as they are potential for biofuels, a good substitute for fossil fuel. Presently, there is a very high demand for these crops from the developed economies.

Solid Mineral is another sector with great investment opportunities. Nigeria is endowed with numerous mineral resources. Recent policy reforms have brought the solid minerals sector to the fore. The emphasis is on encouraging massive foreign investors' participation in this sector as less than 0.5 per cent is contributed to the Gross Domestic Products from Solid mineral sector. However, the Ministry of Mines and Steel and the Ministry of state's focal attention in the last one year is to strategically place the country in a better position to explore and exploit just seven minerals in the plethora of minerals so as to increase Gross Domestic Product to 5 per cent within the next few years. The seven strategic minerals are coal, bitumen, limestone, iron-ore, barite, gold and lead / zinc.

Coal can be found in Enugu, Benue and Kogi. Within these three districts 396 million metric tones can be demonstrated using JORC classification criteria, while an additional 1,091 million tones of inferred and hypothetical coal resourced for the areas studied is 1481 million tones.

Knowing fully that development of coal will assist in the realization of energy, the Government and the Ministries are inviting foreign investors to participate actively in the exploration and exploitation of the mineral. Companies such as Denver Resources and Western Metals have already committed US$10 million and US$15 million respectively for two coal fields in the country. Another Chinese firm, Grid Xin Yuan International Investment Company that is providing more than half of China's electricity needs is also in the country, indicating their interest in the development of a coal field in Kogi State.

The Bitumen reserve in the country is estimated at more than 27 billion barrels of oil equivalent while iron-ore is estimated at over 5 billion inferred reserves with presence in Kogi, Enugu, Niger, Zamfara and Kaduna States. Gold in just 10 locations is estimated at 50,000 ounces, barites 10 million metric tones and limestone at 2.3 trillion reserves.

Talc with an estimated reserve of over 100 million tones can be found in Niger, Osun, Kogi, Kwara, Ogun, Taraba and Kaduna States.The colour of the Nigerian talc varies from white through milky-white to grey. The talc industry represents one of the most versatile sectors of the industrial minerals in the world. The exploitation of the vast talc deposits in Nigeria would therefore satisfy not only the local demands but also that of the international market as well.

The national demand for table salt, caustic soda, chlorine, sodium bicarbonate, sodium hydrochloric acid and hydrogen peroxide exceeds one million tones. A colossal amount of money is expended annually to import these chemicals. There are salt springs at Awe (Platue State), Enugu, and Uburu ( Imo State), while rock salt is available in Benue State. A total reserve of 1.5 billion tones has been indicated. Government, to ascertain the quantum of reserves, is now carrying out further investigations.

In the same vain, large bentonite reserves of 700 million tones are available in many states of federation ready for massive development and exploitation, over 7.5 million tones of barite been identified in Taraba and Bauchi states, and an estimated reserve of 3 billion tones of good kaolinific clays has also been identified.

Gemstone mining has boomed in various parts of Plateau, Kaduna and Bauchi States for years. Some of these gemstones include Sapphire, Ruby, Aquamarine, Emerald, Tourmaline, Topaz, Gamet, Amethyst, Zircon, and Fluorspar, which are among the best in world. Good prospects exist in this area for viable investment. Understanding that this sector requires urgent investment, the Ministry has directed miners who are still in small artisan levels to form cooperatives so as to benefit from World Bank US$10 million assistance. Apart from this, three Nigerian Banks have also established solid minerals desk with fund of over US$ 8 million each for the development of the sector.

Foreign investors will find this sector worth-investing on as Nigerian governments have put in place various incentives and strategies for investment such as 3-5 years tax holiday, deferred royalty payments, possible capitalization of expenditure on exploration and surveys, extension of infrastructure and provision of 100% foreign ownership of mining concerns.

Recognizing that only a sustained macroeconomic environment and a sound and vibrant financial system can propel the economy to achieve the country's desire to become one of 20 largest economies in the world by the year 2020, on the July 6, 2004 the Federal Government through the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), under the leadership of its Governor, Professor Charles Soludo launched a 13-point reform agenda to restructure, refocus and strengthen the Nigerian Financial System. To complement this agenda, another comprehensive long-term reform agenda for the Financial System (the Financial System Strategy 2020-FSS2020) was launched. The grand objectives of these agendas are substantially being achieved. The country financial system now comprises of strong, efficient and internationally competitive banks with an eye for global markets, a capital market with highest returns on investment, in dollar terms, a sound and rewarding insurance industry and other competitive financial participants.

Gordon was right in his submission to have described Nigeria as the most dynamic market in Africa. His view that "foreign investors, who will be patient enough to weigh the Nigerian Financial System on the credit risk perspective relative to the global event, will find the nation's financial sector more interesting to invest and raise funds from" x-rays the truth about the country's financial sector.

The country's banking system is the safest and the soundest it has ever produced in history. It is the fastest growing banking system in Africa and one of the fastest in the world. In fact, the most outstanding contribution towards realization of the country's dream came from this sub-sector. Economic analysts have observed that it has taken Nigeria less than 3 years to achieve what it took South Africa 20 years to achieve in the area of banking. In a short word, a world-class banking system has emerged in Nigeria.

Statistically, banking sector contributes 10 per cent to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and represents 60 per cent of the stock market capitalization, while there was a reduction in the number of banks from 89 to 25, the number of banks branches rose by 33 per cent from 3383 in 2004 to 4500 in 2007. The total asset base of banks rose by 104 per cent from $ 26.8 billions ( 3.21 trillion naira) in 2004 to $54.7 billion ( 6.56 trillion naira) by mid 2007; capital and reserves rose by 192 per cent from $2.72 billion (327 billion naira) to $7.98 billion ( 957 billion naira); capital adequacy ratio rose by 42.6 per cent, point from 15.18 per cent to 21.6 per cent and ratio of non-performing loans total loan improved massively by 51.3 per cent, point from 19.5 per cent to 9.5 per cent. The sector has also remained one of the most profitable in the country's capital market. It was noted that 13 out of 21 quoted banks on the Nigerian Stock Exchange recorded returns in excess of 100 per cent since January 2007.

According to the April 2008 edition of the African Business, (the best-selling Pan-African Business Magazine published in London) 18 out of 28 West African Companies with market capitalisation of more than $1 billion are Nigerian Banks. The magazine stated that First Bank Nigeria Plc with market capitalization of $7.4 billion remains the largest company in West Africa. Two other Nigerian banks namely Intercontinental Bank Plc and United Bank for Africa (UBA) remain the second and the third largest companies in the sub-region with market capitalization of $6.2 billion and $4.6 billion respectively.

Apparently, the rising tide of banks in the country from all indications has made the sub-sector very attractive, not only to local investors, but also to foreign investors, and in particular, foreign banks. For instance, the consolidation of Regent Bank, Chartered Bank and IBTC to form IBTC Chartered Bank attracted the interest of the Standard Bank Group, the largest financial institution in Africa with a market capitalization of $ 17.8 billion, whose subsidiary Stanbic Bank, also of South Africa has just sealed a Merger deal for the latest Merger in the country, Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc. In this direction, other foreign banks have started making enquiries with CBN of a possible Merger or take-over.

To further substantiate the opportunities the banking sub-sector offers the global investors, a cursory look into Intercontinental Bank Plc will reveal the success of banking system in the country. Intercontinental Bank Plc is known to be the second largest companies in West Africa to have recorded a phenomenal growth in gross earnings, which stood at $1.45 billion ( 173.5 billion naira) in 2008. This is an increase of 99 per cent over the $728 million (87.4 billion naira) in 2007, profit after tax grew by 102 per cent to $380 million ( 45.6 billion naira) as against $188 million (22.6 billion) in 2007, while the capital base rose to $1.67 billion from $1.31 billion. The bank deposit base soared to $8.75 billion ( 1.05 trillion naira), an increase of 126 per cent from $3.9 billion (468 billion naira) in 2007, while the total assets also recorded a quantum leap to $14.2 billion (1.7 trillion naira), representing a growth of 108 per cent from $6.86 billion( 823 billion).

The bank is also in strategic partnership with BNP Paribas, the world leading energy financing bank, Afrexim Bank; Export Development Canada (EDC); Finance for Development (FMO); China Exim Bank; Export-Import of United States; International Finance Corporation in financing projects in different sectors of the economy. However, it is relevant to say that the success recorded by Intercontinental bank is a good example of the Nigerian banks' strength and prospects, and a testimony to opportunities available to global investors in the country' financial sector.

Apart from the above, Nigerian Capital Market offers viable opportunities as it is positioned to help companies to raise capital, and to generate high returns on investment. Its total market capitalization has grown by over 4000 per cent to $100 billion (12 trillion naira) in March, 2008, up from $2.39 billion (287 billion naira ) in August 1999.Among emerging markets, the Nigerian Capital market remains one of the most viable in terms of returns on equity. Historically, the market has delivered 28 per cent returns.

Insurance industry is not an exemption to this growth and development the country's financial sector is witnessing. Although there are few black spots on the regulatory handling, the industry has equally recorded success in their reforms and operations. With the inflow of robust capital, insurance companies are now faced with the challenges of delivering returns to shareholders, maximizing value and exploring overseas markets. Their presence can be felt in countries like Ghana, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Sao Tome, South Africa among others.

Although Goldman Sachs' report titled "New Market Analyst" with issue number 08/09 released on March 13, 2008 (cited in the Thisday newspaper March 19,2008) posited that Nigeria is a better economy than South Africa, International Monetary Fund (IMF) reported that Nigeria and South Africa got close to 50 per cent of the $53 billion private equity and debt flow to Sub-Saharan Africa in 2007. This underscores the growing confidence of International bodies and foreign investors in country's financial sector and economy at large.

Furthermore, Fitch Rating Agency and the Standard and Poor rated Nigeria BB-(minus) in the area of sovereign credit, high in development of local currency debt market, and low in the areas of debt to GDP ratio and inflation. The opportunities for growth in Nigeria financial sector are still strong as the underlying fundamentals driving the growth are still present. All these and more, position the financial sector and the country at large as a leading and most dynamic market in Africa and present viable investment opportunities to global investors.

Needless to say that the opportunities presented above are typical examples and an evidence of opportunities awaiting foreign investors in other sectors of the economy.

Nigeria is the largest producer and exporter of oil in Africa (although recently placed second behind Angola in the latest OPEC report as a result of Niger Delta Crisis) with a production of 2.5 million barrels and above a day. Besides, the Nigeria is the 7th world's gas reserve holder and the highest flaring nation in the world, with the potential to become a major player in LNG export. It has annual gas flares' capacity to generate over 12000 MW of electricity needed to catalyze the growth of any economy. Although it currently flares an average of 1.2 TCF of gas annually, the sector has the potential to generate great returns on investment.

One of the greatest opportunities awaiting foreign investors is Real Estate / Property. For instance, Lagos Metropolis with a population of about 18 million has attained mega city status. The State has one of the highest urbanization rates in the world according to the World Bank. Consequently, there is an insatiable demand for housing delivery, which has necessitated the introduction of the New Private Estate Developers Scheme. Under the programme, the government will make large parcels of land ranging from 1 to 25 hectares available to corporate organizations capable of undertaking development and delivery of housing units. Such organization must however demonstrate that they have the financial capacity and technical expertise to deliver quality and affordable housing units.

Among other sectors of the economy that foreign investors will find viable and worth-investing on are Transport, Sport and Entertainment, Tourism, Power and Steel, Export Processing Zones, Privatization. And available records reveal that the rate of returns in these sectors is as high as in the sectors discussed above.

Apart from the opportunities mentioned above which our office is strategically positioned to maximize opportunities for the benefit of prospective investors. We also offer consultancy services in the areas of general management, manufacturing, marketing, finance and accounting, personnel, research and development, packaging, administration, international operation, specialized services and other value-adding services. And our strategic partnership with national and international companies put us in position to deliver quality service and high returns on investment.

Nevertheless, there have been fears raised by international observers, agents and bodies that Nigeria is a high-risk nation for investment and other business transactions. This development is attributed to security, multiple taxation, epileptic power supply, bad roads and poor work environment.

It may appear that doing business in Nigeria is challenging because of the activities of a few untrustworthy Nigerians who are unscrupulous. But such are simply characterization of human nature; as it can be found anywhere else in the world. It must be said emphatically that the world has been biased in their judgment and treatment of Nigeria security issue. There have never been terrorist attacks, suicide bombings or kidnapping until recently when the issue of Niger Delta came on board.

Niger Delta region-the source of nation's oil wealth- has become an area of perennial tension, agitation, and recently, militancy. However, a confluence of factors such as environmental damage by oil exploitation, failure to develop the region, lack of job opportunities and sense of deep deprivation from the low share of derivation revenue accruing to the states in the region, has led to the present situation. Acknowledging their situation, the Federal Government has organised a Summit, to be chaired by Professor Ibrahim Gambari, the United Nations Under Secretary General, to provide everlasting solution to the crisis. Frankly speaking, Nigeria is a safe and investment-friendly place and Nigerians are accommodating and industrious.

Cyber Crime is another fearsome crime, which often put-off prospective investors from involving or investing in the business opportunities in Nigeria. This crime was actually imported into the country by expatriates. It has never been part of Nigeria culture. It is perpetrated by a few section of the population. Their operations are carried out via Internet and their targets are people who transact business via the medium. They pose as government officials and sometimes as businessmen with United Kingdom identity who deal in digital products. However the list of their tricks and operations is not exhaustive. With the help of Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and Related Commission (ICPC), and other Anti-Criminal Agencies, Cyber Crime and their perpetrators are under control and disappearing.

The grand objective of the present administration, as encapsulated in VISION 2020, is to make Nigeria a major industrial and economic power, and one of the 20 largest economies in the World by the year 2020 by providing enabling investment and business environment and maximum security for active participation of local and particularly, foreign investors. The realization of these aspirations had informed the radical and pragmatic reforms designed to increase the attractiveness of Nigeria's investment opportunities and foster the growing confidence in the economy. In this direction, the Federal Government has provided incentives and strategies for investment such as 3-5 years tax holiday, deferred royalty, possible capitalization of expenditure and provision of infrastructures such as road and electricity, just to mention a few.

African economy is witnessing the strongest growth in 30 years; no doubt, Nigeria is one of the major contributors to this development. Most commentators have observed that the opportunities for business and investment in the country look increasingly rosy with GDP growth of 7 per cent in 2007 and 13 per cent in the next 12 years. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecast of 9 per cent growth rate for Nigeria in 2008 (which is second to India 10 per cent and ahead of China 8 per cent) lays credence to their observations.

Furthermore, the increase in Foreign Direct Investment, the entrance of multinational companies, the strong financial sector, the favourable and tremendous business environment, the government support, the abundant natural resources, and the population of over 140 million people, among others, put Nigeria in a comparative ( and possibly absolute) advantage over other African countries.

Just as it is difficult to ignore China as a market in the global arena, (one out of every five persons in the world is Chinese) so is it very difficult to ignore Nigeria as a market in Africa (one out of every three persons in Africa is Nigerian). With a population of over 140 million people and its economic potential, Nigeria still remains Africa most important market.

IMPACT OF GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS IN A DEVELOPING ECONOMY

Unlike China and India, African economy(developing economies) is yet to be integrated into the world economy. This is as a result of slow rate of integration and globalization at which the economy is being fixed into the global economic and financial system. Consequently, developing economies will only suffer a limited financial impact from the credit crunch. However, this is not to say that developing economies are in isolation and totally free from the crisis.

To grant a point, this paper will continue to use Nigerian economy for its analysis as it represents a paradigm of a developing economy with valid and considerable variables.

According to the report from a recently concluded Bankers Committee Meeting, which ended on October 20 th, 2008 , the Nigerian banks are safe as they operate at 22 per cent capital adequacy ratio( 14 per cent above the world 8 per cent requirement) and the financial sector is far from being affected by the current global financial crisis. The report also posits that any bail-out scheme is unnecessary as the situation that warranted bail-out schemes in developed economies- poor quality assets and heavy loan losses resulting from exposure to inadequately collateralised mortgage loans- is absent in Nigeria. To underscore its point, the report noted that, as the Direct Foreign Investment in Nigerian banks is comparatively low and the banks connection with their foreign counterparts is loosely fixed, the impact of the crisis will be limited and indirect.

Conclusion

The words of Mr. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the Managing Director of International Monetary Fund, at a meeting in Washington D.C are the corner stones of the concluding thoughts of this paper. He stressed as follow:

We meet at an extra-ordinarily difficult time- a time of uncertainty and insecurity, with a danger that those fears push us away from- not towards- a more inclusive and sustainable globalization....At its best, multilateralism is a means for solving problems among countries, with the group at the table willing to take constructive action together. When multilateralism is dysfunctional, globalization can be a Babel of Tower, with competing national interests colliding to benefit none. The new multilateralism, suiting our times, is likely to be a flexible network, not fixed system. It needs to maximize the strengths of interconnecting actors, public and private, profit-making and civil society Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). The multilateralism must respect state sovereignties while solving interconnected problems that transcend borders...The private sector cannot restore confidence on its own. Macroeconomic policy measures by governments cannot restore confidence on their own. Piecemeal measures on financial markets will not restore confidence on their own. What will restore confidence is government intervention which is clear, comprehensive and cooperative among countries..The world must act quickly, forcefully and cooperatively to contain the ongoing financial and economic downturn.

Thus, the position of this paper is that the confidence will only be restored if "government intervention which is clear, comprehensive and cooperative" is complemented with investment in developing economies with less or no crisis impact as "flexible multilateralism" and cooperative and sustainable globalization is solution that suits our time, not" economic isolationism".

Azeez Olawale-Arish Yusuff,
Speaker, Human Right Advocate, Tutor, Entrepreneur, International consultant,Economic analyst, Founder/Manager, Cyber Crime Solution Providers Network.

Economic Solution for the US Health Insurance and Health Care Crisis the American Way

The health care and health insurance dilemma in the United States penetrates and corrodes the very core of the quality of the American life. Our politicians and legislators are falling all over each other to produce both State and Federally mandated solutions for one of the most expensive problem facing our nation today. Documentaries such as "Sicko" with Michael Moore, and countless television stories and newspaper articles scream the need for change. As the never-ending inflation of medical services and prescription drugs rises, the bureaucracy of the insurance providers keeps pace by increasing premiums, and lowering quality of coverage for most Americans in their health plans. Drug companies are under constant scrutiny to offer more competitive pricing, but face little regulation compared to the foreign countries who have elected to impose cost controls endemic to their individual society's perceived needs.

So in the face of such a negative equation, how does a capital-driven society like the United States of America re-vamp its health care system, and still maintain the theology of "choice" and "capital market competition"? And how do we do it without killing more Americans?

To answer these questions it is necessary to take in to account what works and what doesn't in both American society and other societies where socialized medicine is the norm. The problem that Uncle Sam and many self-made American business folks have with socialized programs is the ability of such programs to denigrate a societies progress, and step away from our independent roots, both financially and health-wise. In order to continue to allow health insurance providers to shore up their billions of investment dollars ( a key pillar in our financial framework) and still take care of every American who is sick requires us to radically change the way the risk of such health problems is transferred, but to still collect regular premiums from taxpayers to fund the collective system. My proposed solution will be spelled out in this article in relatively simple terms forming a base architecture which will allow independent insurance providers to remain, independent hospitals and doctors to remain independent, and drug companies to remain competitively profitable while still insuring every American.

Proposal Architecture

I would propose a three-tiered system for Health Insurance, Prescription Drugs, and Medical Providers of all types:

I. Insurance Method

In order to keep insurance companies profitable and provide 100% base health coverage to all Americans at the same time, you need a combination of the net effect of socialized medicine and American free trade. A fund must be created by the federal government which closely mimics a Re-Insurance Company. Most insurance companies whether in the health field or commercial insurers have large re-insurance agreements and policies with major funds. A classic example is Berkshire Hathaway's "General RE" which underwrites some of the largest global policies in the world in their niche. For description purposes, the federal government needs to take the opposite approach of a non-profit, heavily taxed medicare and insurance system by creating the world's largest re-insurance vehicle. The re-insurance department is funded by A) a percentage of all health care premiums from all health insurance companies, and B) a 1.5% federal income tax increase across the board for all Americans. From this point forward, all health insurance providers are required to have a BASE INSURANCE LEVEL on all policies which will include a) full prescription coverage included, b) all doctor visits covered, and c) full major medical coverage with no deductible.

From an actuarial standpoint, what you are doing is not eliminating health insurance premiums for Americans. All working Americans who earn more than $16,000.00 per year must pay a scale-adjusted premium of the same category and type for the "base policy". The scale for premium is driven by total income per individual or household based on their current employment. However, you have just turned the entire insurance industry in to one big "group plan" where the risk is spread out over the entire country. Using the proportion of healthy Americans to those requiring services at any given point, this simplistic approach lowers the premium for the base policy to affordable levels for all wage earners, and gives the base policy for free to low income individuals and families. Those people who meet the low income standards get the same base insurance as everybody else, and are required to file with a private insurance company of their choice for insurance. The federal RE fund pays all insurers a minimum base amount equivalent to what they would get from a paying client. The "Federal RE" model receives 30 to 35% of the private insurance company's base premiums for all policies. The base premiums and the amount each individual must pay is determined by an actuarial committee of the new federal RE fund, but should be adjusted very rarely. Once the percentage is set, it becomes law, and the 1.5% tax increase across the board is primarily a cushion for the low income and poor.

Insurance companies then endeavor to differentiate themselves by adding features to the base policy for their clients for their marketing and packaging. They do NOT differentiate themselves by providing sub-standard insurance, as it is not optional. The base policy for all is a major medical insurance policy based on California Standards, and covers all co-pays and deductibles 100%. In order to make additional insured dollars, the health insurer must provide more elite services to guarantee a client who is willing to pay for additional features an even better position than the base position. This enables the following to occur in logical order:

* The federal government actually makes money on investing insurance premiums the way insurance companies do by their re-insurance department. Risk is spread out over each American that can afford to pay premiums. Premiums are minimal because of the inflated group size and reduced insurance company risk. The combination of a small federal tax increase to hedge dollar volume and beef up the account combines with receiving the RE premiums and investing them makes this federal program slightly profitable, and with the ability to adjust policy when needed.

* Insurance companies lower their risk, and are able to simplify and streamline their base coverage for major medical. Since all rules apply to all insurers (new or old) they can compete based on important but "ancillary" products to improve the insurance quality of those that can afford extra benefits. Major payouts will be largely reduced due to automatic RE participation on the policy's base components.

II. Prescription Drug Costs

By making Federal RE the "co-payer" in most medical transactions for both medicine and medical services, you have also created a need for a private-style approach to controlling the cost of drugs and other prescriptions. This is a sticky area, because development costs for drugs are hyped as being out of control if they cannot be later recouped with high prices.

Since the federal government in the form of Federal RE is now a payer/customer of the pharmaceutical companies, prices for medications must find a happy medium to allow for development and free trade, but with sane maximums for purchase. It is the job of the federal government to prevent monopolies. A monopoly is not defined as a single producer of a product (or drug) being the only source for a given product. A monopoly is defined as that single-source-producer charging an amount which hurts our society, and potentially prevents competition. (generic drugs) Standards must be developed for the maximum payment amount allowed for each category of medicine and medical supply. This will be an ever-changing exhaustive piece of work, done on a very ongoing basis by employees of Federal RE. The purpose is never to set prices, but to determine the maximum the fund will allow an insurance company or itself to collectively spend on a medication, taking into consideration all aspects of the newness of a product by using fluctuating actuarial and monetary scales. If a Pharmaceutical supplier will not meet these maximums, then unfortunately, the medicine will not be available until they are willing to bend. This is a flaw in the ointment than cannot be fixed any other way due to the way drugs are really developed in the United States. Americans who add to their "base policy' with supplemental insurance that covers expensive cutting-edge medicine could receive the medicine, but not the base-only policy holders. Drug companies will therefore be forced by demand to reduce their charges at least to the point of scale, in most normal scenarios. This portion of the plan cannot be altered to appease any particular party, because if you do the entire buying system falls apart. However, groups currently involved in assisting low-income victims could shift their focus to those precious few who are not able to get the most cutting edge product in time. The money simply cannot be covered by Federal RE. That does not mean another vehicle cannot be refocused, whether private or public, to assist in those few cases percentage-wise which require the latest cutting edge medications not charted as buy able.

III. Medical Treatment under Federal RE conditions

Medical treatment at this juncture is now available for all Americans, and in almost all cases their prescriptions are covered also. But now that we are prepared to fill up every clinic and major hospital with patients, how do we control the clinically insane costs of running that clinic or hospital? We can stave off socialized prescriptions via creating a powerful buyer in the market Through Federal RE, and having simple cost-overrun standards that are non-negotiable and consistent. But the clinics, hospitals, and emergency rooms didn't get any cheaper. Since all Americans (at a minimum) are covered by the best type of major medical insurance money could previously buy, the billing systems and related bureaucracies are naturally streamlined over time. But sadly, medical charges have very little to do with the actual cost of a procedure, and everything to do with what the various hospital and clinical administrations CAN charge in each situation. If we govern the pricing of each procedure too closely, then we are mimicking the socialized policies of countries who we do not wish to be.

I would argue that the same way maximums were set in item #B above, a geographically mapped system to avoid over-charges could be applied. What constitutes an overcharge is again decided by committee at Federal RE in much the same way that pharmaceuticals are banned when costs are unreasonable to both the insurers and the government. Because 100% of the American population is insured with Basic (unless they foolishly "opt out") the CUSTOMER is now the dual processors of Federal RE and the private insurance company involved in each case. If cost controls are unreasonable by today's standards to any given clinic, the quality of health care will suffer tremendously when the operating units do not get to charge whatever they want, or whatever they used to feel an insurer will pay. But when medical organizations get 100% continuity in payments through a single-payer style system with few errant delays in the simplified processing, they will actually make far more money than they do now in the world of constant claim disputes, and zero consistency. The monitoring committee, as with the prescription committees, are comprised of qualified professionals at Federal RE who understand the true economics of a hospital or clinic. Severe overcharges that are way beyond scale cannot and will not be honored. Plenty of money will still be spent for procedures (especially at the onset when the system is brand new) but the whole key to controlling price is actually not price controls as the system matures...but rather the lower cost of running a hospital and clinic when the payments are made for services with lightening speed. That's right..there is no reason to hold up funds under the new program once the services are provided. Medical billing will be a snap, and the incredible amounts of money spent on corrective systems can be lessened for each institution. Speed of payment to medical facilities is a major factor for overall success. So is having a fairly large and very intimate accounting system to track abuses. Frequent audits will replace much of the former aggravation of charging insurance companies, and will be a much more regular event at hospitals. A strong governmental role in auditing each facility regularly is actually a pillar of this plan, and will be gone in to more detail in later articles as to who and how this occurs, and how frequently.

The American dream is still a wonderful thing. We do not have to take away the profit motive from professionals who seek their fortune through honorable health industries, medical jobs, and insurance work. We simply need to define the rules of a new system that uses the age old insurance RULE OF LARGE NUMBERS to create a national group. The same talent required to be a preferred doctor, dentist, or insurance provider still exists in a more comprehensive form. State programs and the endless bureaucracy that encompasses them are eliminated and replaced by the new system. Welfare mothers and low-income households are fully sponsored for the coverage they really need, and the investments of Federal RE: over long period of time pay for most of the built-in deficiency. Hospitals, clinics, insurers, and drug companies all have to compete on the basis of quality and product provided instead of what HMO or PPO they belong to, or what "level of care" is minimally chosen. You will find that in practice it is an absolute fact that Federal RE will actually show a small profit when the smoke clears away, and medical care will improve through TRUE COMPETITION, not the bureaucratic version of it most of us suffer with today.

Harold B. Miller http://www.haroldmiller.besthealthagent.com/HomePage.aspx

Harold Miller provides exceptionally good planned design for Health Insurance Plans for self employed individuals and families. If you have any questions or comments about health insurance, please visit the web site provided for contact information.

Uranium Mining Revival in New Mexico through Solution Mining

"We've got to get quickly on a track to energy independence from foreign oil, and that means, among other things, going back to nuclear power," U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) recently told Fox News. U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) invited Louisiana Enrichment Services (LES) to build a gas-centrifuge uranium enrichment facility near Hobbs, New Mexico. The facility is currently undergoing the permitting process. Southwest Research and Information Center's Annette Aguayo told us the group planned to begin working on stopping that project. Some environmentalists remain behind the times.

Other environmentalists, who led before, are leading again. James Lovelock, the spiritual guru of the world's environmental movement, sometimes called the "Father of the Green Revolution," because of his research and widely embraced warnings on DDT and CFCs, wrote in Reader's Digest, (March, 2005), "The figures show that many people's fears of nuclear energy are unreasonable." Dr. Lovelock also said "the Greens are plain wrong to oppose it." In May, 2004, Lovelock wrote, "Nuclear power is the only green solution."

New Mexico is primed for a uranium revival, not with conventional mining, but with ISL operations. The in situ leaching method, also known as solution mining, is environmentally friendly. Because it is low cost and does not contaminate the environment in ways that uranium mining did in the 1950s, many uranium companies plan to use this safer method for mining uranium in New Mexico.

In a conversation, late last year, with Grants Chamber of Commerce and Mining Museum employee Barbara Hahn, a deep resentment resounded in her voice when talking about the collapse of the uranium mining business in the 1980s. Grants (NM) was a boom town, during the 1970s uranium boom, when spot uranium prices climbed, and stayed above $40/pound. "Grants replaced the lost mining jobs by opening prisons," she told us. "Now, others bring us their prisoners." Ms. Hahn believed only 35 percent of the uranium had been extracted from the Grants Mineral Belt. "Most of it is still there," she added. According to a McLemore and Chenoweth geological report, a resource of 558 million pounds (279,000 short tons) might still be extracted. The question in the 1980s as it is today revolves around the spot price of uranium.

The higher the spot price of uranium, the more economic it can be to mine. As the price of uranium rises, then the quantity of an economic resource increases. At $30/pound, the U.S. Energy Information Administrated reported the state of New Mexico held 84 million pounds of uranium oxide, grading 0.28/ton, as of Dec 31, 2003. However, at $50/pound uranium, that quantity would jump to 341 million pounds. The spread on the gross value of the uranium assets between those price levels is nearly $15 billion! As the spot price escalates, the economic reserves grow.

Said William Sheriff, Director of Corporate Development for Energy Metals (TSX: EMC), "Our long-term, big, big projects are going to be in New Mexico. Long term, we think New Mexico is going to be quite valuable to us." He explained his company's plans are to first develop production centers in Texas and Wyoming, before developing ISL operations in The Enchanted State. Sheriff added, "Nothing in New Mexico in terms of the first five years, but that's not to say we're going to sit idly by. We're going to be aggressively pursuing these. The only thing we're going to be pursuing is ISL production." Based upon the company's extensive acquisitions in Wyoming, New Mexico and elsewhere, Sheriff threw down the gauntlet at Cameco and Cogema, whose ISL operations in Wyoming contribute the largest share of U.S. uranium production, "We intend to become the largest ISL producer in the United States."

David Miller, President and Chief Operation Officer of Strathmore Minerals, (TSX: STM; Other OTC: STHJF), believes, "The ISL production method will continue to grow in the United States, but we will also see a return to conventional mining and milling in the western states." In addition to their Wyoming uranium properties, Strathmore hopes to move forward their Church Rock uranium property on the heels of Uranium Resources' (OTC BB: URRE) permitting on Section 17, held by their HRI subsidiary. Basically, all three companies are friendly neighbors in the area. There is evidence they frequently talk among themselves, comparing notes. The three uranium juniors appear to be the current major players in New Mexico for ISL uranium mining.

Ron Driscoll, one of the co-founders of Quincy Energy, which has been acquired by Energy Metals, said, "It will get interesting when the oil companies get involved again." It is probably early for the oil giants to rush back into uranium. In the last uranium boom, many of the major oil companies were leaders in the uranium exploration and mining. Kerr-McGee Nuclear was the number one private sector uranium producer in the world. Other major oil companies involved in uranium mining and exploration included Mobil, Phillips, Conoco, Exxon, Chevron, Amoco and others. Another of the recently arrived uranium juniors, Max Resources (TSX: MXR) also plans to drill at the other end of New Mexico, in Socorro County (about 100 miles south of Albuquerque). MXR's property was once drilled by OxyMin, a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum, during the 1980s, before the price of uranium fell off a cliff.

Perhaps, one major company will emerge in New Mexico, consolidating the others, or some of the others. "There's a huge number of small uranium plays in the North American market that need critical mass," Neal Froneman, CEO of Uranium One (TSE: SXR) recently told a South African newspaper. "Consolidation will drive our business in the US and Canada, where we think it's tactically smart to be." Uranium One was itself a consolidation between Toronto-based Southern Cross and South African-based Aflease. Froneman concluded, ""It makes sense to have a major presence in North America in order to supply the (U.S.) utilities that will need to be built."

"The geology for this area, with regards to ISL uranium operations, could help make New Mexico an important supplier to U.S. utilities, possibly before the end of this decade," Strathmore's David Miller agreed. "I would not be surprised at all if there were more uranium to be found in New Mexico than is currently estimated. That's why companies have exploration programs." From a state, which has produced over 300 million pounds of uranium, and which may have between 300 million and 600 million additional pounds of uranium, New Mexico will be a prime target for uranium companies as long as the price of uranium continues to rise. Will uranium crash and burn, as it did in the 1980s? After accurately predicting the spot price of uranium would double in a StockInterview feature in June 2004, Miller recently told StockInterview, "I wouldn't be surprised to see the price double again."

COPYRIGHT © 2007 by StockInterview, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

James Finch contributes to StockInterview.com and other publications. StockInterview’s “Investing in the Great Uranium Bull Market” has become the most popular book ever published for uranium mining stock investors. Visit [http://www.stockinterview.com]