By: Bernadette Giacomazzo

Managing Editor, All About Business

Marijuana is, in a word, a big business.

Whether we’re talking about the price of incarcerating those who either grow, sell, distribute, or – in some states – even just carry marijuana to smoke, or the price one pays for the privilege to smoke marijuana, or the price of the pop culture madness that is the countless TV shows, movies, and commercials (both in favor of, and against, the use of marijuana), marijuana causes money to change hands at a very high rate.

Due to state sovereignty (ref. Tenth Amendment of the Constitution), there is no one Federal law in regards to marijuana criminalization (or lack thereof). As an end result, you have states like California (where you are only susceptible to a felony conviction if you sell marijuana to a minor – and rightly so. What adults choose to put in their bodies falls under the “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” header – not to mention, is a matter of personal responsibility – but once you cross into “corruption of a minor” territory, you deserve to see the inside of a jail cell) on one end of the legal spectrum, and you have states like New York (whose Rockefeller Laws – which have yet to be repealed, despite countless calls to action for their repeal – make possession of marijuana subject to the same penalty as second-degree murder) on the completely opposite end.

It’s interesting to note the extreme disparity of drug laws between these two states, because – by nearly all accounts – New York and California are almost universally regarded as the two most “liberal” states in the Union (you can blame Hollywood and New York City, if you like). Yet, for all their “liberalness,” the two states could not be more different in their stance on marijuana (medical or recreational).

And while New York takes a so-called “conservative” stance on marijuana laws, it takes a blatantly-racist approach on who they choose to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate for violation of these laws. In a country where more Black^? men see the inside of a jail cell than a classroom, it’s disheartening to see a state such as New York – home of the so-called “yellow dog Democrats” – take an approach to prosecution that would make the Grand Wizards of the Ku Klux Klan beam with pride.

New York City, in particular, remains the marijuana arrest capital of the world. Every year, over 40,000 people each year are arrested for possession of marijuana…of which, the staggering majority are Black and Latino men. New York City police – already notorious for racially-motivated shootings of innocent Black men; Amadou Diallo & Sean Bell are just two names in a sea of otherwise-nameless victims of police brutality – abusively arrest Black and Latino men by stopping them on the street, ordering them to empty their pockets, then arresting them if they are found in possession of marijuana.

This practice is not only in violation of New York’s drug laws – under the Rockefeller Laws, one is only subject to arrest for possession of marijuana if it is “in plain view”; concealed in a pants pocket is not, by any definition, “in plain view” – it is in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution (defending people against “unreasonable search and seizure”).

You never hear of a white Wall Street-employed male – notorious for their copious consumption of cocaine – being subjected to this same indignity. And if, by some rare force of will, it were to happen, this poor, innocent white “victim” would resurrect William Kunstler himself to defend him in Federal court, where he would scream bloody murder about the “growing government” and his “Constitutional rights” until the charges were dismissed. Barring voodoo rituals to resurrect the late, great Kunstler – which, of course, no self-respecting Rich White Man would ever entertain, because every religion outside of ultra-conservative Christianity (itself a racist institution hiding behind the shield of “God” to justify its noxious claims) is evil and deserves to be eradicated – said white man would hire the best lawyer that money could buy to defend him in the Nation’s Highest Court…a luxury that few Black and Latino victims have, thanks to their lower income bracket, unless they enlist the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (itself consistently under fire from the Rich White Man, because of their need to reaffirm such pesky things as affirmative action – and who needs that anymore, when – hallelujah! – y’all got a Black President! Isn’t that the be-all and end-all – isn’t everything just peachy-keen now? Well…unfortunately, not really…)

Even though there are exceptions to the Fourth Amendment – “exigent circumstances,” for one – what possible justification could these policemen offer? That, because the subject is Black or Latino, he’s got to have marijuana on him, and he’s definitely on his way to a schoolyard to sell his wares to our lily-white, innocent little boys and girls (having gone to school with a vast lot of them, I can assure you that they were all anything but “lily-white” and “innocent.” The only reason I turned out normal – comparatively speaking – is because I had parents who informed me, on a regular basis, that should I get in any sort of legal bind, the criminal justice system of the United States would be the least of my worries – my parents’ punishments on such matters fell somewhere between “dunking stool” and “whipping post.”), thereby corrupting them for the rest of their lives, subjecting them to such things as – gasp! – questioning of authority?!

You can almost see the wives of the plantation owners clutching their pearls in mock horror. No matter what those wives used to do with those cotton-pickin’ slaves…if you need a visual, I refer you to Lexington Steele’s, um, extensive, uh, body of work.

But there’s a financial motive behind this need to incarcerate heretofore-untold numbers of Black and Latino men. There are currently 13,000 people incarcerated for drug offenses in the state of New York – and, of that number, 80% did not commit violent acts. The total cost of incarceration of these predominantly Black and Latino men? Over $500 million per year.

For purposes of reference: one only needs a high school diploma to become a prison guard. The average salary of a prison guard is $33,750. The average salary of a federal prison guard is $44,200. The average salary of the typical high school graduate in the United States is – wait for it – $25,900. (I’m sure we needn’t revisit the issue that the majority of Blacks and Latinos in this country have little more than a high school diploma, when we’ve already established that more Black men see the inside of a jail cell than the inside of a classroom…)

Abraham Lincoln once said, “Slavery is like having a wolf by the ears: you’re afraid to let it go, and you’re afraid not to.” Today’s drug prohibition is much like that proverbial wolf – and drug prohibition, like slavery, is nothing if not racially motivated (all you have to do is ask Harry Jacob Anslinger). But ending marijuana prohibition (and more than half of all drug arrests) is a very easy thing to do. To re-legalize marijuana (which, in this country, marijuana was legal until the early 1900’s) all it takes is a simple majority in both House and Senate, and the signature of President Obama. It’s time for a Change!

Bernadette Giacomazzo is the Managing Editor of All About Business (AAB), a global organization geared towards the spread of empowerment through social movement and grassroots advocacy. She is also the Associate Editor of Defining Trends Magazine, a freelance writer, and a professional photographer represented by Splash News. For the past ten (10) years, Ms. Giacomazzo has been involved in various areas of the music and entertainment industries, working with various A-listers & power players throughout her career. A PhD candidate, Ms. Giacomazzo is currently finishing up her debut documentary, “Last of the Independents: The True Story of the Long Island Music Scene,” which she is executive producing with Charles Cudd & Melissa Deskovic. She welcomes your comments at bgiacomazzo@optonline.net.

Writer, All About Business

The American government has given millions of dollars to countries struck by natural disasters over the last month. It makes us feel good to know that we are aiding our fellow man and looking beyond cultural differences and varying politics to relieve traumatized and stressed nations as much as we can.

But besides getting a warm fuzzy feeling, what do Americans receive in return? According to The Huffington Post, the American public has given over $8 million to Haitian causes through text message donations, and large private corporations collectively have pledged dozens of millions of dollars to the relief effort. It is honorable to give so freely to something that presents no obvious benefit to our own nation, but is it wise?

There exists a vast array of relatively inexpensive products (ranging from shelter materials to food provisions) that can be sent to Haiti. However, in the continuous wake of the earthquake, focuses on monitoring where donations go do not yet exist. Not to mention, Haiti’s position as a fourth world country makes current relief efforts tantamount to putting a cast on the arm of a victim of a horrific car accident who also happens to be in the late stages of pancreatic cancer. Is the cast even worth it? Especially if one cannot even be certain their money is going towards a cast, as opposed to a band-aid.

Some argue that Haiti isn’t a fourth world country, but a developing nation and should therefore be nurtured or assisted more than, for example, Japan or Chile. The title “developing nation” implies that Haiti is in one way or another developing, but it’s not. It continues to spiral downwards into a cesspool of corruption, crime and disease. If there were serious natural resources in Haiti it would be a developing nation, but for all intents and purposes, there are only textile factories that are now destroyed.

American debt increases by billions of dollars daily. Compassion comes at a price: the millions of dollars being spent on Haiti are adding up quickly. There is no money to spare in the States, and any government funds should be utilized to finance internal American efforts- like job creation or boosting local economies. While it may be true that a few $100 million cannot make a dent in our incredible national debt, when scattered across some local economies that amount could certainly improve sectional financial situations.

As has been touched upon, the generosity of individual Americans who combined have raised millions of dollars is astounding. People are entitled and encouraged to give to charitable organizations as they please; however no one can force someone to give philanthropically. If the government is going to use taxpayers’ money for a cause that will not benefit the American people, it must at least be ensured that said money will have as great of an impact as possible.

From a practical standpoint, Haiti is not a worthwhile investment; but from a humanitarian one, it’s a necessary expense. That Americans, even in their current economic grievances believe so vehemently in helping Haitians is encouraging and inspirational. However, all these selfless donations will be essentially useless if they aren’t heavily monitored, given periodically instead of all at once and done so with a clear plan for the country’s rehabilitation. If money is just going to be thrown at Haiti, then the efforts of the funds will have little to no long term impact. The benefits of providing aid to a country like Haiti cannot be judged on the mere amount given following the initial disaster but instead, by studying the country’s infrastructure, finances and general improvements a few down the road.

In order for humanitarian aid to make a difference, it must be composed of more than just money. Money alone can’t fix a broken country, but the cooperation of many people from many countries could. The truth is that no one wants to be in charge of fixing Haiti, so to speak, and realistically no one really has to. America appears to be comfortable in the gray area right between taking responsibility for the healing and fixing process, and ignoring the tiny nation completely. Historically analogous situations have shown that this gray area does not do anything beneficial for anyone. To complicate things further, it’s impossible to say what the right thing to do in Haiti would be, but an unacceptable action is to sit it out in the shallow end. America’s current actions are superficial and its indecision is dangerous to its image. As a world power it is this nation’s responsibility not necessarily to help, but certainly to define a stance on the Haiti crisis.

Elisabeth Greenberg is finishing her senior year at Tenafly High School in New Jersey. After spending the summer studying table tennis in China, she will attend Baruch College under Macaulay Honors College with a full tuition scholarship for her undergraduate career. Elisabeth can be reached at polydimethylsiloxane@gmail.com.

Dear Mr. Johnson:

I remember when I used to play basketball in high school and my father bought me a tape called “Showtime”. It was about your life and I must have watched it at least 100 times. Your story inspired me to no end and I was always motivated to practice that much harder, take a few extra shots, and become a student of the game. I didn’t go on to play college basketball, but I thank God every day for those skills that I learned from the game because I use the same skills of work ethic, diligence, and determination today as an entrepreneur. Along with many who have assisted me, I owe a small part of my success simply from watching you.

When I became a business man, I began to follow your career and my respect for your business acumen began to grow tremendously.  Your real estate development activities that provide housing for 100s in communities across the country; your purchasing of many Starbucks franchises in areas where there were traditionally none and creating employment; I have sat in your theater in Harlem many times and have heard great things about your other theaters; and I have heard tremendous reviews from the talks that you provide teaching others how to create wealth. I have always thought that you were a strong model of fiscal responsibility and wealth creation.

My admiration continued until, as someone who teaches financial literacy, I was doing research on financial predators and perusing the sites of various financial predators.  I was shocked when I went to a Rent-A-Center site and heard a basketball bouncing. I recognized the sound and immediately thought, “What does basketball have to do with Rent-A-Center?”

I scrolled down to see you bouncing the ball wearing the large smile that I grew up with.  Then I began to see your face on television and hearing your voice on the radio telling people how great Rent-A-Center was.  I knew full well that Rent-A-Center was a financial predator but I decided to go my own research to learn more about Rent-A-Center.  I figured that I must be misinformed because a man like you who has taught and exemplified ownership as a principle of wealth creation, there had to be something more to Rent-A-Center that I must have missed.

So I simply made a few calls to 6 Rent-A-Centers in the New York City area acting as if I was a customer to see what sort of great deals they were offering.  What I found was quite disturbing.

The Sofa and Love Seat:

Mr. Johnson…did you know that at your Rent-A-Center that they are pushing a sofa that retails for $900 and has a weekly payment rate of $19.99? Did you also know that if you stuck to the RAC schedule you would only own it after 78 weeks meaning that you paid $659 in interest at a rate of 80%?

Why would you promote this product when you could promote being responsible and saving $19.99 per week until you can purchase the same $900 sofa in just 44 weeks and save $659 in interest over 34 weeks?

The Leather Sofa and Love Seat: 

Mr. Johnson, did you know that the leather sofa and love seat that RAC is promoting retails for about $2000 and under their payment plan you need to pay $30.99 per week for 78 weeks until you own it? This means that you would have to pay a very modest (using RAC standards) 26% interest rate and about $417 in interest. 

Why would you promote this product when a family can own the same $2000 sofa outright if they just saved $30.99 per week for 63 weeks? This way they would save $417 in interest and would have 15 additional weeks that they could continue to put money away for a rainy day, retirement, etc. 

The 26 Inch Sony Bravio Television:

Mr. Johnson, did you know that the company you are promoting is selling a 26 Inch Sony Bravio television that retails for about $550, and making those who want to own it pay $17.99 per week for 104 weeks? This means that if they wanted to own it the RAC way they would be paying out $1321 in interest at a 163% interest rate!

Why would you promote this when the same family could do what we did while growing up and just stuck with the black and white TV, with the hanger antennas, that we had to turn the channel using pliers for a while? While this family was making do with the cheap television they could save the $17.99 per week in a high yield savings account each week, do this until they can own the same $550 TV after only 30 weeks, and save $1,321 in interest payments over 74 weeks. 

The 52 Inch Sony Bravio TV:

Mr. Johnson, I would think that you believe like I believe…people who can’t afford to purchase a TV shouldn’t even think about buying a big screen television! In this consumer oriented society why are you promoting extravagant, superficial items to people who can hardly even afford to pay bills on a monthly basis? Did you know that this television, under the terms of RAC, one can own after 116 weeks of paying $59.99 per week? The TV only retails for $1900 and if they pay for the full 116 weeks they would have paid out $5,059 in interest and a total of $6,959 total for a $1900 television! Seriously Mr. Johnson, were you made aware of this consumer abuse when you accepted the checks to promote it?

This same television, if someone saved $59.99 in a high yield savings account per week, they could own this television in 31 weeks and save 85 weeks of payments and over $5000 in interest!

It doesn’t stop at Rent-A-Center Mr. Johnson because I also have heard you on the radio promoting the refund anticipation loan as well through your endorsement of Jackson Hewitt. The refund anticipation loan plays upon the fact that many people are expecting to receive their tax return, can’t wait for the money, so they created a way to make exorbitant profit from other peoples’ misery.  Let me give you a scenario:

A single mother in the inner city goes to get her taxes done and her tax preparer at Jackson Hewitt estimates that she should be getting a $1000 tax return.  Then the preparer asks if she has any pressing bills that require her immediate attention. She thinks about the light bill, the gas bill, and the rent. Then she thinks about the fact that her son needs a new pair of shoes as his only pair of shoes have a hole in the bottom, they just increased the bus fair and the price of her monthly pass was increased by 15%, the day care just called and stated that their prices are also going up, and her job just announced that they were going through another round of layoffs. All of these things together make it sound much more responsible to get the refund much sooner than later.

However, the preparer left out a few details. The first detail that he left out was the fact that if she gets automatic deposit into her account the amount of time of which she would get the loan and her actual refund could be as little as a week a part. Also, there are a few fees that he rushed over.  When one accounts for these fees along with the already high interest rate the woman may have to pay interest on the loan that could range from 100 – 500%! Lastly, if the woman decides to take the loan, the refund is an “estimate” of her actual return. If there was a wrong calculation and she only gets half of what she expected (which happens frequently), she is still on the hook for the entire amount of the loan AND the interest!

Mr. Johnson, do you really think that this is fair? Do you really believe that this action is empowering to the community? Did you know that those who have the least are targeted the most?  According to IRS data, of the 8.7 million who received a refund anticipation loan in 2007 67% received an Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) while only 17% of the entire US population received the EITC in 2007.  The EITC program is designed to assist the working poor, so when you see that 2/3rds of those who received an RAL came from only 17% of the population it is clear who those who are in the refund anticipation loan business are marketing to. 

Mr. Johnson, I give you much praise and respect for all of your accomplishments. However, I cannot allow your recent endorsements of such predatory products to go without reproach. I do not deny the personal responsibility that exists in the people to be able to learn and implement principles of financial literacy. If someone goes to Rent-A-Center and pays exorbitant interest for a television or sofa, or if an individual pays 400% interest on a refund anticipation loan that should have never been applied for, the ultimate fault lies with the individual. However, even though your actions are not illegal, your support for these products is immoral and I implore you to take additional measures of consideration of the repercussions of your actions to those in communities across this country.

I would love to join with you in the teaching of the community to attempt to reverse the damage and loss of billions of dollars that communities across the country have lost to these financial predators.  I look forward and welcome your response.     

Regards,

Ryan Mack, President

by: Lawson Hyunh

Writer, All About Business

Wherever you are, look to your left and look to your right. You’ll notice that there is either an advertisement or a device that makes promotional advertisements easier, faster, and more economical.

Major companies have taken advantage of the emergence of social media and so should you. The days of flyering, postering, and phone banking no longer produce the same results. Notwithstanding their ability to still promote a message, its efficacy is outmatched by the emergence of media giants—Facebook, LinkedIn, Myspace, YouTube, and WordPress.

These companies have created new avenues for communication. What started off as a local forum for online social interaction has steadily revolutionized business communication and brand recognition.

Will the availability of these tools mean that success is right around the corner? Not if there is no strategy and persistence to reap the benefits of social media. The price of membership for this social media club costs little to nothing but dedicated participation is required in order to fully reap the benefits of this membership.

There are companies who utilize these tools of communication yet fail to see results. The reason is that there is a lack of commitment to these tools. If there is no persistence and strategy involved then the efforts become futile and time is wasted. The availability of social media is a gift from the technological Gods and any gift whose purpose is not utilized becomes an occupant of the closet we use to store useless items.  The persistence spent on sharpening a rock to a spear is the same persistence needed to devote to social media. However, more important than persistence is the formation of a goal and a plan for achieving such an objective.

Business owners should consult with their marketing specialists to formulate a goal. Whether this goal is to increase sales, promote brand recognition, or for expansion purposes, social media is your ticket to achievement. When deciding a goal, there should be consideration given to short-term and long-term objectives. In the grand scheme of things, brand recognition is best achieved through LinkedIn and Facebook. You may be wondering, ‘what about Myspace?’ Myspace used to lead the charge in the social media revolution however its popularity has waned since the arrival of Facebook. There are simply more avenues in Facebook.

Facebook and LinkedIn allow business owners to sign up their own profile in order to promote their company’s message and mission. Facebook is best suited for gaining social popularity whereas LinkedIn is best fit for recognition in the business world. WordPress.org and other blogging sites are also crucial to spreading the business’s message. Blogging has also gained popularity in the last few years and as such, companies such as Dell, IBM, and Apple have utilized these platforms for promoting their latest gadgets and informing their consumers of future releases.

These are just a few tools available for use however once again, if there is no strategy or goal, then these sites become fruitless. It is crucial to understanding the objective and constructing your plan accordingly.
Twitter and YouTube are effective mediums for achieving short-term goals. Twitter provides for quick exchanges and updates with other Tweeters. Brand recognition can be pursued by following as many other Twitter accounts as possible. As per the general ethics of ‘following’ another Twitter account, the recipient account will usually follow you back. This builds your brand recognition in that you should have amassed a large following on Twitter who will receive any updates you publish from your account. This sounds like a rather easy task however it is simply one means of brand communication and by no means should this be the only method of branding. YouTube provides for the visual and audio presence that is lacking in most social media tools. The medium allows companies to make presentations and other promotional messages in a visual format. ‘Seeing is believing’, as the saying goes and this aphorism has never rang more true. The human psyche best understands and believes a product when it is tangible and visual. YouTube satisfies this natural appetite. Of course, not any YouTube presentation will suffice. In an age where social media is used by everyone, it will take a great degree of ingenuity and creativity in order to best achieve the marketing objective.

Major companies are utilizing these very social media tools in order to create more market opportunity and further solidify their uniqueness within their own niches. These efforts are not randomly fired in hopes of achieving the goal but rather, they are products of a planned effort. Persistence and strategic planning is required if your membership to the social media club is to be fruitful.

Identify.

Strategize.

Follow-up.

Lawson Huynh is a writer for All About Business. He also assists his former organization, the Coalition for Asian American Children and Families (CACF), in helping Asian American Youth cope with racial inequality issues. He is also the founder of Madison Concepts, a project consulting group. Mr. Huynh holds a B.A. degree in Government and Politics from St. John’s University. He plans on pursuing Law School in the coming year. He can be reached at lawsonhuynh@gmail.com

by: Andrew Bruskin

Editor-in-Chief, All About Business

As Chicago prepares for a second amendment fight in Washington D.C., pro-gun supporters are confident that the Supreme Court will overturn Chicago’s quarter-century law that bans handguns.  In 2008, the high court struck down the DC handgun ban, emboldening the NRA and other second amendment groups.

How do I know the court will side with them again?

NUMBER ONE: Otis McDonald, a resident of Chicago’s south side and the lead plaintiff in this case.  Otis is a compelling witness.  Robbed three times in the past, he is not motivated by “right-wing propaganda” or “NRA fanatics”; he just wants to protect himself.  McDonald described the neighborhood robberies, which occur almost weekly.  “They [drug dealers] got away with TV’s, hunting rifles and anything they could sell for a quick buck.”  When a local hoodlum again broke into his garage, Otis was ready.  “I grabbed my rifle, snuck into the backyard and took aim.”  That’s when Otis realized the robber was a twelve year old boy.  “I talked to him; I talked to him like a parent, but warned him if he ever tried to take something from me again, it could be very dangerous.  I never saw him again.”

Despite the handgun ban, Otis says local gangs continue to have access to them.  He claims to have seen a gang member “leveling a pistol” at a moving car, but no shots were fired.  He saw Otis call the police; the teenager escaped before the cops arrived.

Retribution followed.

Several days later as McDonald walked to his car, local gang members threatened his life.  ”They did all this cussing … saying, ‘I’ll put you down, you old gray-haired mothers-and-such; I’ll put you down.’ And they’re grabbing at their side, running up to the truck door, and I’m sitting there defenseless,” McDonald said. ”That’s the things that was on my mind when I made the decision to go with this lawsuit.”

If he was being used as a pawn for political purposes, Otis didn’t care.  “I’m doing this for myself”, he explained to reporters.

NUMBER TWO: The Supreme Court has already decided.  Even though the decision will not come out until June 2010, the justices have already hinted which way they will vote.  I predict that Justices Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Chief Justice Roberts will vote in favor of overturning the Chicago handgun ban.  Kennedy, the swing vote on the court and part of the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)—the landmark Supreme Court case that overturned the D.C. handgun ban—will not change his mind here.  Justices Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayor will dissent.

What the numbers suggest: if the Supreme Court overturns the Chicago ban on handguns, this will allow other cities to follow suit.  What will this mean for the American people?

According to CBS, since the D.C. handgun ban was passed in 1976, more than 8,400 people have been murdered in the district, many killed by handguns. Nearly 80 percent of the 181 murders in 2007 were committed with guns.   Both Chicago and San Francisco currently have handgun bans.  According to the FBI Crime Statistics, both cities surpass the national averages in all categories except rape, with Chicago not reporting.  Hawaii, New Jersey and New York enacted similar legislation and all saw a spike in their crime rates.

These regional gun bans, however, are not nationally enforced.  This means people who want to have access to a handgun could purchase one in another state –or illegally obtain one.

John Stossel had this to say about the gun ban.  “Might stricter gun laws result in more gun crime? It seems counterintuitive but makes sense if we consider one simple fact: Criminals don’t obey the law.”  His analysis focuses on the U.K. gun ban that was determined by lawmakers to lower crime, but since the ban has been implemented, gun-related violence has only increased.

There are several problems with Mr. Stossel’s argument.  He essentially states that criminals are somehow different than ordinary people.  He fails to mention when an ordinary person turns to violence and a gun is readily available to suit their needs, such as cases of domestic violence and suicide.   Maybe a gun ban will solve that problem?

However, maybe this argument is the equivalent of ridding the world of nuclear weapons.  If banning nuclear weapons is impossible, then completely banning guns is impossible too.  “Criminals” will always be able to obtain a handgun—ban or no ban.  Why should innocent people suffer?

Take-Away Questions: would a national ban lower crime?  Would criminals still have access to guns via. the black market?  Or, will violence decrease because “criminals” will have a harder time obtaining guns, even from non-conventional means?  What about unemployment—instead of worrying about our gun debate, would crime decrease if all Americans (including past offenders) had access to paying jobs?  If our society allowed ex-convicts to find meaningful jobs, would our rates of recidivism (and our rates of violent crime) decrease—guns restrictions or not?

I leave that up to the reader to decide.

Andrew Bruskin is the editor-in-chief for All About Business (AAB), a global organization geared towards the spread of ‘empowerment’ through social movement and grassroots advocacy. He was the elected president of The National Society of Collegiate Scholars (NSCS), a national honor society comprised of 230 chapters in all 50 states of the U.S. with over 650,000 members. Currently attending the College of William and Mary School of Law, Andrew is a contributing editor for the Constitutional Law Society and the founder and co-president of the Northeast Legal Society. He can be reached at Andrew.Bruskin@gmail.com

Written By Manyell Akinfe, SVP of Optimum Capital Management, LLC

Yes, you read it right.  A recent report released by the Insight Center for Community Economic Development revealed the median net worth for African American women at the height of their working years (ages 36-49) is $5.  Your personal net worth is calculated by subtracting the amount you owe from the amount you own.  After picking up your jaw calculate your net worth and see how you fare.

What You Own=Assets
Your assets can be broken down into four general categories:

Liquid –This is your cash and anything else that can quickly be converted to cash.

Real Estate- When calculating the value of your property you must calculate the market value. You want the number you would get if the property was sold TODAY.

Personal Possessions- Cars, jewelry, electronics, clothing and any other possessions that have a monetary value.  When calculating value, you must again look at what a buyer would be willing to pay for each item.  Spending a few hours on Amazon or eBbay can help you determine a realistic value for your items.

Investment Assets-This includes all your stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and other investments. Remember to use the current value of your investments.  This number can go up and down so it’s important to keep that in mind when calculating your final number.

What You Owe =Liabilities
Your liabilities are things you owe such as mortgage, credit card debt, car loans, medical bills etc. Do not include your monthly rent or utility bills unless they are in collections.

Once you have both numbers, subtract the amount you owe from the amount you own and see if its more that $5.

The scariest part of this report is that it was compiled using the most recent Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) which was released in 2007.  This means the effects of the recession are not reflected in the numbers.  With the unemployment rate for black women at about 13% and the majority of this percentage being single women I suspect that we will be in the red in the next report.

I encourage women everywhere to use this information as motivation to control their finances.  Take your first step by watching, “What’s In Your Purse?” A Women’s Guide to Financial Success LIVE online at 11:30am  Saturday, March 13th. You can access the live stream by clicking on the Livestream video box on my Facebook page or by clicking on:

http://www.livestream.com/boxofficekidstv

In the 2000s popular news was often published with a relatively negative connotation regarding the “emerging markets” of South America, West Asia, and Africa– Adventurous Investor – New Frontier – Navigating Uncharted
Waters, are the kinds of subject titles that we’ve seen in the past decade. But how risky are these places? It’s
important to first acknowledge that every country has a different investment profile. South Korea is a totally
different market than South Africa, and neither should be grouped into a bucket of risky potential as if they were
roulette layouts.

The African markets in particular are met with the stereotype that they are 1) one large consistent market 2) under
construction. It is true that the fifty-three African countries are not as developed at the fifty United States of
America collectively. But one could drive from Cairo to Cape Town without stopping. It’s been done for decades.
I’ve been evaluating the African continent for the better part of this past decade and my firm has been investing
directly for the past three years with no signs on a downturn prior to or during the American depression of 2007.
Take for instance, South Africa: It is by far the most robust of the African markets. It accounts for 10% of the GDP
from the continent. It commanded approximately 70% of the continents total private equity deals in 2009. It
bolsters the world’s 10th largest exchange, and its currency is one of the most competitively traded.
I don’t think that it is imprudent to recognize South Africa as an ideal investment location, consistent with the
potential of the four BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) countries. BRICS would be a more accurate coverage of
the global landscape. The realities of a country like South Africa are that they do have what I like to call the tripod
of capitalistic growth. ZA has exceptional physical infrastructure (roads, telecom, and water/sewage) from their
ports to their rapidly growing cities. They have robust legal structure that rivals (from an operational standpoint)
that of the USA and EU, partially because they were given much intellectual assistance after Apartheid was
abolished in 1994. Finally, ZA has a great financial infrastructure. After gold was discovered in the Witwatersrand
the Johannesburg Stock Exchange was founded in 1887. Other than their large national banks, every major foreign
bank is there, including the newly built China Construction Bank.

That is just the tip of the iceberg, or in Mzansi terms the tip of Lions Head. The reality in 2010 is that buy & hold
strategies whether prudent investment philosophy or not, aren’t attractive and actively managed foreign direct
investment is more ideal for people looking to benefit from long-term growth. From this stand-point South Africa
offers the most attractive benefits, globally.

Natural Resources: ZA is arguably the largest mining country on the planet other than China. The benefit is in its
open market philosophy. Information travels fast and well. Unlike China, investors don’t need to partner with the
state to integrate well. Capital markets are not only informative, but liquid.

Timing: Johannesburg and Cape Town are four hours ahead of London and six/seven hours ahead of New
York/Toronto/Brazil depending on day-light savings time. When the US Dollar is low, and the price of metals is
high…South African currency, commodities, and equities are in for a steady incline…companies like Exxaro, Sasol,
Goldfields, etc. will see great growth.

Measurability: No one will likely tell the ambitious 21st century investor that low barriers to entry and trust worthy
information are the most desirable traits in any market. While we should never use the word “predictable” when
referencing the equity markets, because there are always black swans as Nassim Taleb would call them, investors
should be looking for the most measurable market available. In comparison to ZA, the USA is saturated with
companies. Although the JSE has more than four-hundred-seventy listed companies, ten of them carry the trading
weight. A market this sparse is much more than measurable. The idea is to set oneself up as an investor to
capitalize on as many opportunities as possible. 20 years from now, South Africa may be too big to enter, and Peru
may be the most measurable location available, who knows? While riding the N1 from Pretoria to Johannesburg
yesterday I saw the freeway expanding to make more room for everyone – there are no extreme adventures to be
had investing in South Africa in 2010, only very measurable growth.

James Keith is the Chairman and CEO of the Enxit Group: A small global IT Services and Equity Development firm established in late 2007 to deliver the latest technological and financial solutions of the most affluent to disfavored market segments globally. James is an American expat living in South Africa.

Writer, All About Business

In light of the snowstorms that slammed Washington DC and the entire East Coast, the interesting question to ponder remains: is the Earth really warming?  There is a seeming disconnect between manmade climate change (hence, warmer average atmospheric temperatures) and the recent snap of colder weather.  These recent snowstorms have caused an interesting – and spirited – debate between two sides:  those that believe manmade climate change isn’t happening, and those that believe it is.

Climate change skeptics, of course, have used the DC snowstorms to prove that climate change isn’t really happening.  The climate change deniers, for example, argue the DC snowstorms “(provide) evidence for global warming skeptics.”  Senator Jim Demint, in particular, said, “It’s going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries ‘uncle.’”

On the other side of the argument, the climate change proponents argue that the DC snowstorms do not undermine their position that Earth’s atmospheric temperature is getting warmer.  The evidence supporting their view includes a large collection of scientific data — most interestingly, the 2009 U.S. Climate Impact Reports, which says that storms of the kind that slammed DC would become less prevalent, but more intense.  Simply put, “hotter air can hold more moisture, so when a storm gathers, it can unleash massive amounts of snow.”

When weighing the merits of both sides of the argument, it is important to examine the evidence they have provided to bolster their claims.  So far, climate change skeptics have only said the DC snowstorm proves that global warming can’t be happening.  According to Senator Demint, and others, the DC snowstorms render the “manmade climate change” argument false. On the other hand, the proponents of manmade climate change have provided convincing scientific evidence of how the DC snowstorms do not disprove the idea.

On the merits, therefore, it should be noted that climate change proponents clearly have more factual empirical evidence to support their claims.  This is not to say that the climate change deniers’ arguments are totally out of left field and should be dismissed out of hand.  Rather, their arguments are not convincing based on one isolated event. Similarly, it would be wrong for climate change proponents to state that one big hurricane or even this massive DC snowstorm prove their point that climate change is happening.

Climate change is all about looking at trends rather than single isolated events.  What is irrefutable is the exponential increase in the Earth’s atmosphere – now, moreso, than any other timeframe.  In fact, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, “there is a high level of confidence [that] the last few decades were warmer than any comparable period during the last 400 years.”

Since climate change is indeed occurring, and it is primarily manmade, what will Congress do to address it?  Unfortunately, the answer may be: NOTHING.  The rationale is that the recent DC snowstorms “have made it more difficult to argue that global warming is an imminent danger.”  However, such thinking is misguided and falls into the trap of extrapolating a lot of information from one event.

Just like it is wrong for individuals on either side of the climate change debate to use isolated events to bolster their arguments, so is it wrong to use isolated events to put addressing the issue on hold.  What the policy for addressing manmade climate change should be is a subject of debate—whether it should be cap and trade or something else.  One thing is certain: Congress should act to address manmade climate change and not use the DC snowstorms to postpone action.

Patrick Kenney is a recent graduate of William and Mary with a double major in environmental science and public policy, who is now working toward a master’s degree.  Patrick’s interests include environmental/natural resources and energy policy. He has worked on restoration projects for the Chesapeake Bay, and on bringing a sustainable energy policy to William and Mary.

The derivatives market that grew so rapidly was able to do so because it was not regulated. These were private contracts written between banks and clients in a manner where banks would be able to squeeze large profits and take large risk with nobody to look over their shoulder…yes, a recipe for disaster. Since this was the cause of the collapse of the economy…it is only natural to think that congress would have jumped right on fixing this problem right? WRONG! Not one regulation has been passed since the over two years that we have been in this horrific economy. It seems as if our Government could be helped I they were to seek and find a large amount of intestinal fortitude to fight the strongest lobbying party in Washington…financial lobbyists! I urge you to please call, write, email, and send messages in bottles to your congressman and senators to urge financial market reform today! 

Click here and insert your zip code to see who your local Congressman or Senator is…CALL THEM TODAY!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/opinion/05fri1.html?hp 

Written By Ryan Mack, President of Optimum

Written By Ryan Mack, President of Optimum Capital Management, LLC

Let me first say that I feel that we should definitely be extending unemployment insurance and health care benefits to those who need it most. At its very core, to make sure that those people who are unemployed can still pay their bills, put food on the table, keep clothes on their back, is something that we all should be able to agree on. In the richest country of the world, to have people going hungry is a travesty. 

Let me also say that Senator Bunning is a hypocrite. He has switched positions on important issues like the “pay as you go” legislation…he once was for it, but as soon as the President was for it he was against it.  Also, as the Bush administration was rapidly increasing the debt with unpaid tax cuts, unpaid wars, and unpaid Medicare expansions he was in the front row of the cheering section. For him to now posture as if he is a fiscal hawk is hypocritical. 

Lastly, for Bunning to wait until the last moment to stand up and obstruct the legislation from being passed is disingenuous at the least…purely obstructionist at the most. I try not to judge somebody’s heart but if I had to place a bet on whether he was sincere about his position in not expanding the national debt vs. his desire to block any successful piece of legislation from passing under the Obama administration I would probably bet on the latter even though there will never be a way to prove it. 

However, no matter how I feel about the motivation for his position, his position that as a country we must start paying for things as we go in order to not place debt on the shoulders of our future generations is correct!

In a phenomenal year we generate approximately $2.5 trillion in tax receipts as a country. In a few years our national debt should reach as high as $15 trillion.  This means that if we spent ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of all tax proceeds on paying down the debt it would take us 6 years to pay it all. Here are three reasons this is highly unlikely to happen not only in the next six years but in my lifetime:

1. Our deficits are scheduled to continue to increase over the next few years. We are not paying down our debt, we are adding to it at a record pace. I must admit that much of this spending was necessary to avoid a depression; however, it is time that we start looking aggressively for places to save and fight the voices of the special interest organizations. 
2. Interest rates are at record lows and they should soon start rising. Approximately 40% of our debt is held in the short term treasuries which essentially make our debt the same as variable debt. Interest rates have nowhere to go but up which will make it much more expensive to pay off the interest to this debt. 
3. Those on the left are too scared to cut spending and those are the right are too scared to not cut taxes…so both sides will continue be either spend happy or revenue deficient. 

Let me give you very real scenario of what can happen.  Almost half of our national debt is owned by foreign investors because we are still viewed as a safe haven to foreign entities. They invest in the USA to the tune of almost $2 billion dollars per day.  Let’s say they see our national debt continues to rise and they become a little more skeptical about our ability to pay this debt back.  They don’t stop investing completely but perhaps they just invest half of what they previously invested or $1 billion per day…still a substantial amount but not as risky.  What will this do?

This will automatically weaken the dollar because of the decrease in foreign investment.  The weakening dollar will cause inflation, and now you have a spiral of problems that occur including inflation, increased interest rates (which will have to occur because they will have to try to make investments more attractive to foreign investors), steadily high unemployment, and a sluggish economy still remains.  An economy that looked very safe before will now not look as attractive…heaven forbid this because we really are at the whim of foreigners. If foreigners decide to pull back, the “ponzi” scheme called the national debt that relies on new foreign investment to pay down interest on existing foreign debt, will begin to unravel.  A few failed treasury auctions because the Fed doesn’t have enough to spend to cover the lack of interest in our debt (the Fed has already had to cover at treasury auctions because of lack of interest) and the government debt house of cards comes tumbling down.

This scenario is a very real scenario and can easily happen within a few years unless we start to get serious about fiscal responsibility!  I don’t care that Bunning is lying through his teeth, being hypocritical, or trying to obstruct the President…what he is saying is correct. I don’t like being in so much debt to foreigners that one shift in their mentality and we are screwed…we need to start paying as we go.  If we can take funding from the stimulus package that hasn’t been allocated and put that towards the extension of benefits without adding to the national debt then we are taking a step in the right direction. 

I will repeat this again, because I don’t want to seem as if I am insensitive to the plight of those who are unemployed whom I am in the streets fighting for every week. I want to see them get an extension of benefits! However, it is beyond time that we start to make sure that we start to take an earnest and honest account of each dollar that we spend as a country. It is just as important to make sure that we provide funding for those who are struggling in the short term, as it is to make sure that our economy can remain stable in the long term.  This is not an either or choice because there is a responsible way to do both.  Is it too much to ask that we find the fiscally responsible means to solve our problems and ask our government to execute?!