The Economy: Searching for Answers

It’s July 4th and all’s well—I guess.   I don’t want to give a hearty amen to this statement because I have been reading Business Week.  So many questions, yet so many incomplete or less-than-hearty answers.

Have you noticed the lack of commitment by all the business experts?  Here’s an example, “All this austerity will pay off—eventually.”  Or Jack and Suzy Welch’s answer to the question “When will this *@&^ recession end?”  They answered, “How about sometime in 2010?  The problem with being more precise, you see, is the mixed picture out there.”

I would agree with that.  But just give me a straight answer.  I want to know whether the stimulus plan is working—plenty of hemmin’ and hawin’ when it comes to an answer to this question.  How many more banks will fail?  It depends on how you define “fail.”  Is there any hope for the automobile industry?  Maybe if they can come up with new and exciting products.  When will unemployment stop rising?  We may be near the bottom of readjustment, so we should see this trend slowing.

There is one question from this issue of Business Week that reveals where the American public seeks an answer.  They are seeking their answer from the White House, which may indicate that we are drifting toward increasing reliance on our federal government to solve everything.  The question:  “What one issue would matter most in your presidential vote?”  Over 50% of the respondents to the Pew Research Center poll answered, “Economy/Jobs.”  Moral values rated, but only at 10%.  Compare these figures to the same poll in 2004.  Terrorism/Iraq/Afghanistan garnered 36%, the economy 21%, and moral values 27%.

Of course the economy would rank higher in this year’s poll.  And it would seem reasonable for Terrorism/Iraq/Afghanistan shrinking to 8% as we move further away from 9/11/01.  My concern is the shrinking emphasis on moral values.  Just take a look at some of the moral issues we see around us, in particular among political leaders.  If we can’t have politicians who know how to act responsibly on a personal level, then we likely will not have politicians who can address major issues with the economy in a responsible manner.

We need men and women who will serve this country with dignity, that will set a proper example for the next generation.  Yes, the economy is perhaps the most significant issue of the day.  But let’s not throw out our morals.  This might just be the time when we consider that the really important things in life are the intangibles.  Our lives will be the richer for it.  Oh, and happy July 4th!

What Would You Accomplish With Billions of Dollars?

I am watching with great interest the hoopla surrounding the “stimulus package” being offered by the Democrats in our U.S. Congress.  According to Daniel Henninger’s excellent analysis in today’s Wall Street Journal, this American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (just 700 pages of reading) is more a “self” stimulus bill than it is an economic stimulus bill because of how much would be spent on rebuilding the government’s infrastructure.  For example, the boast within the bill that says 3 million jobs will be created fails to clarify that these jobs will all be on our government’s payroll with the federal government as their boss.  Is this economic stimulus?  Sounds sketchy and a bit scary to me.

Whatever happened to zero-based budgeting?  You know, where we figure out what is needed first and then assign a cost.  It seems we have reversed this process to something like, “How much money can we spend or print?” and then let’s start putting everything into categories of spending.  We can’t operate our own homes this way.

I looked over some of the numbers in the stimulus package and have never seen so many zeros in all my life.   There is $6,000,000,000 for the construction, repair, and alteration of Federal buildings.  How about $375,000,000 to rebuild trails on our Federal lands?  Or we have the Weatherization Assistance Program chiming in at $6,200,000,000.  By the way, what is that $500,000,000 of expenses included within this?  No detail, just half-a-billion dollars of expenses.

Perhaps in contrast, I became aware that Wycliffe Bible Translators launched the Last Languages Campaign.  This campaign focuses on translating the Bible into 2300 languages that remain on their list of people groups without a Bible in their native language.  Bob Creson, President of Wycliffe, gathered their staff together to pray and plan this campaign.  It was fueled by a donor who asked the question, “If I gave you $100,000,000 for your work, what would you accomplish?”  This is cold, hard cash.  The Last Languages Campaign will enable all of these remaining languages to have a translation started by the year 2025.  The price tag is $1,000,000,000 (give or take a few dollars).

This represents billions of dollars that will accomplish something far-reaching on a scope that influences many people groups on the face of the earth.  It is not an “invest in ourselves” mentality like the Democrats are proposing, but rather an “invest in others” plan that will influence untold cultures and societies for the better.  The lesson for us, and for the next generation, is to look at how we invest in others and how we learn to be a conduit for good while we inhabit a short time on the face of this earth.  The present fades away, the eternal endures.  This must become our focus.

Thinking About Fertility Rates, the Economy, and the Next Generation

A factor that gets little attention in the press today is the relationship of fertility rates to the economy.  This point struck a chord yesterday when I had the opportunity to hear economist Stuart Varney address a gathering of near 1000 accountants and financial professionals in Atlanta. With a bit of humor and unsettling reality, Varney explained why he thinks the fertility rates of the world should be of top concern.

A little background here—for a country to merely remain even in terms of population, it requires a fertility rate of at least 2.1.  There are 45 countries in the world that are well below this rate.  These countries include much of Europe, Russia, China, and Japan among others.  Translated, this means that population growth is negative for these countries.  The U.S. maintains close to a fertility rate of 2.1 only because of the number of immigrants here.  Of all the countries, the lowest fertility rate according to one report I read was in Spain, which was near 1.15.

Think this through with me for a moment in relationship to the economy.  An older, graying population that is living longer these days will need healthcare, housing, pensions, and other retirement benefits.  The model for providing these needs includes economic input from the younger generations.  If the populations are declining, who will help fund these needs for the older generation?

The governments think they can help. But again, with declining populations the tax rates must be much higher to even make a dent in these needs. Today, the governments sit in the unenviable position of trying to figure out the current economic crisis and it appears they struggle each day to fix on a strategy that is elusive.  The quest for a solution lingers no matter what is done.

When I observe the next generation, I see a generation less concerned with wealth creation and more concerned with solving the world’s issues.  I might suggest to them that the economy is one of the single-most important issues.  This is not to say that we want to preserve certain negative aspects of wealth creation, but that we want to consider how wealth creation enables us to address some of the other issues we face. I would ask, “What are the positive aspects of wealth creation?” This might help us adopt a better way to solve economic issues while at the same time addressing other complex issues.  The world is changing, and the next generation needs to be in a position to wisely lead when the baton is passed.  Let’s make sure we help them understand the times and extend ourselves as counselors and mentors.

Obama’s and McCain’s Charitable Giving: Observations for the Next Generation

By now you are probably aware that both Barack Obama and John McCain have posted prior year personal tax returns on their respective websites for public inspection. Public officials being public about private financial matters merit some positive and public praise. But let’s be careful as we scrutinize the candidates’ charitable giving.

Yes, we see that Obama’s giving was minimal for years 2000-2004 (close to a cumulative $10,000 for these 5 years) and suddenly shot up in 2005 as he honed in on his candidacy for President. This coincides with a dramatic increase in his AGI to $1.6 million the same year; however, total charitable giving was still less than 5% of the Obamas’ AGI. In contrast, McCain’s charitable giving appears relatively stable from year to year within a range higher than 20% of his AGI. We do know that his wife Cindy inherited a fortune from her family and that her tax returns have not been made public. The Foundation they give from favors the private schools their children attended.

I don’t care to analyze the candidates and their charitable giving at length, but what are some observations we might make for Christ followers and next generation stewardship from this cursory review?

Why not start with the fact that our tax returns are not made public, but our Lord knows them. If we truly believe in an omniscient God who knows us and watches over us, then our giving is no mystery to Him. So, to whom are we accountable? It would appear that public officials publicizing their tax returns strive for accountability to the public that they serve; likewise, as a Christ follower we should strive for accountability to our Lord we serve, properly handling the resources that flow through us. A good question to ask is, “Lord, what do You want to give through me?” Not, “Lord, what do you want me to give?”

Also, our giving to the Lord’s ministry should not be done to gain favor in the eyes of other people. Political candidates especially seem sensitive to gaining favor from groups as a way to enhance their political stature. Sometimes I fear that the successful business owners within our congregations seek positions on stewardship campaign committees to gain the favor of their fellow congregants rather than truly being sacrificial. What happened to the “not equal gifts, but equal sacrifice”? I’ll never forget the time we joined a church and went to the counseling room with a couple of deacons, one a real estate agent who on the way out of the counseling room gave me his card and said to call him if we were interested in buying a house. Business owners should nail their business cards to the cross when they come to church.

Another observation is that public officials give themselves to their parties first. Undoubtedly this influences their charitable giving. Who have we given ourselves to? I like to think that we, like the Macedonians in 2 Corinthians 8:5, first give ourselves to the Lord and to His will. Then, out of that giving flows the freedom of passionate stewardship of what God has entrusted to us.

Do we owe an account to the public? Yes, to be the faithful stewards of the witness of how Christ has changed our lives. Public officials may deem their financial transparency adequate, but show me one who is willing to go the extra step to be accountable to the Lord. The next generation cannot afford to compartmentalize their stewardship, but to make it one of the marks of their devotion to a cause that is greater than any political party on the face of the earth.