Many farmers are finding that the competition between feeding America and fueling America is increasing their cash take.

Federal Subsidies still exist. It would be better for the government to buy the small farmers’ commodity for a set price, then to have the subsidy and having them sell it on the open market. The government can decide based on need whether feeding the hungry or reducing the USA’s dependence on oil is more important.

The current system makes the voter pay taxes for the subsidy, pay increased costs for food and increased costs for fuel. Systems of making voters pay more for less are not good policy. The problem is that the subsidy was not created to support what has expanded into a diversifying of a business to use their products for more than one thing.

The farmer was the main source many years ago for making sure that the USA could be food independent and supporting the farmer was the right thing to do. However, the USA’s dependence on foreign fuel has created a need to use food stock and convert it into fuel. The price of foreign fuel has only created an increase demand on the food commodities.

There are many resources that people do not consume to survive, such as solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, nuclear, wave motion, etc. and therefore, do not impact the price of food.

Alternative energy should not result in a policy that makes it a choice between food and fuel. Organizations who deal with feeding those in need of food and those who are supporting alternative energy initiatives should work together to make sure a policy of fuel independence does not create other harms.

The continuing violence against women has highlighted again the lack of adequate services for women and their children to access.  The most serious need is housing. The services should include childcare to allow employment opportunity and the housing of the women and her children.  The housing must be both permanent for families and temporary for initial emergency intake.

The majority of those making decisions to fund services are white males who have never had their life at risk.  Women should not vote for men who do not take their needs seriously.  Set an agenda that prioritizes where housing and Domestic Violence services are needed to allow equal and equitable access to services.  If elected officials do not support the agenda then make sure that the community is educated about the position of the officials.

This cartoon depicts a manner in which to create a message against Domestic Violence and Children Witnessing Violence.  Logos that are visual have a more lastly effect for people to remember. 

Cartoons by Speartoons

Food, Housing, Clothing, Jobs and the Environment are the basic elements for survival.

Food:  access to sufficient foods to have a balance diet and access to sufficient water.

Housing: affordable housing stock at a cost that is 30% of individual’s income.  A living wage standard is critical to make this happen.

Clothing:  protection from the environment and supportive role for individual

Jobs: training our youth, training the hard to place, and retraining.

Environment:  Whether it is global warming or safe drinking water, or the poisoning of children and adults by the environment or violence, it is a critical element for the survival of individuals.  This area should include equal access to any service, which should include music, arts, sports, and education.

To more adequately serve a community the nonprofits, government, donors and business partners need to be committed to sharing and distributing the wealth of the USA to provide equal access to services.  Geo coding of all available resources and needs will create a priority map and percent of need for every community.  While each nonprofit cannot be held responsible to create such a database, it does not stop an organization from strategically producing a sub set of the information for their organization.  This should be the blue print for an organization to think about for what services to provide and where to provide it.

In converting to a geo coding way to allocate resources, one other factor needs to be taken into consideration.  What is a reasonable distance for an individual to travel to have equal access?  I advocate that if access is within a 20 minute drive that access has been provided.  However, if the access is for individuals that do not drive then the next measure is what transportation options provide the 20minute access.  An exception should be made for specifically accessing youth programs.  It requires adapting the geo coding to an ability to walk to and from the program safely.

The main obstacle to GEO coding is that it documents why a community should or should not get resources. Who should be prioritized and makes it harder politically to allocate resources based on personal preference.

“Behavior is important for the reason that you may introduce yourself to someone you don’t know. You might be mean, but they might be tougher. It is important because you may destroy the world but if we don’t want the earth to destroy it’s self we need to replace it with an era of peace and kindness. Talking first is better than fighting with fists. We should be more like Dr. Martin Luther King.”

He also wrote “What is a Best friend?”

I asked him why he was thinking about this. He was watching the news with me and said that it sounded like people were just being mean. Why do people not talk?

I raise this as an important aspect of human interaction since people always think the worse of someone base on assumptions. Therefore, organizations need to always be prepared to clearly respond to any misrepresentation of their brand, mission or services.

With the credit markets tight and the variable rates jumping from 3 percent to 11 percent, nonprofits are in a financial squeeze.  The credit market is not acting rationally and has frozen just about every sector in some way.  An approach proposed was to allow a nonprofit to bid on its own bonds.  This effectively allows for manipulation by the seller of the bonds and the recent financial market problems should have taught all of us that there should not be more possible ways for manipulation allowed, regardless of the type of organization.  If a nonprofit has sufficient monies to bid on its own bonds then why create more debt.  Since most of the bonds are related to hospitals and schools the reason for the bonds is to pass on the debt to the consumer even if they raised the money already.    The cost is passed on to individuals in the form of higher medical costs and tuitions.

During this time of the financial credit meltdown congress has provided an opportunity for credit worthy individuals to be able to purchase properties. For 2008 they have increased the loan ceiling that they will cover to be tied to the median income of a county. Thereby, allowing those individuals who have traditional been shut out of the FHA loan market to have access to the federally insured loan market. Check out the amount of your county by going to this link:

These loans are currently approximate .375% cheaper than the conventional Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans.

With the number of foreclosures and short sales on the market you should expect to find property discounted 20-50%.

Now is the time for nonprofits to invest in creating affordable housing at an affordable price.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts is a nonprofit organization that is a health care insurance entity. The CEO was paid 1.36 million in 2006 and 3.6 million in 2007. The Chairman was paid 1.73 million in 2007. The former chairman received 16.4 million to retire in 2007. Average premiums increased 7.5 percent.

The CEO of Harvard Pilgrim was paid 1.38 million in 2007. The CEO of Tufts Health Plan was paid 1.19 million in 2007.

If the President of the USA can be paid a salary of $400,000 then that should be enough for any executive of a nonprofit regardless of revenues.

Since these organizations are acting like for-profits in the manner in which they run their organization compensations and incur costs should they be stripped of their nonprofit status?

The states should allow access to the nonprofit organizations to have their employees be on the state medicare system for a flat fee per month. This will give the medicare and nonprofit system better pricing options.

The other option is to have nonprofits create a cooperative insurance company that they have better control over for costs and benefits.

Health care insurance and medical expenses should not have to make you bleed money as well!!!

Employer sponsored clubs for employees are useful tools to build camaraderie, help employees get to know each other then work, create company loyalty, reduce turnover, and provides a social context to improve morale.

A happy employee makes a more productive employee.

Allowing retirees of the organization to participate, will increase the number of individuals whom support the organization.

Heating Oil is up 42% and rising.
1.    Have an energy audit performed, invest in the recommendations and get the rebates.
2.    Apply to foundations and donors to utilize solar and other one time environmental changes to decrease costs, take control your heating costs and reinvest into your programs.

Gasoline is up 28% and rising.
1.    Implement telecommuting and teleconferencing for staff
2.    Evaluate vehicle use for efficiency and effectiveness
3.    Convert to hybrid vehicles, change usage, change vehicle types
4.    Apply for one time grants or donors to purchase fuel efficient vehicles

Medical is up 6%-35% depending on your size and rising.
1.    Switch plans
2.    Change to deductible plans and set up Health Services Accounts for employees
3.    Provide a level of Self Insurance
4.    Employee Health Initiatives

Food is up 4% and rising
1.    Buy from Food Cooperatives
2.    Buy in bulk from Warehouse vendors
3.    Buy in bulk with other nonprofits
4.    Create your own foodstuffs thorough preserving
5.    Open your own grocery

Government needs to get smarter.  There are good choices, good mandates and there are government rules that do not make sense.  One choice is allowing employers to decide whether to have flexible spending plans, Health Service Accounts (HSA’s) or HRA’s.  The fact that HSA’s allow for paying health premiums and the Flexible Spending accounts do not is bad policy.  The fact that Flexible Spending requires guessing the right amount to save but you are penalized if you do not use it is bad policy, especially when the HSA allows no penalty and it rolls over.

The controlling of Health Care costs is the responsibility of everyone.  However, it should not burden any one entity or person more than other.  Therefore, having to pay something should be a fact for everyone.  It should not be a choice of whether to have a Health Savings Account (HSA).  Regardless of employer size every employee should have a HSA account.  Since at some point there are out of pocket expenses there is absolutely no reason to pay taxes on money used for health care costs.  This allows an employee to be proactive and build a health care fund non-taxable and as an investment to their future.  If an employer wants to add to it they can.   It is the employee’s account to manage and to make choices with.  Just like retirement is a function for which every employee should be planning.  Everyone gets sick at some point or may wish to have an elective procedure.  Most individuals are not good at planning and that is where government assists people in making decisions that are best for them.

If insurance companies are making millions and paying high salaries then there is room to shave off the costs to health care.

One option is to have a combination of employers paying into a government sponsored insurance program with a small deductible of $1,500 for individuals and $3,000 for families to be paid out of Heath Savings Accounts is the best way to go.  The Health Savings Account should not be limited to the amount someone can pay into it.  I advocate for no limit because there are many procedures not cover by insurance such as major dental work or laser eye surgery or there is a sudden illness that causes a spike in costs to the individual/family.  An individual should not be held to a percent of their income or a cap on the plan because it only helps the wealthy that would get the service regardless of the tax consequence.  It provides for the government, employer and employee to jointly control health care costs.