This is long. Does anyone know of this guy or the IIM?
Comments?

US Economy Risks and Strategies 2007-2017 (V1.2)
Monday, 5 March 2007, 1:11 pm
Opinion: Med Yones

U.S. Economy Risks and Strategies for 2007-2017
Policy White Paper
(V1.2)
By Med Yones
International Institute of Management (IIM)
http://iim-edu.org/u.s.economyrisks/
(NOTE: This version of this paper supersedes the
(Draft V1.1) version.)
Executive Summary
On Jan 31st, 2007, the President of the United States
gave his speech on the “State of the Economy” citing
strong economic growth, record Dow Jones performance
and low unemployment rate. This report depicts a
different picture than the one announced. A deeper
look into the economy reveals that the painted rosy
picture is based on selective facts instead of a
neutral assessment of all the relevant numbers and
economic trends. According to the author of the white
paper, "It is true that the U.S. Economy grew at 3.5
percent rate in 4th quarter of 2006, but that growth
is unhealthy. The real economic growth is much less
than advertised. Since 2001, the U.S. economic growth
has been largely fueled by rapid increases in asset
prices (housing bubble) and expanding consumer debt,
rather than development projects, which result in
non-sustainable debt-driven growth. In order to
address the emerging socioeconomic risks, policy
makers must acknowledge the economy's strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats. The U.S.
Government must be candid in communicating with the
American public and the approach must be direct."

This IIM white paper provides the following: 1). A
neutral assessment of the current U.S. economic
health, 2). An analysis of long-term consequences of
current policy decisions 3). Emerging economic, social
and geopolitical threats to U.S. financial prosperity
4). Risk mitigation strategies

The paper addresses the key challenges facing the U.S.
Government's policies and attempts to answer the
following critical questions:

ADVERTISEMENT
1. The United States economy has been resilient, but
for how much longer? Can the U.S. economy sustain
unlimited economic growth?
2. Will the United States face another economic crisis
and if so, when? How strong and how long will the
negative cycle be?
3. How can the United States manage the financial
costs of the aging baby-boom generation?
4. How can the United States compete with low-cost
China, India, Mexico and other economies?
5. How can the United States fight and win the
antiterrorism war and at the same time not lose
international allies and economic partners?
6. How can the U.S. Government mitigate social,
economic and geopolitical risks and reverse the
negative trend?
7. What will be the price of recovery be from past and
current policy mistakes?

The white paper summarizes the study in ten sections:
1). Historical perspective, 2). Economic risks, 3).
Social risks 4). Geopolitical risks, 5). Root cause
analysis 6). Government policy options and their
price, 7). Recommended strategies 8). Best practices
9) Notes and 10). Resources.

1) U.S. Historical Perspective

No economy can sustain unlimited growth. The economy
behaves in cycles; for every up cycle there is a down
cycle, it is only a question of how long and how steep
the curve is. The next decade is probably the most
critical for U.S. socioeconomic prosperity. Let's
start with a historical perspective:

• 1920 - 21 U.S. stock market crash
• 1929 U.S. stock market crash, followed by the Great
Depression
• 1987 U.S. stock market crash
• 1997 - 98 U.S. financial crisis
• 2000 U.S. Dot Com bubble burst
• 2001- 06 September 11 + Iraq war + Globalization +
Offshoring + Real estate bubble + Highest budget and
trade deficits in U.S. history
• 2007-17 What are the prospects for the U.S. economy?


2) U.S. Economic Risks

This section provides a quick assessment of the U.S.
economic health status. The basic commonsense formula
to assess the health of an economy is as follows:

• If revenues are more than expenditures, then the
economic health is good, because the Government can
afford to invest in socioeconomic development projects
such as research, education, transportation and
infrastructure
• If revenues are less than the expenditures, then the
economic health is not so good. If you add an
increasing debt and higher interest rates, then the
economic health is bad. But how bad is bad?

To properly assess the health of an economy, it is
important to take note of the revenues, expenditure
and debt numbers in relation to each other. Here is
the big picture using bullet-point format:

• The size of the U.S. economy = $13 trillion.
Commonly known as the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Economic Growth

• The actual U.S. economic growth is much less than
advertised. Since 2001, economic growth has been
largely fueled by rapid increases in asset prices
(housing bubble) and expanding consumer debt rather
than spending on business investments and
infrastructure projects, which result in
non-sustainable and unhealthy growth.
• But how come the stock market is doing well? The
short-term impact of the slowdown in real estate
prices is to drive investors to move their money into
the stock market for better returns. But as the dollar
value drops and the interest rates increase, investors
will move their money from stocks to bonds or even to
other international markets to avoid the depreciating
dollar

National Debt

• In 2000, the U.S. Government had a surplus (profit)
of about $237 billion (the largest in U.S. history).
In 2006, the budget deficit was about $390 billion
(loss). For information on Whitehouse budget details
please visit
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/tables.html

• Although the 2006 budget deficit (loss) was only
about 3% of GDP, the problem is the accumulation of
losses over multiple years, hence the need for debt to
finance the deficit. By the end of 2006 (over a period
of 6 years), the accumulated national debt was about
$8.3 trillion (the largest in U.S. history!). The U.S.
Government has borrowed that money to pay for tax
breaks, new Medicare drug benefits, the war in Iraq
and other policies.
• A large national debt is bad. Why? The Government
has to pay interest on the debt. As the debt and the
interest payment grow, eventually all the Government
can afford to do is pay the interest payments, with no
money left over for other critical expenditures. If
uncontrolled, this could leads to national bankruptcy
and major socioeconomic crises.
• Suring the 2006 fiscal year, the U. S. Government
spent $406 Billion of its budget on interest payments
to the holders of the national debt. Compare that to
Education at $61 Billion, and Department of
Transportation at $56 Billion. When interest payments
become larger than other critical socioeconomic
budgets, this calls for major concern.

Consumer Debt

• Consumers are the main engine of any economy, the
less money the consumer has to spend or invest, the
less is economic growth. By the end of 2006, the U.S.
consumer debt was about $11 trillion
• According to the Commerce Department, the personal
savings rate for 2006 was a negative 1 percent; the
worst in 73 years!. This is the lowest level since the
Great Depression, which could be a problem for the
millions of retiring baby boomers and for the job
market.
• U.S. home mortgages debt = $8.2 trillion. Due to the
housing bubble in recent years, U.S. homebuyers took
on more debt to buy overpriced homes, thus reducing
share of disposable income. Many Americans refinanced
their homes during the real-estate boom to pay for
living expenses. With the expected housing bubble
bust, Americans could lose a significant part of their
savings.
• The slowing economy will lead many small businesses
and consumers to go bankrupt. Foreseeing this, U.S.
lenders have lobbied the Government to make changes to
the bankruptcy laws, to make it more difficult to get
rid of debt.

Interest Rates

• To prevent a major decline in the dollar value the
U.S. must raise interest rates.
• The higher the debt and the interest rate, the more
costly financing will be and the less money is
available for investing in socioeconomic development.
• Last year, the average return on equity investment
(stocks) was 8% while the bonds interest rate was 5%.
Higher interest rates result in lower investment
activities, because investors will buy more secure
bonds than risky stocks, thus hurting the stock market
and impeding economic recovery.

Foreign Debt & Investment

• In early 2006, overseas investors held $13.6
trillion in U.S. stocks, bonds, real estate,
businesses and other assets.
• About 45% of the U.S. public debt is owed to foreign
holdings (up from 40% in 2005). China, Japan, the EU,
Saudi Arabia and Oil Exporters are the largest
creditors. They financed the U.S. economy expenditures
by buying U.S. Government and corporate bonds and
mortgage-backed securities. They are the United
States' biggest bankers, any of which could cause the
United States serious financial problems, if they so
desired.
• According to the Commerce Department, the United
States paid more to its foreign creditors than it took
in from its overseas investments. The gap was about
$2.5 billion for the last quarter - the first time
that has happened in more than 90 years! (Are you
noticing the negative trends in numbers?)

Balance of Trade & Global Competitiveness

• The U.S. 2005 balance of trade deficit was $723
billion. The number for 2006 is expected to be higher.
In other words, foreign companies are better at
competing than domestic U.S. companies. With the
improvement of IT & Telecom technologies, offshoring
will increase and knowledge networks will expand. In
other words, the U.S. will decline in international
competitiveness. The United States is not the only
economic superpower any more. In a global economy, the
name of the game is global competition: Boeing vs.
Airbus, Intel vs. AMD, GM vs. Toyota, and so on. The
U.S. cannot compete with China’s low-cost
manufacturing or India’s low-cost services. Several of
U.S.’s largest companies such as Intel, Boeing, GM and
Ford are closing local factories and laying off
workers due to slowing demands and increased global
competition. In 2005, the U.S. lost more than 500,000
jobs. Similar numbers are expected for 2006.

Oil Prices

• The rapid growth of China, India and other
developing countries will create major demands for
oil, thus depleting the energy supply. This will
result in an inevitable increase in oil prices, thus
negatively impacting transportation and energy costs,
raising the cost of local products and services and
reducing company profits and household disposable
income. Soaring energy costs, combined with negative
personal savings rates create strong negative forces
that impede U.S. economic growth.
• Some analysts claim that this the main driver behind
the U.S. policy towards Iraq, Sudan and Iran - that is
to to control as many oil supply sources as possible.

Dollar Exchange Rate

• In the past few years, the U.S. dollar has slipped
about 40% against the Euro and other major currencies.
In other words, U.S. citizen's buying power is reduced
significantly. The weaker dollar causes the price of
imports to rise (Wal-Mart buys about $20 billion in
goods from China alone). The low-income sector has not
felt the price increase because of the intervention of
the Chinese Central Bank to prevent the floating of
its Yuan currency. If China allows the Yuan to float
freely, then the prices can increase 50% or more. Not
only would the price of imports increase, but local
goods will increase as well, due to the following; (1)
the increased cost of imported raw material and
components (2) the increased price of foreign
products, will provide coverage for local producers to
increase their prices, in order to make more profit.

Economic Confidence

• What is the U.S. economic outlook? If you compare
the global economy to the stock market and the U.S.
economy to a company listed on that market, then the
real question is: Would you invest in a company that
is losing money and increasing its debt for several
years in a row? Or would you invest in one of its
competitors which shows increasing market share and
profit (surplus)? Granted that USA Inc. is the largest
company in the global market, but the global investors
put more weight on profitable growth and performance
trends than the size.
• The worst thing that could happen would be the loss
of confidence in the U.S. economy. If the U.S.
Government does not commit to reducing federal budget
deficits, at some point in time foreign banks could
panic and rush to dump their dollars to be the first
out of a sinking currency, thus making the economic
crisis far worse and recovery more difficult. China
has already signaled its intention to decouple the
currencies, which will lead to the loss of trillions
of dollars in U.S. Treasury value. In order to
minimize that loss, the Chinese will have to sell off
some of their U.S. holdings. The real danger is how
much and how fast China will do so. If they decide to
do it quickly, they will prompt huge panic by other
lending countries. Investors will have to copy China’s
moves, resulting in a disaster to the dollar value,
interest rate, stock market, homeowners and the U.S.
economy as a whole.

3) U.S. Social Risks

• Social Security payments go in the Social Security
Trust Fund. The purpose of any surplus payments to
Social Security is to pay future benefits. But the
U.S. Government has spent all of the money in the
Social Security Fund. That's part of the national
debt.
• By 2025, nearly a quarter of Americans will be over
60, a shift with huge implications for the U.S. social
services budget and economy. Those baby boomers will
be a major voting force and will influence Government
decisions to raise taxes to support Social Security
and Medicare, which will reduce individual salaries,
companies' profits, investments and domestic
competitiveness.
• With lower Social Security payout and higher
healthcare and living costs, many seniors will have to
go back to employment to support themselves, thus
competing with the younger generation for the already
declining number of jobs. The higher labor supply and
lower demand for employees will create intense
competition and increase work stress on the individual
and the society. Think of the younger generations
resenting the baby boomers, blaming them for a falling
standard of living.
• I would not be surprised if many senior and richer
U.S. citizens start emigrating to other more
affordable countries, taking their savings and wealth
with them so they can live there for the rest of their
lives, or simply to invest in stronger economies with
stronger currencies. Because of the extremely high
healthcare costs, some are already traveling overseas
to get treated.
• Higher cost of education will lead to less access to
equal opportunities and will increase the economic
gap.
• Think of the impact of thinning middle-class layer
and the increase in an economic distribution gap. That
can result in a major social and political crisis,
further complicating recovery.
• The deteriorating economic conditions can stress the
social fabric of the nation. Extreme socioeconomic
situations are more likely to produce racial,
religious and political extremism. Blaming others is a
classic response to times of hardship, especially when
others practice a different religion or belong to
another race or economic class.

4) U.S. Geopolitical Risks

• No one disputes the right of the United States to
defend itself against terrorism, however the way it is
conducting the war on terrorism is a highly
controversial issue inside and outside the country.
Regardless of one's positive or negative opinion of
the current U.S. foreign policy, the launch of the
U.S. war on Iraq with "a fabricated WMD threat report"
or "mis-intelligence”, without the support of the
international community, the 600 thousand Iraqi
civilian casualties, the extensive infrastructure
destruction in Iraq, the Abu Ghuraib torture scandal,
the Haditha's civilian massacre scandal, the civil
war, the Guantanamo concentration camp, the disregard
of the Geneva Convention's agreement on torture and
the treatment of prisoners of war and the ignoring of
the Middle East peace process have all hurt the U.S.
fight against terrorism and destroyed the American
international goodwill and trust. The common
international perception is that the Iraq war is
driven primarily by the U.S. interest to control Iraqi
oil resources and that the current U.S. Government
foreign policy is driven by an ideology of domination
and exploitation rather than peace and collaboration.
Both trust and goodwill are critical elements of
productive diplomatic and business relationships.
Without those elements, it is much more difficult to
promote the U.S. global socioeconomic agenda.
• In addition to the Iraq war, the U.S. financial,
political and weapon support of Israeli war on the
Palestinian territories and Lebanon in 2006 have
increased anti-American sentiments and fueled
terrorism, providing more risk to the U.S. economy and
increasing expenditures on security and defense. War
policies take away from Government's time, effort and
budget and are almost always at the expenses of
socioeconomic development.
• The U.S. media and foreign policies are erecting
major psychological and political barriers to
socioeconomic exchange between the U.S. and about 1.5
billion Muslim in more than 30 countries, further
fueling extremists' agenda for driving the situation
into the clash of civilization, another future World
War or "Armageddon".
• The onslaught of post 9/11 negative media toward
Arab and Islamic countries is having a major impact on
U.S. foreign policies and economic relations. An
example is the rejection of Dubai's winning bid to
manage the U.S. ports. It is worth noting that Dubai
(UAE) is a moderate Arab country and a U.S. ally. As a
reaction to those policies, many of the rich Arab and
oil investors are considering investing elsewhere
(rather than traditional U.S. markets). Arab countries
are awarding lucrative national development projects
to competing European and Chinese companies. For
example, the development of Sudan's oil industry is
now dominated by the Chinese oil companies instead of
the traditional American companies. Many of the elite
and rich Arab families, tourists and businesses are
going to competing European schools and economies to
spend their money and build stronger partnerships.
• While the U.S. politics, army and media were busy
with the Middle East hostilities, China, Russia and
the EU were busy building stronger socioeconomic
relations with Middle Eastern countries though joint
economic development initiatives and open cultural
dialogues. It is a known fact, people do business with
people they like. Why else do you think Dubai lost the
U.S. port deal after they won it? Why else do you
think Sudan choose China instead of the U.S. as its
primary oil investor and partner? Who do you think has
a better global competing strategy the U.S. or the EU,
Japan & China?
• The Palestinian- Israeli conflict and the U.S.
animosity with Iran has led the Iranian Government to
plan Euro-Perto Bourse in an effort to weaken U.S.
dollar domination on oil trade. The new Bourse will
compete with New York's Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX)
and London’s International Petroleum Exchange (IPE)
for international oil trades. It should be noted that
both the IPE and NYMEX are owned by U.S. corporations.
The IPE was bought in 2001 by a consortium that
includes BP, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. In fact
if there was peace in the Middle East, the Iranian
nuclear energy project would actually help the U.S.
economy, because it allows Iran to export more oil,
thus reducing the price of oil.
• In 2005, U.S. dependency (in dollar amounts) on
imported oil was half of imported manufactured goods.
If the U.S. launches another war or an attack on Iran,
that would most definitely lead to a sharp increase in
oil prices and further risk for the U.S. economic
recovery. Not to mention the ability of Iran to
finance and support attacks on the U.S. anywhere in
the world.
• Tensions with Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela
and other Latin American countries can lead to an
escalation that may unify these smaller countries to
build a major force against the U.S. causing further
damages.
• Except in a few isolated cases, history shows that
the fight against terrorism cannot be won by military
force alone. Only political solutions can result in a
lasting peace. By watching how people and
organizations adapt to conflicts and improve their
fighting weapons and tactics, one can see that it is
only a matter of time before the opponents of the
United States will acquire or develop more terrorizing
weapons, such as dirty bombs (biological, chemical or
nuclear). Another 9/11- scale attack or several other
smaller attacks could result in major havoc on the
U.S. economy and cause investors to flee to more
stable business environments.
• The continuation in the current foreign policy
direction may risk some creditors getting back at the
United States through economic measures. That could
cause major economic damage.

5) Root Cause Analysis

So what led to the current situation?

Possible causes:

• A series of short-term-gain policies by incompetent
or corrupt politicians? Although no one can know the
intentions of any world politician, the competency is
easily judged by the results.
• Ideologically driven policies, rather than
pragmatically driven policies? This can be judged by
the politician's own statements, and again, by the
results.
• Bought-and-paid-for analysts and lobbyists promoting
foreign or private interests over national or public
interests? Analysis of foreign and local media
watchdog reports will always reveal the hidden
agendas.
• Misinformation promoted by media analysts and
commentators have led the country in the wrong
direction? Again, the best way to judge the competency
of the media and its commentators is by the review of
media archives and the final results.
• Ivory-tower economists not in touch with real
business challenges? To be fair, that may not be the
case here; the U.S. Federal Reserve has done a good
job so far in controlling and pacing interest rates
increases, but there is not much that they can do
beyond that. A better policy is to educate the public
and address the threats openly and directly.
• Tax policies? Not increasing taxes was a wise
measure that helped businesses and investors, however,
the Government has no other choice but to raise taxes
in order to balance the budget and pay for national
debt.
• Uncontrollable external events? While 9/11 was a
major negative event, it is the reaction to that event
that counts. The U.S. Government cannot blame
everything on 9/11, especially the failed U.S.
foreign-relations and economic policies.
• The pitfalls of the powerful? If the American public
does not stop the war for ethical and humanitarian
reasons, there are few politicians who have the
incentives to do so. Many U.S. politicians consider
Iraq to be a military success. Their unstated logic is
that they lost about 3000 Americans since the start of
the Iraq war in 2003. In their the minds they are
thinking, "So what, about 40,000 Americans die every
year on the highways from auto accidents". When
politicians have such superior power, they are tempted
to use it every time things don't go their way.
Especially, if there is no other major constraining
force.
• Last but not least, could it be that the U.S.
consumer culture has resulted in a huge consumer debt,
thus weakening the economic engine? That seems to be
the general consensus.

6) Government Policy Options & Their Price

A scientific economic fact: any economy that is built
on uncontrolled debt will eventually crash. An
increasing debt is a vicious cycle that can only be
broken through a strategy shift and operations
restructuring. In IIM's opinion, the conditions for a
crash are far from being met, however, attention must
be paid early to avoid coming closer to the tipping
point. The more the current Administration waits to
make a change, the stronger the force of inertia will
be to reverse the direction and the more the
socioeconomic and political pains that will result
from the necessary reforms.

So what policy options are available to the U.S.
Government to help it overcome the above listed
challenges?

To pay the bill for the annual economic expenses,
Social Security deficit (care for baby boomers), debt
financing, and economic growth, the U.S. Government
will have to resort to a combination of one or more of
the following options:

• Allow the dollar value to fall so that it can pay
debts more cheaply. That may increase inflation and
will lower the real purchasing power of U.S. citizens
and businesses, but at the same time, this may improve
price competitiveness with other countries. With the
new currency exchange rate, salaries of the American
worker become more competitive with their European
counterpart. That will reduce the salary gap with
China and India, thus slowing offshoring).
• Increase interest rates to attract enough money back
to the United States. That is a poor choice, as it
will make it tougher and more costly to raise capital.
Also, increasing interest rates will result in savers
investing less in the stock market, thus slowing
economic growth. Increased interest rates will result
in lower demand on the housing market and thereby a
loss in home values.
• Increase taxes. That is another weak option, which
will reduce business profits and U.S. ability to
attract foreign investment
• The U.S. has to sell more assets (telecom, utility
infrastructure, and other assets) to overseas
investors. Buyers look for a bargain and this will
result in foreign control of major national assets --
A high price to pay.
• Reduce the U.S. Government budget across all major
sectors, including defense, education, health and
other social programs. That option will cause major
layoffs in public and private sectors and will face
major challenges from the strongest lobbies and the
public.
• Relax immigration policies, Which will provide U.S.
with more competitive labor (competing with China and
India) and at the same time it will create a larger
consumer base (helping in economic growth). Most
likely that option will be opposed by the white
majority, fearing cultural and political change. Not
forgetting that the U.S. itself is a nation of
immigrants and its economic prosperity is credited to
the hard work of these emigrants, the U.S. Government
can manage immigration policies in such a way as to
attract productive immigrants and minimize negative
impact on the culture.
• Recharge the U.S. innovation engine and generate new
unique products and services to make enough profits to
pay off debt and attract foreign investments. That is
the best possible solution and would offer the U.S.
the most competitive advantage. The U.S. has given the
world the most valuable modern innovations including
atomic energy, computers and the Internet. Future bets
are on nanotechnology, alternative energy,
bioengineering and medical innovations.

The U.S. will resort to the use of more than one
option. All options except the last one will have a
heavy price tag.

7 ) Recommended Strategies and Solutions

The U.S. Government must formulate a new economic
strategy to address the two most critical challenges:
debt and competitiveness.

Problem 1: Debt

• Before formulating a new strategy and launching
reform initiatives, U.S. policy makers and the
American public must acknowledge and accept that the
solution must be long-term and cannot be pain-free.
Leaders must make tough decisions rather than push
them on to the next presidency. The Government must be
honest in communicating with the public and the
approach must be direct.
• The U.S. Government must commit to reducing the
federal deficit, i.e. the U.S. Government must tighten
its belt to reduce expenditures and operational costs.

• The U.S. Government should not increase interest
rates or taxes, however, this a highly debatable
issue. Yes, that may lead to inflation, but the policy
priority should be economic growth over any other
issue. Economic growth avoids many other social and
economic crises.
• Institute new energy policies to promote better
energy performance standards and to provide
energy-saving tax incentives to reduce energy waste.
Promote the development of alternative energy sources
and technologies to help reduce the demand for oil.
• Both Government and business leaders need to exit
and divest losing economic sectors (where U.S. cannot
compete).
• Encourage major reductions in pharmaceutical,
healthcare and insurance costs. Reform liability laws
and open the market for international competition to
reduce prices and become more competitive.
• Encourage the development of the quality of
education and lower its costs by reducing
accreditation bureaucracy and competitive barriers for
private institutes.
• Reduce foreign and military aid to other countries
and re-invest the money in the local economy. When
necessary, invest in foreign joint-development
projects sharing the risks and the rewards rather than
just giving the money away.
• Re-prioritize expenditure from space exploration and
defense to other national budget items
• The U.S. Administration must consider the historical
lessons of falling empires. One of the main reasons
for the decline of early empires was the wasting of
their national resources on wars and conflicts. The
problem with conflicts is that they are made of
vicious and expanding cycles. They are high-risk
ventures that take a lot of time, effort and money to
win. One need not go far to see the evidence. Just
consider the U.S. cost of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict in terms of the financial aid, military aid,
cost of combating terrorism, U.S. foreign relations
and the Administration time and effort. What would
have happened if the U.S. had spent half the amount of
time, money and effort to reach a peace agreement?

Problem 2: Competitiveness

The U.S. Government must formulate short-term and
long-term policies and build institutions to
strengthen the nation's competitive advantage through
better education, innovation, technology and
entrepreneurship development. The U.S. can compete
with other economies using one or more of the
following strategies:

• Education and research budgets: Budgets should be
redesigned to help investments in revenue-generating
economic sectors and to provide incentives for new
globally competitive products and services. Reform the
U.S. education system to increase competitiveness and
provide education and retraining resources for
displaced U.S. workers
• Competitive tax policies: Tax policies should be
redesigned to encourage innovation and industry. One
simple, but highly effective measure, would be to
shorten the depreciation schedules on capital
investment and research spending, and increase
short-term capital gains taxes to discourage
short-term thinking.
• Make it simple: Simplify business management for
entrepreneurs by simplifying the tax code and
Government transactions. Simplify, automate and
eliminate bureaucracy.
• Reduce insurance and legal costs by reviewing the
legal system to minimize frivolous lawsuits. Consider
the model of the Japanese legal system
• Promote positive culture re-engineering: Promote
transformation from consumerism to investment-oriented
culture, from leisure society to education and
entrepreneurship. This can be done through education
and media programs.
• Manage Globalization: The U.S. can slow
globalization and offshoring through protection.
However, The U.S. Government cannot stop globalization
and will lose to competitors in the long-run. The only
way is to manage the process by enforcing fair trade
and investment agreements.
• Low cost Labor: If you can't beat them, buy them.
The U.S. can partner with neighbor countries, such as
Canada and Latin American countries as low-cost labor
sources.
• Immigration Policy: Bring more investors and
competitive labor through more attractive immigration
policies to attract foreign investors, intellectual
capital and low cost labor.
• Hostile takeover (War): That is an unethical option
and has been proven to be high risk, high cost and
unprofitable foreign policy option.
• Friendly Merger: Acquire new labor, natural
resources and markets. Learn from the European Union
expansion model and consider mergers with other North
American countries such as Canada and Mexico.
• Build stronger global socioeconomic networks: That
will help favor American products and services. In
order to build strong international relationships, the
U.S. must refrain from acting as the world police and
stop attacking other countries and cultures. Instead,
the U.S. can promote American values by encouraging
cultural exchange, open dialogues and economic
partnerships. Transformation through education and
positive exchange takes more time, yet is far more
effective and lasting.
• Build stronger partnerships with other nations: That
can be done through shared investments which will
improve U.S. favoritism and trade relations over
competitors (through shared interest in profit and
loss).
• Build Peace: Shift the focus of foreign policy from
combating threats with military force to building
peace in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle
East. It does not help to take sides and create more
enemies. Empower the United Nations and World Court to
handle international conflicts, thus treating the root
causes of terrorism and the U.S. hatred. That will
eliminate most of the U.S. security threats and
related socioeconomic liabilities. U.S. can gain much
more through peace, and partnership activities than
hostilities.
• When solving problems, U.S. Leadership needs to
adopt the attitude of being smart vs. being right.
Religious, ideological or egotistical policies create
more problems than they solve. A pragmatic approach is
far more productive domestically and internationally.
The challenge with this recommendation is the personal
and subjective elements of the leadership.

8 ) Management Best Practices

Probably the best way the U.S. Government can
implement the change effectively and efficiently is to
adopt the private-sector management best practices.
The simplest way to understand IIM proposed solution
is to compare the country to a company:

• The President as its CEO
• The Congress as its board of directors
• Multiparty subcommittees as the independent audit
committee
• The Citizens as the shareholders
• Industry experts and the media as the company
performance/investment analysts

USA Inc. is competing with other countries in a global
economy. The CEO's mandate is the socioeconomic
prosperity of her/his country. If the leadership team
cannot meet their stated-objectives in their 4-years
term, then they should be replaced. To help manage
U.S. Government policies better, it is worth to
considering the following:

• A group of nationally respected academic
researchers, socioeconomic experts, and
representatives from all political parties could
establish a comprehensive set of socioeconomic metrics
as the main election agenda and set the performance
goals for elected or appointed officials. This allows
better informed-decisions by the public when electing
the executive team
• Provide financial/political performance incentives
and penalties tied to the complete set of
socioeconomic performance measures. This will ensure
tying of the interest of the elected officials to
public interest as opposed to the interest of private
lobbies.
• Establish better technical qualifications for the
candidacy nominations
• Establish better governing standards for the
separation of duties to eliminate the conflict of
interest
• Institute a new format of an annual status report to
the American public with far more details showing the
performance of the Government using various
socioeconomic measures

Although it maybe too much and too early for the
implementation of the above mentioned reforms, they
are worth stating for future intellectuals and
leaders. In my opinion, such reforms would better
inform and educate the public and would promote more
responsibility and efficiency in addressing national
challenges and opportunities.

9) Paper Notes and Corrections:

A) This paper is not intended to be an academic
research paper. To make the paper accessible to a
wider audience, the format and the language of the
paper were simplified to read like an article. For
example: statistical numbers are rounded for
simplicity, citations were minimized and key concepts
are mostly stated in bullet-point format. Readers can
verify the stated facts from the Internet and listed
data sources in section ten.
B) When writing this paper, some of the quoted numbers
were actual reported number and some were forecasted
numbers for FY 2006.
C) The goal of this white paper is not to provide a
complete solution; the goal is to draw attention to
the true picture of the economic health and to shed
light on the emerging risks and available mitigation
strategies.
D) Some of the above mentioned recommendations are
drastic, socially expensive and cannot be implemented
at this time. However, the purpose of a neutral study
is to explore as many options as possible. From my
knowledge of the political behavior, some of the best
and most effective strategies will be discarded for
ideological rather than pragmatic reasons. It’s a
human and political tendency to reason what we love
rather than love what we reason.

10) Statistical and economic data sources

U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC), European Commission
(EC), United Nations (UN), Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), International
Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization WTO,
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) World Book, World
Economic Forum (WEF), MSN Encarta, The Economist,
Business Week, Financial Times, FederalBudget.Com ,
The White House, and International Institute of
Management (IIM)

About the Author


*************
Med Yones is the president of International Institute
of Management (IIM). IIM is a management best
practices research and education institute. IIM has 41
universities and research partners in 16 countries.
Mr. Yones is an international expert specializing in
the global economy, business strategy, and leadership
development. For more information about IIM, please
visit http://www.iim-edu.org

What are IIM White Papers?

IIM white papers provide businesses and Government
leaders with a list of questions, terminologies and
discussion-points that can be used to address emerging
challenges and opportunities. IIM white papers are not
academic research papers, they are succinct work
documents designed for communication and
problem-solving by the leadership team. The structure
of the white paper includes three main sections: 1). A
statement of the problem or opportunity 2). Analysis
of root causes and driving forces 3). Proposed
solution and implementation best practices.

Copyright License

Royalty-free license is granted for using or
publishing for educational purposes provided that the
user/publisher include a clear reference to the
author(s) and International Institute of Management
www.iim-edu.org (Please include the active hyperlink
for electronic publishing)






Blog:  http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html

Reply via email to