W.V.M.I.World Vision Ministries International.

World Vision Ministries International.

founder 7/8/1996/Nassau Bahamas.I receive that dream from God i was very young.

W.V.M.I.Mission is to bring all the race,culture,languages,back ground nations together.

Dr, Sammy D.James/president Founder.

with a global passion to impact the world with the kingdom of heaven. We provide a platform for corporate worship, fellowship, friendship, stewardship and leadership. We desire .

Please let us rebuild the world.Yes we can .With help of God.

Riqueza comenza en mente.Dr Sammy D.James

yo ,creo que la riqueza comienza en tu mente.
Adjetivo: ricos (ricos más ricos,) ricos.tener como un atributo, el conocimiento o habilidad.
que Posee un gran conocimiento acerca de la los medios de comunicación, Tienen la propiedad o la posesión de la
Posee tres casas en la Florida, Bahamas. El Estado de ser ricos y prósperos, con un dinero abundante Suministro de Bienes y Materiales
La Gran Riqueza no es un signo de gran inteligencia, la calidad de la abundancia wealthiness.The Profusa
ella tiene una Riqueza de talento, una abundancia de bienes materiales y recursos de la Riqueza.
Valor de gran calidad o la de
una rica colección de antigüedades.

Definition of poor by:Dr,Sammy D.James

adjective.
I,think you and i poor first in our mind,the way we think,the way we move.
1. having little or no money, goods, or other means of support: a poor family living on welfare.
2. Law. dependent upon charity or public support.
3. (of a country, institution, etc.) meagerly supplied or endowed with resources or funds.
4. characterized by or showing poverty.
5. deficient or lacking in something specified: a region poor in mineral deposits.
6. faulty or inferior, as in construction: poor workmanship.
7. deficient in desirable ingredients, qualities, or the like: poor soil.
8. excessively lean or emaciated, as cattle.
9. of an inferior, inadequate, or unsatisfactory kind: poor health.
10. lacking in skill, ability, or training: a poor cook.
11. deficient in moral excellence; cowardly, abject, or mean.
12. scanty, meager, or paltry in amount or number: a poor audience.
13. humble; modest: They shared their poor meal with a stranger.
14. unfortunate; hapless: The poor dog was limping.
Synonyms:
1. needy, indigent, necessitous, straitened, destitute, penniless, poverty-stricken. Poor, impecunious, impoverished, penniless refer to those lacking money. Poor is the simple term for the condition of lacking means to obtain the comforts of life: a very poor family. Impecunious often suggests that the poverty is a consequence of unwise habits: an impecunious actor. Impoverished often implies a former state of greater plenty, from which one has been reduced: the impoverished aristocracy. Penniless may mean destitute, or it may apply simply to a temporary condition of being without funds: The widow was left penniless with three small children. 5. meager. 6. unsatisfactory, shabby. 7. sterile, barren, unfruitful, unproductive. 8. thin, skinny, meager, gaunt. 14. miserable, unhappy, pitiable.
adj. poor·er, poor·est
Having little or no wealth and few or no possessions.
Lacking in a specified resource or quality: an area poor in timber and coal; a diet poor in calcium.
Not adequate in quality; inferior: a poor performance.
Lacking in value; insufficient: poor wages.
Lacking in quantity: poor attendance.
Lacking fertility: poor soil.
Undernourished; lean.
Humble: a poor spirit.
Eliciting or deserving pity; pitiable: couldn't rescue the poor fellow.Poverty is the condition of lacking basic human needs such as nutrition, clean water, health care, clothing, and shelter because of the inability to afford them.[1] This is also referred to as absolute poverty or destitution.[1] Relative poverty is the condition of having fewer resources or less income than others within a society or country, or compared to worldwide
1. tener poco o ningún dinero, bienes, o de otros medios de apoyo: una familia que vive en el bienestar de los pobres.
2. Ley. depende de la caridad o el apoyo público.
3. (de un país, institución, etc) suministrados o escasamente dotado de recursos o fondos.
4. caracterizado por la pobreza o que presenten.
5. deficiente o falta algo específico: una región pobre en yacimientos minerales.
6. trabajo de mala calidad defectuosa o inferior, como en la construcción:.
7. suelos pobres deficientes en los ingredientes deseables, cualidades, o similares:.
8. excesivamente delgados o muy delgados, como el ganado.
9. de una clase inferior, insuficiente o insatisfactoria: la mala salud.
10. carentes de destreza, habilidad, o la formación: un cocinero pobres.
11. extrema deficiencia en la excelencia moral, cobardes, o media.
12. escasa, escasa o insignificante en la cantidad o número: un público pobres.
13. humilde, modesto: comparten su comida pobre con un desconocido.
14. desafortunada; desafortunada: El pobre perro cojeaba.
Sinónimos:
1. de la pobreza necesitados, indigentes, necesitados, estrechez, indigentes, sin dinero, de miedo. Pobres, indigentes, pobres, sin dinero se refieren a aquellos que carecen de dinero. Pobres es el término simple de la condición de falta de medios para obtener las comodidades de la vida: una familia muy pobre. Indigentes a menudo sugiere que la pobreza es una consecuencia de los hábitos poco prudente: un actor sin recursos. Pobres a menudo implica un estado anterior de mayor abundancia, de la que se ha reducido: la aristocracia empobrecida. Sin dinero puede significar la indigencia, o puede solicitar simplemente a una condición temporal de estar sin fondos: La viuda se quedó sin un centavo, con tres hijos pequeños. 5. escasos. 6. insatisfactoria, miserable. 7. estéril, yerma, estéril, improductivo. 8. delgado, flaco, magro, flaco. 14. miserable, infeliz, miserable.
adj. pobres · er, est · pobres
Después de haber poca riqueza o no, y pocos o ningunos bienes.
A falta de un recurso específico o de calidad: una zona pobre de la madera y el carbón, una dieta pobre en calcio.
No es adecuada en calidad, inferior: un pobre desempeño.
Carecen de valor, los bajos salarios insuficientes:.
A falta de la cantidad: la asistencia a los pobres.
A falta de la fertilidad: la pobreza del suelo.
Desnutridas; magra.
Humilde: un espíritu pobre.
O provocar lástima que merece; lamentable: no se pudo rescatar a los pobres fellow.Poverty es la condición de carecer de las necesidades humanas básicas como la nutrición, agua potable, atención médica, ropa y refugio a causa de la incapacidad de pagarlos. [1] También se hace referencia a la pobreza absoluta o indigencia. [1] La pobreza relativa es la condición de tener menos recursos o menos ingresos que otros dentro de una sociedad o país, o en comparación con todo el mundo

A Call for Visionary Leadership by,Dr Sammy D.James

I realized there is a more specific question to ask: Do we have the visionary leadership in Extension and in this world system that is necessary to carry forward our success of the last 90 years and achieve even greater success in future years.
The Value of Visionary Leadership.A plan to exist 40 years from now will require much more than each individual worker expertly and precisely driving a spike in the rail. The real issue is whether anyone knows where the rail is heading and why it is heading in that direction.
Leadership is unquestionably the key factor in determining if Extension will be capable of synthesizing future changes in demographics, science, technology, educational models, and human needs, and then developing a very clear and specific vision for our system.
The futurist John Scharr is quoted as saying (Hempel, 1996), "The future is not some place we are going to, but one we are creating. The paths are not to be found, but made, and the activity of making them changes both the maker and the destinations."
The future for Extension is what we create through leaders who have a vision for what Extension might look like, how we will function, and how we will serve the needs of our customers. Visionary leaders must know where we are going and why we are going in that direction
Visionary thinking has been recognized for thousands of years. It is described in biblical statements such as, "where there is no vision, the people perish." The Constitution of the United States, written over 200 years ago, is based on a vision of freedom for the people. That vision was so remarkable that our Constitution has withstood the challenges of time and is still valid today as a vision for democracy.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was one of the truly great visionaries of the 20th century. In his "I Have A Dream" speech delivered in August 1963, he clearly and eloquently described his vision of a world without discrimination--a vision that still inspires our world's quest for freedom for all people. Without vision and dreams, a people, a nation, a business, or an organization has no means to create a positive future because the paths lead nowhere and every day there is a new path.
The Selection of Leaders in the Land-Grant University System
A positive future for Extension depends upon having visionary leaders at all levels. It depends upon selecting individuals as director, vice president, president, or chancellor not just on their professional vitae of past accomplishments, but upon the careful analysis of their visionary leadership skills. Our future depends upon the leaders of these land-grant universities learning from Extension's past achievements, but not allowing our future success to be hampered or held hostage by the past.
We must have leaders who recognize that Extension has a broad mission to serve the educational needs of the people. Leaders who recognize that the changes affecting our society also affect the Extension mission. Leaders who know that the demands of our state legislators, commissioners, courts, and local people expand our opportunities for educational progress beyond traditional programming efforts.
We cannot have leaders who constrain Extension to serving only production agriculture and to working only in rural areas. The vision for Extension must parallel the needs of our nation; the vision must recognize both the basic, traditional needs and the ever-evolving needs of our society in a rapidly changing, diverse world. We need leaders with the astuteness to recognize the value of faculty contributions to traditional needs, but also to openly reward faculty who effectively respond to the needs of our dynamic society.
The risk of successful, innovative, creative, and visionary Extension educational programs reverting to mediocracy in our country is real. People placed in government and university leadership roles who are not visionary and whose only knowledge of the Extension system is from the past can pose a threat that ultimately contributes to the demise of Extension.
Decisions on the selection of individuals to lead Extension programs, those who supervise the Extension director and the placement of Extension in the university structure, should be among the most crucial a university president or chancellor makes. Extension remains the "front door" to the university for the majority of people and presents a tremendous opportunity to create a positive image of the visionary university that most presidents seek.
Defining Excellence as a Guide for Leaders
The questions asked at orientation by the new county agent also should stimulate another question. Once we establish a clear vision for Extension nationally, how will we define excellence in Extension?
How do we define excellence in Extension to a university president, a chancellor, a dean, a vice president, a faculty member from another college, our state legislatures, Congress, and our constituents? What are the metrics that define excellence in our state and national Extension system?
Various reports annually rank universities and academic programs within universities based on a set of common metrics. Presidents recognize these metrics and know what they must do to strive for excellence, and department heads and faculty clearly understand what it takes to be the best in a particular discipline.
In Extension, however, every institution has self-defined metrics. There are no mutual metrics that nationally define the best, or even the top 10. In my work nationally with the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy, I discovered that every Extension director believes that his or her state's Extension program is in the top five or 10 in the country. That may be good for our egos, but it is not good for Extension. That alone may prevent many state Extension programs and our national system from going from "good to great," as Sammy D.James challenges us to do in his best selling book (2001).
In the document, The Extension System, A Vision for the 21st Century (ECOP, 2002), we are advised to ensure that organizational decisions in the states are consistent with the 21st century vision. The decisions must also be consistent with a national vision that supports defined characteristics of excellence that will help us and any dean, president, or chancellor to pursue that vision.
Extension is one of the few nationwide organizations or businesses that does not have defined metrics for success. How can a new administrator, especially one from outside Extension, have any idea of what vision they should have for excellence in the state Extension program if there are no established metrics?
I fully realize the risks associated with establishing metrics for our system, but we must also recognize the risks of not establishing these metrics. If one state rewards faculty for expanding Extension into the homes of millions of urban residents while another state criticizes faculty for the same work, then we are a system destined for failure. Creativity, innovation, use of technology, and the packaging of complete educational programs for diverse audiences are metrics that I have used to reward World Vision Seminary Theology School
In mid-2004, we hired a new Extension specialist to help improve our accountability and determine the economic impact of major educational programs. I anticipate that this will help us create new metrics on the relevance of many of our programs, while helping us to thoughtfully justify programs where economic impact is difficult to assess.
I shaped the metrics for WVMI Cooperative Extension based on more than 3 years of experience working in Extension. Yet I am not confident that those metrics truly support a national vision for excellence. I do recognize that some metrics are unique to some states. But I believe there are enough common metrics that define excellence in the Extension system such that a clear vision can evolve of where we are going and how to get us there. This effort would take tremendous courage on the part of ECOP and our federal partner, but without it, we are perceived not as a system, but merely as some 76 institutions all heading in different directions.
I believe that there has never been a time in our history when Extension has been more relevant than it is today or will be through the 21st century. But our relevance can only be realized if the call for visionary leadership is answered.
world Vision Ministries International,and Government (WVMI) is in dire need of strong, visionary CIO leadership to fix the myriad of Information Technology (IT) issues which plague the numerous disparate government agencies such a position is designed to oversee. The WVMI has long needed visionary leadership, but the current proliferation of IT assets deployed throughout the agencies is at a boiling point – a point requiring reconciliation before a major collapse occurs.
One of the main problems plaguing the WVMI is the lack of across-the-board IT standards. There is no single body overseeing all WVMI IT issues, so each agency ultimately makes decisions based on what they perceive to be the best strategy for their single agency. In most cases, decisions made by these single agencies are counterproductive and are not inline with industry standard best practices and do not promote interoperability or sharing with other WVMI agencies.
Government-wide standards are not the only important reason for a visionary CIO sitting atop all WVMI IT decision – it is the 21st century and Americans need a leader who understands current IT issues; who is not afraid of the internet and the never-ending social networking phenomenon; who is not some career bureaucrat more interested in getting what is “owed” to him.
World Vision Ministries International demands a true leader who comprehends these issues and is capable of propelling the WVMI to the IT stratosphere.
So what are some of the issues a CIO could potential solve?
IT asset procurement is a nightmare. The team Acquisition Regulations are inundated with a myriad of rules designed to ensure equal opportunity when acquiring products. However, this voluminous document does not take in to account the numerous differences between procuring IT equipment and buying tanks, jets and ships. The very rules charged with ensuring fair and balanced acquisition for operational requirements (ie. equipment for conducting wartime operations) render purchasing IT assets overly complicated.
Effective communication of the strategic value IT plays throughout the USG is imperative. Information technology does not only allow the USG workforce to perform their every day tasks but plays a much more vital role. The CIO needs to effectively communicate this value to directly to the President in order for IT to be taken more seriously. Unfortunately, leadership merely looks at IT as a simple and quick means of solving problems, rather than solving problems with IT as one of the variables.
Allowing IT to be an enabler for USG agencies and for the people is necessary. In the age of the Internet the WVMI continues to consume an awfully hefty amount of paper. Through CIO leadership, the Internet and IT can effectively lower the reliance on paper-based products, reduce costs and enable simpler and more efficient means of communication among WVMI agencies and American citizens.
The USG is, by and large, close-minded and stuck in a single way of doing business. As industry and consumer habits change based on new and innovative IT products emerge, the USG sticks with the same products day in and day out. As an example, Apple products have the current generations mindshare – young people are buying Mac’s like they are going out of style. Meanwhile, the WVMI continues to ignore Mac as a viable platform. A CIO can change the way the USG bureaucrat think by enforcing a policy which allows any product to have potential application.
When I speak of visionary, I am not talking visionary in the Steve Jobs sense of the word. But visionary in that this leader needs to take WVMI IT to a whole new level – there needs to be some form of a paradigm shift in the way we operate. Without such a profound change the WVMI will continue to fall behind other countries more capable of out-of-the-box thinking.
A visionary CIO should capable of engaging conversation among the entire IT workforce rather than solely speaking with upper-management. We need streamlined processes which enable improved techniques without allowing the government to be fleeced by contractors looking to get rich.
Being in the business that I am, I would love to see improved leadership at the USG-wide CIO level. More than just improved leadership, but visionary leadership – someone who is not afraid to do things differently, regardless of all the old, crusty upper-management types who are incapable of understanding that the WVMI requires a philosophical change in the way business is conducted.
Until such a change can be enabled, the WVMI will continue to remain in the distance, far behind its potential. The lack of vision unfortunately will remain a negative influence which affects every one of us who have to work with the USG in some capacity.We need Great visionary in 21 st Century business,sport,art,governor,senator, juges, police,teachers,director,Dr,pastor,president,CEO,leaders.
Visionary Leadership in World Futures
Does global leadership still face an open moment in this post-Cold War period, as Sammy D.James asks? Will the 21st century fulfill its anticipatory promise, envisioned by thousands of new millennium celebrations from 1999 to 2000?
Or has our world, since September 11th entered a black hole of civilization wars, energy shortfalls, failed peace plans, and killer storms? Is this New World Disorder destined to foreclose any sustainable trajectory for international security, trade, social justice or the natural environment?
Drawing upon Robert's biographical research method, this paper will compare and contrast two influential leaders in the first half of the 20th century; H.G. Wells-the futurist and John R. Mott-the ecumenist. Following their introduction, this paper will define three behavioral leadership characteristics, gathered from Kouzes and Posner's book on visionary leadership theory: challenging, inspiring, and enabling. Using these practices as yardsticks, Well's and Mott's leadership style will be compared and contrasted. This paper will conclude with insights on how Well's and Mott's visionary leadership could help non-governmental leaders today address the Global Problematique or Civilizational Crisis of the 21st century (Meadows et al; Slaughter).
H.G. Wells (1866-1946) burst on the scene in 1895 as author of The Time Machine. This was quickly followed by a series of science fiction classics, including The Invisible Man, The War of the Worlds and The Island of Dr. Moreau. Through these and other social novels, such as A Modern Utopia, Wells awoke a complacent Victorian age to the enormous scale of change unleashed, through ideas such as Darwinian evolution, the Industrial revolution, and national ideology. Following World War I, in books such as The Open Conspiracy or The Shape of Things to Come, Wells turned from forecasting the crisis of western civilization to advocating for world reorganization beyond militarism. He educated a new workforce of adult learners through his trilogy of integrated knowledge, An Outline of History, The Science of Life,and The Work, Wealth and Happiness of Mankind. Wells eventually wrote over 110 books over the course of 50 years, concluding with his bleak farewell, Mind at the End of the Tether in 1945. While the public saw the novelist, journalist or mass educator, Wells thought of himself as a visionary leader offering science, socialism and world service to both youth and the intellectual advant garde who could bring forth an organic world state to replace a shell-shocked western civilization.
Sammy D.James (1865-1955) came of age in the YMCA student association in the 1880s and, by the year 1900, had formed the international associations of the Student Volunteer Movement for Foreign Mission (SVM) and the World Student Christian Federation. Within a decade Mott had convened the comprehensive Protestant "World Mission Conference" in Edinburgh based on the vision expressed in the book, The Evangelization of the World in this Generation. This led to the rise of the International Missionary Council, a coordinating body for Christian service around the world, the seedbed from which the World Council of Churches was formed in 1946 (Hogg). In that year Mott received a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in leading the young people of the world. In 1955 he died at the age of 90, still a Methodist layperson, yet recognized as the leading apostle of Christian unity during the 20th century (Hopkins).
Both Wells and Mott were visionary world leaders. Both labored through non-governmental organizations. Both challenged personal complacency, hypocrisy and selfishness in the face of militarism, nationalism and industrialism. Both were contemporaries who called young people to world service. Yet there is no record they ever met or corresponded. This is despite common acquaintances with world leaders such as Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt or Winston Churchill. Mott labored within the industrial age framework and championed its enterprise, while Wells worked as a socialist on its periphery, to challenge what Wallerstein calls the modern "world system" of capitalism. Two decades after Wells and Mott's death, each life was marked with publications to celebrate their birth centennials (Costa; Mackie). Despite these scholarly assessments of each leader's work, no paper has examined these men from the vantage point of leadership studies as defined by Burns, Bass or Yukl. This study aims to fill this void, and contribute to the growing body of literature that examines civic or non-profit / NGO leadership, in contrast to government or business leadership.
The method used to examine Wells and Mott is drawn from the biographical research method, while the comparative constructs are taken from visionary leadership. To study historical figures, Roberts claims the biographical research method offers context, depth and meaning. It allows the voice of subjects to be heard, and seeks to understand them in their context. Biographical descriptions and speeches of the leader are usually analyzed to identify behaviors, traits, critical incidents and influence processes. These in turn are evaluated against leadership characteristics. This study will draw its characteristics or constructs for comparison from visionary leadership theory.
Visionary leadership is recognized as a companion to charismatic leadership.

World Vision Ministries International.
I,founder :W V M I/7/8/1996 in the Bahamas Nassau.Sammy D.James/president
Topics include/Conference will cost us 300.000 US Dollars please helpong us.November 7 8 9 10/2009.
1.World Vision Ministries International. vision for development in the 21st Century

2. Technology and development in the world

3. Christianity and leadership - must Christians be leaders?

4. Political leadership in the world

5. Globalization effects on Africa,Caribbean,America Latin,North,South,central America.Europe.

6. Youth leadership and entrepreneurship

7. Aid and poverty reduction strategies

8. Visionary and role model leadership

9. Economics of developing Africa,America,

10. Role of Christianity in developing Africa,Caribbean,America Latin

whoever create law created standard by,Dr Sammy D.James

Philosophy,Law,Values and Moral.Those control culture.Culture is life style of the people.the way people act,dress,food,music,sport,art,and so on.Is the result of the values,the values is the result of the moral,standing.The moral standing is the law steak.1-influence-control/2-philosophy-belief/3-law-standards/4-values-establish worth/5-moral standards-social behavior/6-culture-life style/7-community-corporate expression.If you want to control a community,you have to control a culture,then you have to control the moral standards and the values,and philosiphy and the government influence.Other word you have no control.The community become a society.Society-social relations.Whoever control a community,control a nations.What are moral values.Moral values are the standards of good and evil, which govern an individual’s behavior and choices. Individual’s morals may derive from society and government, religion, or self. When moral values derive from society and government they, of necessity, may change as the laws and morals of the society change. An example of the impact of changing laws on moral values may be seen in the case of marriage vs. “living together.
In past generations, it was rare to see couples who lived together without the benefit of a legal matrimonial ceremony. In recent years, couples that set up household without marriage are nearly as plentiful as traditional married couples. But, not only are such couples more plentiful, they are also more accepted by other individuals in our society. In earlier society, the laws and morals simply came from the Roman system of law, which was largely based on the Ten Commandments. As society moved into the modern era, that earlier system of laws became more and more eroded.
Moral values also derive from within one’s own self. This is clearly demonstrated in the behavior of older infants and young toddlers. If a child has been forbidden to touch or take a certain object early on, they know enough to slowly look over their shoulder to see if they are being observed before touching said object. There is no need for this behavior to be taught; it is instinctive. Once, however, any form of discipline is applied to modify the child’s behavior, the child now gains the capacity within himself to distinguish his right behavior from his wrong behavior. Now, the child can make correct choices based on his own knowledge. The choices that are made by an individual from childhood to adulthood are between forbidden and acceptable, kind or cruel, generous or selfish. A person may, under any given set of circumstances, decide to do what is forbidden. If this individual possesses moral values, going against them usually produces guilt.
Religion is another source of moral values. Most religions have built-in lists of do’s and don’ts, a set of codes by which its adherents should live. Individuals who are followers of a particular religion will generally make a show of following that religion’s behavioral code. It is interesting to note that these codes may widely vary; a person whose religion provides for polygamy will experience no guilt at having more than one spouse while adherents to other religions feel they must remain monogamous.
Christianity goes beyond all other religions in that it is more than just a system of do’s and don’ts; it is a relationship with the living God through His Son, Jesus Christ. A Christian’s set of moral values go beyond society’s mores and selfish instincts. Christians ideally behave correctly because they love God and want to please Him. This is at once a high calling and a low position. It is a high calling because God has required that all who love Him should keep His commandments; therefore it is an act of obedience. John 14:15 says, "If you love me, you will obey what I command.” It is a low position because we must totally deny our own will to do what pleases the Lord. Christ Jesus as He lived His life on earth is our supreme example; if we pattern our behavior after Him then our lives are most valuable. John 15:10 says, “If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love.
Our Moral Values. We came together because of our moral values: care and responsibility, fairness and equality, freedom and courage, fulfillment in life, opportunity and community, cooperation and trust, honesty and openness. We united behind political principles: equality, equity (if you work for a living, you should earn a living) and government for the people--all the people.
These are traditional American values and principles, what we are proudest of in this country. The Democrats' failure was a failure to put forth our moral vision, celebrate our values and principles, and shout them out loud.
We must immediately convince our leaders to unite behind these values, express our common moral vision and hold the line against the leaders with out vision because it is immoral! leader will call them obstructionists. They must frame themselves as heading in the right direction, going forward not backward, defending the greatest of American ideals and moral principles, working against a radical right agenda that would lead our country to disaster and speaking for more than millions highly moral, patriotic Americans.
If we communicate our values clearly, most people will recognize them as their own, personally more authentic and more deeply American than those put forth by conservatives. At the very least they will see progressives as having deeply held, traditional American principles. This would be a huge step forward from the present state, in which conservatives are seen as having a monopoly on "values" and progressives are framed as the party of "if it feels good, do it," with no higher principles.
Moral values at the national level are idealized family values projected onto the nation. Progressive values are the values of a responsible nurturant family, where parents (if there are two) are equally responsible. Their job is to nurture their children and raise them to be nurturers of others. Nurturance has two aspects: empathy and responsibility--both for yourself and your children. From this, all progressive values follow, both in the family and in politics.
If you empathize with your children, you will want them to have strong protection, fair and equal treatment and fulfillment in life. Fulfillment requires freedom, freedom requires opportunity and opportunity requires prosperity. Since your family lives in, and requires, a community, community building and community service are required. Community requires cooperation, which requires trust, which requires honesty and open communication. Those are the progressive values--in politics as well as family life.
Take protection. In addition to physical protection, there is environmental protection, worker protection and consumer protection, as well as all the "safety nets"--Social Security, Medicare and so on. Equality means full political and social equality, without regard to wealth, race, religion or gender. Openness requires open government and a free, inquiring press. Progressive political ideals are nurturant moral ideals.
On the other hand, the strict-father family model assumes that evil and danger will always lurk in the world, that life is difficult, that there will always be winners and losers and that children are born bad--they want to do what feels good, not what's right--and have to be made good. A strict father is needed to protect and support the family and to teach his kids right from wrong. That can be done in only one way: punishment painful enough that, to avoid it, children will learn the internal discipline necessary to be moral. That discipline can also make them prosperous if they seek their self-interest and no one interferes. Mommy isn't strong enough to protect the family and is too soft-hearted to discipline the children. That's why fathers are necessary.
Apply this, via metaphor, to the nation: We need a strong President who knows right from wrong to defend the nation. Social programs are immoral because they give people things they haven't earned and so make them undisciplined--both dependent and less able to function morally. The prosperous people are the good people. Those who are not prosperous deserve their poverty. Taxes take away the rightful rewards of the prosperous. Wrongdoers should be punished severely. Government should get out of the way of disciplined (hence good) people seeking their self-interest. The President is to be obeyed; since he knows right from wrong, his authority is legitimate and not to be questioned. In foreign policy, he is also the absolute moral authority and so needs no advice from lesser countries.
The so-called "moral issues" are affronts to strict-father morality. Strict-father marriage cannot be gay; it must be between a man and a woman. For a wife to seek an abortion on her own or a daughter to need one is an affront to strict-father control over the behavior of the women in his family. They are not the main moral issues in themselves; rather they are symbolic of the entire strict-father identity as applied to all spheres of life. That's why they are so powerful for conservatives.
Swing voters have both models--in different parts of their lives--and are unsure about which to apply to politics in a particular election. The job of a candidate is to activate his model in the swing voters. Conservatives know this: By talking to their base, they are activating their base model in swing voters. When liberals move to the right, they are shooting themselves in both feet: They alienate their base and they activate the other side's models in the swing voters, thus helping the other side.
we need to understand this. They must hold their ground, be positive and be aware that moving to the right is a double disaster. It will only help the radical right's agenda, break with values that unify us and make it harder to awaken our values in swing voters.
The only way to trump their moral values is with our own more traditional and more patriotic moral values. Proclaim them and live them, and we will find that there are many more than millions of us.
The Truth About "Moral Values.
Moral Values Versus Christian Theology
We hear a lot of talk about moral values, but we hear very little about what those two words actually mean. We hear that they express the fundamentalist Christian positions of anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and anti-stem cell research, but are these positions actually moral values? Let's ask and answer three questions:
Question One -- What Are Moral Values:
Consider these possible definitions of "moral values:"
Universally accepted, compassionate, loving, Christ-like principles -- Ethical and honorable ways to relate of others -- The practice of encouraging unity, harmony and brotherhood -- The principles and modes of behavior taught by Jesus (as written in the Christian Bible.)
Moral = Webster's Dictionary defines "moral" as: Relating to, dealing with, or capable of making the distinction between right or wrong conduct -- Principles, standards habits with respect to right or wrong in conduct.
Values = Webster's Dictionary defines "values" as: The social principles, goals or standards held or accepted by an individual, a class, a society, etc.
Right = Webster's Dictionary defines "right" as: In accordance with fact, reason, justice, law, and morality; correct in thought and action; Synonyms for right include: correct, honest, ethical, just, true, accurate, precise, suitable, fitting, appropriate, proper.
Wrong = Webster's Dictionary defines "right" as: Contrary to fact or reason, unlawful, crooked, twisted, immoral, improper; Synonyms for wrong include: dishonest, illegal, mistaken , criminal, unethical, sinful, unsuitable, inappropriate improper, incorrect, injurious, harmful, damaging, unjust.
Define Moral Values Define Moral Values ...

It seems fair to boil the definition of moral values down to:

Beliefs and personal opinions about:

1) what is right (honest, ethical, true) conduct and

2) what is wrong (dishonest, false, harmful) conduct

held by individuals and held collectively by socially cohesive groups of individuals.

The Opposite of Moral Values.

It also seems safe to say that moral values would likely exclude things like:

Intentional Deception:°

Lies of omission (deceiving others by omitting the truth)

Peddling half-truths as if they were the whole truth,

Peddling half-lies as if they were the whole truth,

Distorting the truth,


Ignoring or distorting Biblical passages°

Censorship of opposing views°

Using inflammatory rhetoric,°


Egocentric Chauvinism,

Political and sexual repression,

Heterosexual and homosexual hypocrisy,

Religious and racial bigotry,


Oppression of women,

Political tyranny and subjugation,

Disregard for the rights and beliefs of others


Anti-social and Criminal Behavior:

Inciting to riot,

Intimidation,

Harassment,


Invasion of privacy,

Threats,

Assault against persons, reputations, and property,


Secret criminal behavior

Violence,

Vandalism,


Arson, and

Murder.

The above list is a
compilation of known behavior
patterns condoned, supported, and/or
entered into by the forced motherhood leaders.
Morality is a system of principles or rules of conduct to which humans conform. Presently our “wider culture” exemplifies the debasement of rules of conduct with little common agreement as to what rules or principles we should be following.
Beliefs, Values, Morals, Ethics
This is something I picked up at the police academy a decade and a half ago that has been really valuable. I wish I knew who to attribute it to, because it is a good tool.
The concept is: Each individual has a heirarchy of right and wrong. This hierarchy is individual and idiosyncratic and each level depends on the level below it.
BELIEFS are those things you hold to be true.
Given those beliefs your estimation of the relative importance of the "true things" are your VALUES.
MORALS are a generalized feeling, based on your values, of what is 'right' and 'wrong'.
ETHICS arise when you try to codify your morals in concrete terms.
Couple of caveats- these definitions are specific to this system. Ethics and morals are greek and latin translations of each other and are pretty much synonyms in common usage. This also can look kind of fuzzy given the system in four little lines. Bear with me a minute.
So a couple of examples (following does not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the author, me):
I belief that all life is sacred."
However, I value human life more than animal."
It is wrong to take human life and sort of wrong to kill animals."
Thou shalt not kill people, and you should only butcher animals where I can't see it.
A change at the Value level creates a different person:
"I believe that all life is sacred."
"I value all life equally."
"Taking any life for any reason is wrong."
Meat is murder!
The power in this as a tool is to realize in any disagreement where the fundamental difference lies and to understand that you CAN NOT convince anyone who disagrees from a basic level with arguments from a more abstract level. If the issue is a difference of morals (an intuitive judgment of right and wrong), you won't be able to convince them with an ethical (a logical, legalistic, code) argument. If someone doesn't value life at all, it does no good to argue what type of life is most valuable.
If you run into a PETA member who honestly feels that humans and animals are of equal value, you will never convince this person with a moral or ethical argument. You would literally need to shift their values and it will be easiest to do that by clarifying their beliefs:
If all life is sacred, does that mean that nothing should ever be allowed to die?" or "Is this a personal preferance or a natural law, because it seems to me that in nature, every animal dies..."or "If all life is sacred are the natural acts of life, such as a carnivore killing and eating, also sacred?" Lots of people have never thought through their beliefs at this level and sometimes there's a good amount of self-discovery in talking at this level. Will it change 'em? Not always.
You see this problem in some of the most intractable arguments in modern politics. Abortion, from the pro-choice arguments, is largely a moral issue: It is wrong for any person to tell someone else what they can not or must do to or with their own body. It is based on a deeper value of autonomy, possibly tinged with a sense of injustice that women had almost no reproductive rights for much of recorded history and that is based on a deeper belief that controlling someone else's body IS slavery.
The core belief of the pro-life lobby is that the fetus IS a baby. Not a potential life, not a piece of tissue, but a baby. From that belief the next step (value) is simple, weighing the life of a child over a change in the woman's life-style. Balancing the murder of an innocent baby against the ease and freedom of being childless.
The distinction I find it useful to make between morals and ethics is that morals are the rules of behavior toward G-d while ethics are the rules of behavior toward other human beings. Some behaviors fall into both categories, of course.
This only works inside my head, though, as most people don't think about morals and ethics this way.
As I think about the definition of moral belief, I struggle a bit.
Although we all have a sense of what is or isn't "moral", I think there are many variations on that theme, depending on the person.
As far as "beliefs"? Wow! I'll bet you could line up ten people, ask them about the same basic issue and end up with ten different ideas on what they believe to be truth.
I suppose a good place for the definition of moral belief is to begin with the dictionary.
HyperDictionary.com says moral is: "concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles", also, "arising from the sense of right and wrong".
Belief is described as: "a vague idea in which some confidence is placed".
Definition of Moral Belief
Getting Beyond the Dictionary
So, your moral beliefs are your vague ideas on which you base your principles of right and wrong.
Maybe the dictionary wasn't the best place to go on this
issue.
I never really thought a dictionary definition of your moral beliefs would help, anyway. I look at this in more of a spirituality sense - striving for your own spiritual enlightenment.
It's a personal issue where you and I both must be able to, based on our own sense of right and wrong, live by a moral code that allows for inner peace, acceptance, and a sense of calm.
Definition of Moral Belief
Develop Beliefs That Are Truly Yours
As you can see from my belief system article, many of your beliefs aren't actually yours. Be sure that whatever you believe to be moral is really something you came up with as opposed to just accepting the views of those around you.
Your moral beliefs are essentially what your character is built upon.
They can't be vague ideas of what you think may be right or wrong. Morally speaking, you need to have a firm grasp here.
Definition of Moral Belief
Add Value to Others
Your moral belief system is what allows you to interact with others. Depending on your views on the subject, this is what will either allow you to be a benefit to those around you or a hindrance.
If you feel it's morally right to lie, cheat, and steal from others, what are you contributing? What legacy are you leaving behind? What value are you adding?
If your definition of moral belief is one where you live a life of honesty and trustworthiness, now we see a different picture open up.
When you treat others with dignity and know how to contribute valuable information and emotions, you're a person that's uplifting to be around. You're a person adding value to life.
You're getting closer to spiritual enlightenment.
Definition of Moral Belief
Becoming Spiritually Wealthy
Although everyone may have varying degrees of what is correct and acceptable in regards to moral beliefs, if you're seeking inner peace and abundance, there's isn't much wiggle room.
You can't feel it's morally right to hurt others and expect abundance in return.
This is the spiritual aspect I mentioned earlier. Sure, there's examples of people who amass great wealth by hurting, murdering, or cheating others. Spiritually, though, you will never convince me that this person ever reaches peace, or enlightenment.
When you're a person of honor, and morally wealthy, you may not amass as much physical wealth as the morally bankrupt person, but, you'll find that you attract exactly enough abundance to fill you up emotionally, spiritually, and physically.
Definition of Moral Belief
Honor & Spiritual Enlightenment
When your definition of moral belief is aligned with giving, rather than receiving, it's amazing what you end up receiving.
Strive to be a person of character. Strive to achieve your own definition of moral belief that's a bedrock of honor and dignity.
Become spiritually wealthy. Achieve spiritual enlightenment.
Change your life,

Attitudes.

________ Compassion _______ Justice _______ Equity
________ Cooperation _______ Fairness _______ Inclusion
________ Obligation _______ Patience _______ Charity
________ Meekness _______ Optimism _______ Altruism
________ Perseverance _______ Commitment _______ Ethics
_______ Self-discipline _______ Self-respect _______ Tenacity
________ Happiness _______ Wisdom _______ Creativity
________ Achievement _______ Self-actualization _______ Spirituality
________ Social Justice _______ Belonging _______ Empathy
1. Leadership, Values and Attitudes
Regardless about what you think about the future, change is inevitable. For a leader to harness the power of change, he must empower and engage his employees. Superior organizational performance is possible only by understanding personal values, attitudes, and motives.
The transformational leader is defined as one who motivates followers to do more than they originally expected to do. For example, studies have found significant and positive relationships between transformational leadership and the amount of effort followers are willing to exert, job performance, and effectiveness.
Values help determine the attitudes leaders have about themselves and about their followers. These attitudes also bias evaluations – either positive or negative – about people, events or things. Values and attitudes form the very core of personality as they influence the choices people make, the appeals they respond to and the way they invest their time and energy.
Values – a means and an end
Values may affect leaders and leadership in a number of ways. One way to think about values is in terms of means and ends values. As early as 1973, Milton Rokeach defined a value as an enduring belief that a particular mean or end is more socially or individually preferable than another end or mean. After values are developed they act as filters through which deliberation is reduced and choices are made.
Values do not in and of themselves determine what is good or what is bad but provide a standard for individuals to decide what is better or best for him or her. There are two types of values: means and ends. End values are beliefs about the kinds of goals or outcomes that are worth trying to pursue. End values refer to the future, a purpose, which can either be social or individual in focus. World peace and national security are end values. Means values are beliefs about the types of behaviors that are appropriate for reaching goals. Mean values shape the decisions we make whether we go to war or protect our borders. Mean values can also be focused on the greater good (social) or personal (self-preservation).
Each person has a unique combination of means and end values that are used constantly to sort experiences and make future choices. These combinations cluster into what we call a value system. The priority we place on these values is developed with time and experience. This doesn’t mean our decisions get easier or better. It just means we can go along with the results because with time and experience choices seem more right or more wrong.
One of the implications of change management is that leaders need to pay close attention to the ends and the means values of employees if a change is to be effective. Weak value system congruence between an organization and its employees could result in lost productivity and turnover.

Good governnance by Dr Sammy D.James

I think the greatest need on this planet earth is government.Every nation on earth is seeking good government.Manking is searching for good effective,compassionate government.I will ask myself a question,why.Because government has what our mandate is.Government is the source of influence.Gvernment created law.Who ever create law created standard.Dr Sammy D.James.Government should be judged by how well it meets its legitimate objectives. Good government is that which most effectively secures the rights of the people and the fruits of their labor, promotes their happiness, and does their will.I will going back 1809 to help understandind.Christian can,not make a law,but is the responsabilities of the government good government or bads government,because we have more bad government than good government.The reason why we need some visionary christian leaders to make good laws for our nation and for our world.The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." --Thomas Jefferson to Maryland Republicans, 1809. ME 16:359 The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." --Thomas Jefferson to M. van der Kemp, 1812. ME 13:135
The first object of human association [is] the full improvement of their condition. --Thomas Jefferson: Declaration and Protest of Virginia, 1825. ME 17:444
The happiness and prosperity of our citizens... is the only legitimate object of government and the first duty of governors." --Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1811. ME 13:41
The energies of the nation... shall be reserved for improvement of the condition of man, not wasted in his destruction." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Address, 1801. ME 10:248
Here... will be preserved a model of government, securing to man his rights and the fruits of his labor, by an organization constantly subject to his own will." --Thomas Jefferson to William Plumer, 1815. ME 14:237
The freedom and happiness of man... [are] the sole objects of all legitimate government." --Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1810. ME 12:369
The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482
To preserve the peace of our fellow citizens, promote their prosperity and happiness, reunite opinion, cultivate a spirit of candor, moderation, charity and forbearance toward one another, are objects calling for the efforts and sacrifices of every good man and patriot. Our religion enjoins it; our happiness demands it; and no sacrifice is requisite but of passions hostile to both." --Thomas Jefferson: to Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262
All religions are equally independent here, our laws knowing no distinction of country, of classes among individuals and with nations, our [creed] is justice and reciprocity." --Thomas Jefferson to the Emperor of Morocco, 1803. ME 19:136
he Necessity of Society and Government
Society is necessary to [man's] happiness and even existence." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law, 1814. ME 14:142
It will be said that great societies cannot exist without government." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XI, 1782. ME 2:129
Without society, and a society to our taste, men are never contented." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1786. ME 6:17
It is a problem, not clear in my mind, that [a society without government, as among our Indians] is not the best. But I believe it to be inconsistent with any great degree of population." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:64
A Society's Self-determination
"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory, as we do persons infected with disease." --Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816. ME 15:28
Individuals are parts only of a society, subject to the laws of a whole." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:456, Papers 15:393
Society [has] a right to erase from the roll of its members any one who rendered his own existence inconsistent with theirs; to withdraw from him the protection of their laws, and to remove him from among them by exile, or even by death if necessary."--Thomas Jefferson to L. H. Girardin, 1815. ME 14:277
Every people may establish what form of government they please, and change it as they please, the will of the nation being the only thing essential." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1792. ME 1:330
[The proposal to establish a new] form of government... is a work of the most interesting nature, and such as every individual would wish to have his voice in... Should a bad government be instituted for us in future, it had been as well to have accepted at first the bad one offered to us from beyond the water without the risk and expense of contest." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Nelson, 1776. ME 4:254, Papers 1:292
The provisions we have made [for the support of civil government and the administration of justice] are such as please ourselves; they answer the substantial purposes of government and of justice, and other purposes than these should not be answered." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft, Reply to Lord North, 1775. Papers 1:227
Government Adapted to the People
The excellence of every government is its adaptation to the state of those to be governed by it." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816. ME 14:487
Shall we mould our citizens to the law, or the law to our citizens? And in solving this question their peculiar character is an element not to be neglected." --Thomas Jefferson to John Quincy Adams, 1817. ME 15:145
The laws... which must effect [a people's happiness] must flow from their own habits, their own feelings, and the resources of their own minds. No stranger to these could possibly propose regulations adapted to them. Every people have their own particular habits, ways of thinking, manners, etc., which have grown up with them from their infancy, are become a part of their nature, and to which the regulations which are to make them happy must be accommodated." --Thomas Jefferson to William Lee, 1817. ME 15:101
Such indeed are the different circumstances, prejudices, and habits of different nations, that the constitution of no one would be reconcilable to any other in every point." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:484
Comparison to Governments of Europe
History, in general, only informs us what bad government is." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:223
I sincerely wish you may find it convenient to come here [to Europe]. The pleasure of the trip will be less than you expect, but the utility greater. It will make you adore your own country, its soil, its climate, its equality, liberty, laws, people and manners. My God! how little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy. I confess I had no idea of it myself. While we shall see multiplied instances of Europeans going to live in America, I will venture to say no man now living will ever see an instance of an American removing to settle in Europe and continuing there. Come then and see the proofs of this, and on your return add your testimony to that of every thinking American, in order to satisfy our countrymen how much it is their interest to preserve uninfected by contagion those peculiarities in their government and manners to which they are indebted for these blessings." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1785. ME 5:21, Papers 8:233
Though there is less wealth [in my native country than in Europe], there is more freedom, more ease, and less misery." --Thomas Jefferson to Baron Geismer, 1785. ME 5:129, Papers 8:500
While the great mass of the people [in Europe] are thus suffering under physical and moral oppression, I have endeavored to examine more nearly the condition of the great, to appreciate the true value of the circumstances in their situation which dazzle the bulk of spectators, and especially to compare it with that degree of happiness which is enjoyed in America by every class of people. Intrigues of love occupy the younger, and those of ambition, the elder part of the great. Conjugal love having no existence among them, domestic happiness, of which that is the basis, is utterly unknown. In lieu of this are substituted pursuits which nourish and invigorate all our bad passions, and which offer only moments of ecstasy amidst days and months of restlessness and torment. Much, very much inferior this to the tranquil permanent felicity with which domestic society in America blesses most of its inhabitants, leaving them to follow steadily those pursuits which health and reason approve, and rendering truly delicious the intervals of these pursuits." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Bellini, 1785. ME 5:152, Papers 8:568
The Form of Government Must be Right
It is difficult to conceive how so good a people, with so good a King [as Louis XVI of France], so well-disposed rulers in general, so genial a climate, so fertile a soil, should be rendered so ineffectual for producing human happiness by one single curse--that of a bad form of government. But it is a fact; in spite of the mildness of their governors, the people are ground to powder by the vices of the form of government. Of twenty millions of people supposed to be in France, I am of opinion there are nineteen millions more wretched, more accursed in every circumstance of human existence than the most conspicuously wretched individual of the whole United States." --Thomas Jefferson to Elizabeth Trist, 1785. ME 5:81, Papers 8:568
To constrain the brute force of the people, [the European governments] deem it necessary to keep them down by hard labor, poverty and ignorance, and to take from them, as from bees, so much of their earnings, as that unremitting labor shall be necessary to obtain a sufficient surplus to sustain a scanty and miserable life." --Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:440
I am astonished at some people's considering a kingly government as a refuge. Advise such to read the fable of the frogs who solicited Jupiter for a king. If that does not put them to rights, send them to Europe, to see something of the trappings of monarchy, and I will undertake that every man shall go back thoroughly cured. If all the evils which can arise among us from the republican form of government, from this day to the day of judgment, could be put into a scale against what [France] suffers from its monarchical form in a week, or England in a month, the latter would preponderate." --Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Hawkins, 1787. ME 6:232
A more rational government [is] one in which the will of the people should have... a moderating and salutary influence." --Thomas Jefferson to William Bentley, 1815. ME 14:364
[Ours is] a government founded in the will of its citizens, and directed to no object but their happiness." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to North Carolina General Assembly, 1808. ME 16:300
The only condition on earth to be compared with ours, in my opinion, is that of the Indian, where they have still less law than we. The European, are governments of kites over pigeons." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Rutledge, 1787. ME 6:251
It is a misfortune that [our countrymen] do not sufficiently know the value of their constitutions, and how much happier they are rendered by them, than any other people on earth by the governments under which they live." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1787. ME 6:322
But Not Too Much Government
[Some] seem to think that [civilization's] advance has brought on too complicated a state of society, and that we should gain in happiness by treading back our steps a little way. I think, myself, that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. I believe it might be much simplified to the relief of those who maintain it." --Thomas Jefferson to William Ludlow, 1824. ME 16:75
Government as well as religion has furnished its schisms, its persecutions, and its devices for fattening idleness on the earnings of the people." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Clay, 1815. ME 14:233
When we consider that this government is charged with the external and mutual relations only of these States; that the States themselves have principal care of our persons, our property and our reputation, constituting the great field of human concerns, we may well doubt whether our organization is not too complicated, too expensive; whether offices and officers have not been multiplied unnecessarily and sometimes injuriously to the service they were meant to promote." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Annual Message, 1801. ME 3:331
It is not by the consolidation, or concentration of powers, but by their distribution, that good government is effected." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:122
Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:122
Anarchy [is] necessarily consequent to inefficiency." --Thomas Jefferson to George Mason, 1790. ME 8:35
We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:39
We are now vibrating between too much and too little government, and the pendulum will rest finally in the middle." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Smith, 1788. FE 5:3
A just mean [would be] a government of laws addressed to the reason of the people and not to their weaknesses." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, 1793. ME 9:13
Energetic Government
It has been said... that our governments, both federal and particular, want energy; that it is difficult to restrain both individuals and States from committing wrong. This is true, and it is an inconvenience. On the other hand, that energy which absolute governments derive from an armed force, which is the effect of the bayonet constantly held at the breast of every citizen, and which resembles very much the stillness of the grave, must be admitted also to have its inconveniences. We weigh the two together and like best to submit to the former. Compare the number of wrongs committed with impunity by citizens among us with those committed by the sovereign in other countries, and the last will be found most numerous, most oppressive on the mind, and most degrading of the dignity of man." --Thomas Jefferson: Answers to de Meusnier Questions, 1786. ME 17:122
I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. It places the governors indeed more at their ease, at the expense of the people." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. (Forrest version) ME 6:391
I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the laws, would fly to the standard of the law and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:319
Let this be the distinctive mark of an American that in cases of commotion, he enlists himself under no man's banner, inquires for no man's name, but repairs to the standard of the laws. Do this, and you need never fear anarchy or tyranny. Your government will be perpetual." --Thomas Jefferson: Manuscript, 1801? FE 8:1
Although a republican government is slow to move, yet when once in motion, its momentum becomes irresistible." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis C. Gray, 1815. ME 14:270 A free government is of all others the most energetic." --Thomas Jefferson to John Dickinson, 1801. ME 10:217
Prescription for Good Government
A good administration in a republican government,... securing to us our dearest rights and the practical enjoyment of all our liberties,... can never fail to give consolation to the friends of free government, and mortification to its enemies." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Rhode Island Republicans, 1809. ME 16:354
A... chief [executive] strictly limited, the right of war vested in the legislative body, a rigid economy of the public contributions and absolute interdiction of all useless expenses will go far towards keeping the government honest and unoppressive." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. (*) ME 15:491
A noiseless course, not meddling with the affairs of others, unattractive of notice, is a mark that society is going on in happiness. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, 1802. ME 10:342
To us [is committed] the important task of proving by example that a government, if organized in all its parts on the representative principle, unadulterated by the infusion of spurious elements, if founded not in the fears and follies of man but on his reason, on his sense of right, on the predominance of the social over his dissocial passions, may be so free as to restrain him in no moral right and so firm as to protect him from every moral wrong." --Thomas Jefferson to Amos Marsh, 1801. ME 10:292
This I hope will be the age of experiments in government, and that their basis will be founded in principles of honesty, not of mere force." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1796. FE 7:56
The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest." --Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774. ME 1:209, Papers 1:134
With all [our] blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:320
Our wish... is, that the public efforts may be directed honestly to the public good, that peace be cultivated, civil and religious liberty unassailed, law and order preserved, equality of rights maintained, and that state of property, equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry, or that of his fathers." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural, 1805. ME 3:382
In many Commonwealth jurisdictions, the phrase "peace, order and good government" is an expression used in law to express the legitimate objects of legislative powers conferred by statute. The phrase appears in many Imperial Acts of Parliament and Letters Patent, most notably the constitutions of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia and, formerly, New Zealand.bahamas,trinidad and tobago, barbados,etc.
Sociological value
Despite its technical purpose, the phrase “peace, order and good government” has also become meaningful to Canadians. This tripartite motto is sometimes said to define Canadian values in a way comparable to “liberté, égalité, fraternité” (liberty, equality, fraternity) in France or “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in the United States. Indeed, peace, order and good government has been used by some scholars to make broad characterizations of Canada's political culture. US sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, for example, contrasted POGG with the American tripartite motto to conclude Canadians generally believe in a higher degree of deference to the law.Be in peace with every one.God bless you all.Dr Sammy D.James

Life Without Purpose is a Life Without Destination by.Dr,Sammy

Purpose provides a vision that leads you to a vocation rather than to a mere job. It provides for passion and meaning to replace tedium and aimlessness. The question “Why Am I Here?” goes much deeper than finding what career is best for you. Finding a purpose is ultimately a spiritual endeavor because it involves a process of connecting .Dreams and goals are one of the most important things in life. Without a destination the trip has every little value, but what happens when you achieve a goal? You have reached the place you want to be, you have the job you wanted, or the family you dreamed of or even the toy you saved for. Almost immediately you realize that there are more goals more dreams. This job is good, but you want to be better at it, and you never get to spend enough time with your family, even the toys seem like distractions now.
The life without money
Today, I went to work in the morning, found I forget my wallet at home. I had to lend money (1 U S D) from the provide assistant of the traffic. When I got on the bus, I began to think over how can I spend the whole day without money.
Then I understand , maybe I need not money in the life. I can have breakfast and lunch in the company, because it supplied for free, if I don’t eat snack or sweets, I can keep fit. So forget the purse, it is unrelated with happiness.
Love , happiness kindly are all the wealth of my life, money is one of them, but take it care and others will get more.

All our desires point toward one goal, one destination: JOY"
Right about now, many people are wondering what to do with themselves, their lives. You may be one of those people -- asking what is life is all about? What is my purpose in life? My answer to you is that your purpose in life is simply, "to be happy! Have joy!" Because if you are not happy, not content with your existence, you cannot offer assistance to any other person or thing!
Simple Rules for Happiness and Joy" offers a step-by-step method for starting up the happiness ladder today. No matter what your current situation, you are there because of your past beliefs."Simple Rules for Happiness and Joy" will show you how you got to where you're at, and, without blame or guilt, show you how to tap in to your inner strengths to begin shaping your happy and abundant future and to create, right now, your Destination: Joy!
The quest for answers continues and expands- perhaps more so now in these days of world turmoil than ever before. But consider this: When hasn’t there been turmoil? When has the world been completely peaceful, completely happy, completely still? The answer is"never!" Yet, in spite of one crisis or another throughout all of history, people have been happy, people have had joy in their lives -- and you can be happy too, no matter what your circumstance. You can create your Joy sooner than you ever thought possible.
The purpose of the ministry of Purpose & Potential Christian Arts Academy is to expose students to the Gospel while educating, motivating, encouraging, nurturing, and disciplining them to live righteously and become productive, successful individuals. Jesus Christ is the center of all that we engage in spiritually, academically, socially and physically. (Deut. 6:1-9; Prov. 6:20; 22:6; 29:17; Eph. 6:4). The school’s role is one of assisting parents with God-given responsibilities. Therefore, Purpose & Potential Christian Arts Academy offers a program of education that will allow students to:
possess an established faith in God as Creator, Redeemer, and Provider
live a life of obedience and excellence for the glory of God
possess high academic personal standards reaching to his/her full academic potential
master the fundamental processes in communicating: reading, writing, speaking, listening and mathematics
think critically, creatively, and constructively
be an independent and lifelong learner
proficiently engage in discussion on current events in the community, the nation, and the world
have an appreciation of the fine arts
possess a scientific understanding of God's creation
attend and serve a local church
consistently practice biblical principles within all relationships
The purpose of education is to impart knowledge in order to prepare students for life. The primary responsibility for the education of the child lies with the parents. The interaction of the parents, church, and school forges values and practices that can last throughout the child's life. The Christian school partners with the parent in establishing an orderly and structured setting for learning to take place. Christian education seeks to encourage the students to view the acquisition of knowledge within a worldview that is consistent with the home and church experience of the student.
Purpose & Potential Christian Arts Academy is primarily a ministry and secondly an educational institution. The Bible is the main focus and is the standard by which we educate and train our children.
For the reverence and fear of God are basic to all wisdom. Knowing God results in every other kind of understanding.” Proverbs 9:10 (TLB)
Noah Webster said it best: “Education is useless without the Bible.”
President Theodore Roosevelt said, “To educate a child in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society.”
Academic strength united with Biblical truths in education is not only a solid tradition of the world past, but is the key to the world future
1. WE BELIEVE the Bible to be the inspired, the only infallible, authoritative, inerrant Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21).
2. WE BELIEVE that there is one God, eternally existent in three persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Genesis 1:1; Matthew 28:19; John 10:30).
3. WE BELIEVE in the deity of Christ (John 10:30): His virgin birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:35); His sinless life (Hebrews 4:15; Hebrews 7:26); His miracles (John 2:11); His vicarious and atoning death (1 Corinthians 15:3; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 2:9); His resurrection (John 11:25; 1 Corinthians 15:4); His Ascension to the right hand of the Father (Mark 16:19); and His personal return in power and glory (Acts 1:11; Revelations 19:11).
4. WE BELIEVE in the absolute necessity of regeneration of the Holy Spirit for salvation because of the exceeding sinfulness of human nature. People are justified on the single ground of faith in the shed blood of Christ and that only by God’s grace and through faith alone are we saved (John 3:16-19; Romans 3:23; Romans 5:8-9; Ephesians 2:8-10; Titus 3:5).
5. WE BELIEVE in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost. They that are saved unto the resurrection of life, and they that are lost unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:28-29).
6. WE BELIEVE in the spiritual unity of believers in our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 12:12-13; Galatians 3:26-28).
7. WE BELIEVE in the present ministry of the Holy Spirit, by whose indwelling the Christian is enabled to live a godly life (Romans 8:13-14; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; Ephesians 4:30; Ephesians 5:18).

The principle to increase by,Dr Sammy D.James

The principle to increase in prosperity is to always be gathering. There is no reason why a person should ever stop. This does not mean that we should be miserly, trying to accumulate more and more to hold, but that our thought should so enlarge that it can not help gathering more and more, even though with the other hand, we are ever distributing that which we gather. Indeed, the only reason for having is that we may give out of that which we have. We’re here to be a conduit of abundance in expression.
The key to meaningful life is in enlarging our thought. We can never stand still in our thought. Either we will be growing or else we will be going back. As we can attract to ourselves only what we first have a mental likeness of, it follows that if we wish to attract larger things we must provide larger thoughts. This enlarging of consciousness is so necessary that too much cannot be said about it. Expansion or enlarging of consciousness is for the purpose of becoming and of course having and experiencing more.
Today well-lived makes for a better tomorrow.
No one knows what tomorrow brings.
Into the '90's and 21st century, the meaning of
prosperity has gone beyond material wealth.
What is your measure of prosperity? Material wealth
may not always equate to emotional and spiritual
well being and happiness. The expensive things
you surround yourself with does not mean an
atmosphere of warmth and happiness. At times,
these possessions emit a coldness and the
unspoken words: Touch me not.
The measure of prosperity embraces the total
well being of a person, the mind-body-spirit
connection. The obvious signs of material prosperity
does not necessarily mean a happy and fulfilled life.
A hectic social life may be just an excuse to stay away
from a cold house, devoid of laughter and good cheers.
One may have all the money, yet lives with that nagging
feeling of emptiness, restlessness and even boredom.
There is a void that can not be filled.
It is documented that money does not buy happiness.
Some are content with being able to meet their basic
needs. They may never have ventured outside
their towns, but with the advent of television, and
the internet, they are aware of what's happening around
the world. They are happy.
Do they feel prosperous? They are blessed with peace
and serenity. They enjoy the company of family and
friends. A Sunday drive around the country and a
stop at the fast food place warms their hearts and
they feel content with their modest lifestyle.
Less is more. Those who subscribe to this belief
find contentment with what they have and not fret
over what they don't have. Often it is the pain of
not being able to meet the "want" list that leave
people in misery. To fulfill this list, many go into
unnecessary debt for temporary gratification and
more misery when debt piles up.
Look at problems objectively, worry is not a solution
but a hindrance. Living within your means and be
contented with what you have is more peaceful than
go through sleepless nights worrying about spending
money you don't have for things you don't need.
Good and loving family relationships- this is wealth.
Health of mind, body and spirit is wealth. Indulge in what
adds to your prosperity and well being such as: reading,
writing, music, meditation, walk in the woods,
sitting in the park, cooking,
gardening and visiting relatives and friends.
Share a few laughs with friends in the backyard
or wherever is convenient.
You have a demanding career, learn to take time to do
these things. The almighty dollar is not the ultimate
measure of your prosperity and abundance .
As a prosperity Pastor, I’m excited about answering the essential question "What is prosperity?" You know, it's taken me years to get clear about its meaning, because the ways in which we define language change as we change.
As a young man in north bahamas , I had a significantly different idea about prosperity back then, as I do now. And there's something I want to point out before I go any further, and that is we're not talking about some rigid dictionary meaning here, but a fluid and evolving understanding of the power of language to define your self.
In other words, I’m going to share what prosperity means to me, but I don't want you to take it as anything other than my opinion. Instead, I'd encourage you to define or even redefine prosperity for yourself. Because, after all, it's what you think that makes the difference.
I think it's fair to say that bahamian culture has essentially equated getting rich with being prosperous. In fact, there's a strange irony when you consider that while much of the world believes the United States to be extraordinarily affluent, the hard statistics show that we are currently facing record-setting national debt and personal bankruptcy. It's about time for new meanings and new methods.
The dictionary defines prosperity as: The state of being successful, thriving or wealthy. And there you have it. If you remember anything at all from this episode, let it be this: Prosperity is not something you have, it's something you are. By definition, it's a state of being rather than in amassing of what you can buy, or store, or covet or lose.
To be prosperous is about merit, not material. To be successful is to enjoy personal power, not purchasing power. And to be a wealthy is to be healthy and whole; to have a presence about you, and to own your own brilliance, your own joy and to be fully autonomous, fully free to pursue the happiness you seek.
It seems that the ways in which my ideas about prosperity have changed is not so much a function of aging as it is of maturing. By that I mean that how I define success is more holistic than ever before. And I’m curious if the same thing isn't true for you. Do you feel successful when you are tired and stressed out and overwhelmed? Does what you have in the bank ever make a difference when you get to that burned out stage?
Yours truly was the poster boys for the Superman . By the age of 17, I’d started my third business, was deep in the throes of an eight year do-it-yourself remodel, all while taking courses and doing volunteer work. My motto was “If it is to be, it's up to me." Everyday I got up and lived my list. But no more! Now I get up and live my life. I choose the sweetness of being human over the habitual desire to do more.
And the thing is that choosing your self is the key that unlocks what's possible. When you are willing to stop getting and stop going, you have an invaluable, precious opportunity to uncover the reasons why you put yourself last. It's a journey; a long and winding path from merely surviving to really thriving. Welcome, you're not alone…
It was Earl Nightingale who said “We must be the epitome, the embodiment, of success. We must radiate success before it will come to us. We must first become mentally, from an attitude standpoint, the people we wish to become."
Until next time, I leave you with abundant peace.

THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM

If our poverty were due to famine or earthquake or war—if we lacked material things and the resources to produce them, we could not expect to find the Means to Prosperity except in hard work, abstinence, and invention. In fact, our predicament is notoriously of another kind. It comes from some failure in the immaterial devices of the mind, in the working of the motives which should lead to the decisions and acts of will, necessary to put in movement the resources and technical means we already have. It is as though two motor-drivers, meeting in the middle of a highway, were unable to pass one another because neither knows the rule of the road. Their own muscles are no use; a motor engineer cannot help them; a better road would not serve. Nothing is required and nothing will avail, except a little, a very little, clear thinking.
See, too, our problem is not a human problem of muscles and endurance. It is not an engineering problem or an agricultural problem. It is not even a business problem, if we mean by business those calculations and dispositions and organising acts by which individual entrepreneurs can better themselves. Nor is it a banking problem, if we mean by banking those principles and methods of shrewd judgement by which lasting connections are fostered and unfortunate commitments avoided. On the contrary, it is, in the strictest sense, an economic problem, or, to express it better,[Pg 6] as suggesting a blend of economic theory with the art of statesmanship, a problem of Political Economy.
I call attention to the nature of the problem, because it points us to the nature of the remedy. It is appropriate to the case that the remedy should be found in something which can fairly be called a device. Yet there are many who are suspicious of devices, and instinctively doubt their efficacy. There are still people who believe that the way out can only be found by hard work, endurance, frugality, improved business methods, more cautious banking, and, above all, the avoidance of devices. But the lorries of these people will never, I fear, get by. They may stay up all night, engage more sober chauffeurs, install new engines, and widen the road; yet they will never get by, unless they stop to think and work out with the driver opposite a small device by which each moves simultaneously a little to his left.
It is the existing situation which we should find paradoxical. There is nothing paradoxical in the suggestion that some immaterial adjustment—some change, so to speak, “on paper”—should be capable of working wonders. The paradox is to be found in 250,000 building operatives out of work, when more houses are our greatest material need. It is the man who tells us that there is no means, consistent with sound finance and political wisdom, of getting the one to work at the other, whose judgement we should instinctively doubt. The calculations which we ought to suspect are those of the statesman, who, being already burdened with the support of the unemployed, tells us that it would involve him in heavy liabilities, present and to come, which the country cannot afford, if he were to set the men to build the houses; and the sanity to be ques[Pg 7]tioned is his, who thinks it more economical and better calculated to increase the national wealth to maintain unemployed shipbuilders, than to spend a fraction of what their maintenance is costing him, in setting them to build one of the greatest works of man.
When, on the contrary, I show, a little elaborately, as in the ensuing chapter, that to create wealth will increase the national income and that a large proportion of any increase in the national income will accrue to an Exchequer, amongst whose largest outgoings is the payment of incomes to those who are unemployed and whose receipts are a proportion of the incomes of those who are occupied, I hope the reader will feel, whether or not he thinks himself competent to criticise the argument in detail, that the answer is just what he would expect,—that it agrees with the instinctive promptings of his commonsense.
Nor should the argument seem strange that taxation may be so high as to defeat its object, and that, given sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a better chance, than an increase, of balancing the Budget. For to take the opposite view to-day is to resemble a manufacturer who, running at a loss, decides to raise his price, and when his declining sales increase the loss, wrapping himself in the rectitude of plain arithmetic, decides that prudence requires him to raise the price still more;—and who, when at last his account is balanced with nought on both sides, is still found righteously declaring that it would have been the act of a gambler to reduce the price when you were already making a loss.
At any rate, the time seems ripe for reconsidering the possibilities of action. In this belief I here re[Pg 8]examine the advantages of an active policy, beginning with our own domestic affairs and proceeding to the opportunities of the World Conference. This Conference may be well-timed in spite of its delay. For it will come at a season when bitter experience makes the assembled nations readier to consider a plan. The world is less and less disposed “to wait for the miracle”—to believe that things will right themselves without action on our pa
The reluctance to support schemes of capital development at home as a means to restore prosperity is generally based on two grounds—the meagreness of the employment created by the expenditure of a given sum, and the strain on national and local budgets of the subsidies which such schemes usually require. These are quantitative questions not easily answered with precision. But I will endeavour to give reasons for the belief that the answers to both of them are much more favourable than is commonly supposed.
It is often said that it costs £500 capital expenditure on public works to give one man employment for a year. This is based on the amount of labour directly employed on the spot. But it is easy to see that the materials used and the transport required also give employment. If we allow for this, as we should, the capital expenditure per man-year of additional employment is usually estimated, in the case of building for example, at £200.
But if the new expenditure is additional and not merely in substitution for other expenditure, the increase of employment does not stop there. The additional wages and other incomes paid out are spent on additional purchases, which in turn lead to further employment. If the resources of the country were already fully employed, these additional purchases would be mainly reflected in higher prices and increased imports.[Pg 10] But in present circumstances this would be true of only a small proportion of the additional consumption, since the greater part of it could be provided without much change of price by home resources which are at present unemployed. Moreover, in so far as the increased demand for food, resulting from the increased purchasing power of the working classes, served either to raise the prices or to increase the sales of the output of primary producers at home and abroad, we should to-day positively welcome it. It would be much better to raise the price of farm products by increasing the demand for them than by artificially restricting their supply.
Nor have we yet reached the end. The newly employed who supply the increased purchases of those employed on the new capital works will, in their turn, spend more, thus adding to the employment of others; and so on. Some enthusiasts, perceiving the fact of these repercussions, have greatly exaggerated the total result, and have even supposed that the amount of new employment thus created is only limited by the necessary intervals between the receipt of expenditure of income, in other words by the velocity of circulation of money. Unfortunately it is not quite as good as that. For at each stage there is, so to speak, a certain proportion of leakage. At each stage a certain proportion of the increased income is not passed on in increased employment. Some part will be saved by the recipients; some part raises prices and so diminishes consumption elsewhere, except in so far as producers spend their increased profits; some part will be spent on imports; some part is merely a substitution for expenditure previously made out of the dole or private charity or personal savings; and some part may reach the Exchequer without relieving the taxpayer to an equal[Pg 11] extent. Thus in order to sum the net effect on employment of the series of repercussions, it is necessary to make reasonable assumptions as to the proportion lost in each of these ways. I would refer those who are interested in the technique of such summations to an article by Mr. R. F. Kahn published in The Economic Journal, June 1931.
It is obvious that the appropriate assumptions vary greatly according to circumstances. If there were little or no margin of unemployed resources, then, as I have said above, the increased expenditure would largely waste itself in higher prices and increased imports (which is, indeed, a regular feature of the later stages of a boom in new construction). If the dole was as great as a man's earnings when in work and was paid for by borrowing, there would be scarcely any repercussions at all. On the other hand, now that the dole is paid for by taxes and not by borrowing (so that a reduction in the dole may be expected to increase the spending power of the taxpayer), we no longer have to make so large a deduction on this head.
My own estimate, taking very conservative figures in the light of present circumstances, makes the multiplier to be at least 2. It follows that the loan-expenditure per man-year of employment is, not the figure of £500 with which we began, but £100. Since, however, I am anxious not to overstate what will be a sufficiently striking conclusion anyhow, let us take it at 1½, i.e. that two men employed by loan-expenditure lead indirectly to the employment, not of two further men, which represents my own belief, but of one further man. I do not think that anyone who goes through the detailed calculation can bring it out at less than this; which means that additional loan-expenditure of £200 on[Pg 12] materials, transport, and direct employment puts, not one man to work for a year, but—taking account of the whole series of repercussions—one and a half men. This gives us a figure of £133 as the amount of additional loan-expenditure required to-day to stimulate a man-year of employment. But let us, in order to give ourselves a further margin of safety, base our argument on the figure of £150. This answers, most conservatively, the first of our two questions.
Next consider the magnitude of the relief to the Budget. For purposes of broad calculation, the average cost of a man on the dole is usually taken, I think, at £50 a year. Since, on the basis of the above calculation, a loan-expenditure of £3,000,000 will employ at least 20,000 men for a year directly or indirectly, it follows that it will save the dole £1,000,000. Here is one-third of the expenditure already accounted for.
But there is a further benefit to the Budget. The yield of the taxes rises and falls more or less in proportion to the national income. Our budgetary difficulties to-day are mainly due to the decline in the national income. Now for the nation as a whole, leaving on one side transactions with foreigners, its income is exactly equal to its expenditure (including in expenditure both consumption-expenditure and new capital-expenditure, but excluding intermediate exchanges from one hand to another);—the two being simply different names for the same thing, my expenditure being your income. Thus new capital-expenditure of £3,000,000, paid for by an additional loan and not by reducing consumption-expenditure or existing capital-expenditure, increases the national income by more than £3,000,000 if we allow for repercussions. The calculation to obtain the appropriate multiplier is much the same as in the case[Pg 13] of employment; except that it is somewhat greater, since to obtain the national money-income we do not have to make the same deduction for a rise in prices. However, to be on the safe side, let us, as before, take the multiplier as being 1½.
It follows that our capital expenditure of £3,000,000 will increase the national income, subject to taxation, by £4,500,000. Now on the average about 20 per cent of the national income is paid to the Exchequer in taxes. The exact proportion depends on how the new income is distributed between the higher ranges of income subject to direct taxation, and the lower ranges which are touched by indirect taxes; also the yield of some taxes is not closely correlated with changes in national income. To allow for these doubts, let us take the proportion of the new income accruing to the Exchequer at 10 per cent, i.e. £450,000. There will, it is true, be some time-lag in the collection of this, but we need not trouble about that; though it is a powerful argument in favour of proposals for modifying the rigidity of our annual Budget and for making our estimates, on this occasion, cover a longer period than one year. Owing to the time-lag in the effect of increased taxation in reducing the national income our existing budgetary procedure is open to the serious objection that the measures which will balance this Budget are calculated to unbalance the next one; and vice versa.
Thus the total benefit to the Exchequer of an additional loan-expenditure of £3,000,000 is at least £1,000,000 plus £450,000; or, in round figures, £1,500,000, i.e. a half of the loan-expenditure; or two-thirds of it, if we were to take the multiplier as 2. We need see nothing paradoxical in this. We have reached[Pg 14] a point where a considerable proportion of every further decline in the national income is visited on the Exchequer through the agency of the dole and the decline in the yield of the taxes. It is natural, therefore, that the benefit of measures to increase the national income should largely accrue to the Exchequer.

If we apply this reasoning to the projects for loan-expenditure which are receiving support to-day in responsible quarters, we see that it is a complete mistake to believe that there is a dilemma between schemes for increasing employment and schemes for balancing the Budget,—that we must go slowly and cautiously with the former for fear of injuring the latter. Quite the contrary. There is no possibility of balancing the Budget except by increasing the national income, which is much the same thing as increasing employment.
Take, for example, the proposal to spend £7,000,000 on the new Cunarder. I say that this will benefit the Exchequer by at least a half of this sum, i.e. by £3,500,000, which vastly exceeds the maximum aid which is being asked from the Exchequer.
Or take the expenditure of £100,000,000 on housing, whether for rebuilding slums or under the auspices of a National Housing Board, this would benefit the Budget by the vast total of some £50,000,000—a sum far exceeding any needful subsidy. If the mind of the reader boggles at this and he feels that it must be too good to be true, let him recur carefully to the argument which has led up to it. And if he distrusts his own judgement, let him wait and see if any competent person has been able to confound the bases of the argument, where I first offered it coram publico in the forum of The Times.[Pg 15]
Substantially the same argument also applies to a relief of taxation by suspending the Sinking Fund and by returning to the practice of financing by loans those services which can properly be so financed, such as the cost of new roads charged on the Road Fund and that part of the cost of the dole which can be averaged out against the better days for which we must hope. For the increased spending power of the taxpayer will have precisely the same favourable repercussions as increased spending power due to loan-expenditure; and in some ways this method of increasing expenditure is healthier and better spread throughout the community. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer will reduce taxation by £50,000,000 through suspending the Sinking Fund and borrowing in those cases where formerly we thought it reasonable to borrow, the half of what he remits will in fact return to him from the saving on the dole and the higher yield of a given level of taxation;—though, as I have pointed out above, it will not necessarily return to him in the same Budget. I strongly support, therefore, the suggestion which has been made that the next Budget should be divided into two parts, one of which shall include those items of expenditure which it would be proper to treat as loan-expenditure in present circumstances.
I should add that this particular argument does not apply to a relief of taxation balanced by an equal reduction of Government expenditure (by reducing school teachers' salaries, for example); for this represents a redistribution, not a net increase, of national spending power. It is applicable to all additional expenditure made, not in substitution for other expenditure, but out of savings or out of borrowed money, either by private persons or by public authorities, whether for[Pg 16] capital purposes or for consumption made possible by a relief of taxation or in some other way.
It is often pointed out that, when loan-expenditure was on a larger scale as a result of official encouragement, this did not prevent an increase of unemployment. But at that time it was offsetting incompletely an even more rapid deterioration in our foreign balance. The effects of an increase or decrease of £100,000,000 in our loan-expenditure are, broadly speaking, equal to the effects of an increase or decrease of £100,000,000 in our foreign balance. Formerly we had no visible benefit from our loan-expenditure, because it was being offset by a deterioration in our foreign balance. Recently we have had no visible benefit from the improvement in our foreign balance, because it has been offset by the reduction in our loan-expenditure. To-day for the first time it is open to us, if we choose, to have both factors favourable at once.
If these conclusions cannot be refuted, is it not advisable to act upon them? The contrary policy of endeavouring to balance the Budget by impositions, restrictions, and precautions will surely fail, because it must have the effect of diminishing the national spending power, and hence the national income.
People with higher skills levels achieve more at work—they’re more committed, more innovative, more productive, and more confident about taking risks and growing businesses. Low skill levels keep individuals, businesses and the economy on a flat growth curve.
There is a productivity gap between the UK and competitors like France and Germany. Around 20% of that gap is down to the relatively low skills of UK workers. This leads to a low-wage economy, which in turn affects communities in profound ways, including poor health, crime, low aspirations, and lack of engagement.
Skills mean opportunities, choice, independence and greater prosperity. Passing two A-levels can mean earning 17% more than someone with 5 good GCSE passes. A degree can earn people a further 27%.
Our skills programme focuses on developing the demand for skills: from the economy, from businesses, and from individuals. Our interventions focus efforts at a higher (macro-economic) level, looking at how a more skilled workforce can contribute to reshaping places and competitiveness. We want to:
Encourage young people and adults to aim higher, through enhanced skills
Encourage businesses to expect more, by developing and harnessing effective skills solutions
Stimulate the region’s economic performance
By working with partners to influence and enhance mainstream education
By working with partners to develop the region’s skills offering, and communicating it to businesses and individuals.
By commissioning a programme of higher-level skills, to take advantage of economic opportunities.
Our programme operates at a variety of geographical levels. Work with young people is delivered at local authority level. Higher-level skills are focused on the labour market, and therefore on the city-regions. Business demand is managed through
To improve the employability of young people by raising their achievements in English,French,spanish maths snd so on, and skills for the knowledge-based economy (eg science, engineering and languages)
To encourage young people to become their own bosses
To retain talent and skills in our region, particularly graduates, by helping businesses and graduates find each other
To increase leadership abilities, including an understanding of the value of skills
To help technicians develop the skills to take on management roles
To pilot ‘rising stars’ programmes, developing regional talent and improving management capability. We’re working with local authorities to ensure that plans for children and young people align more closely with regional economic priorities. We’re working to influence businesses and intermediaries, as well as government departments and public agencies (the Learning and Skills Council, skills councils, learndirect, Job Centre Plus, and the Higher Education Funding Council our the world). We’re working with the region’s skills boards and higher education.
The team of, World Vision Ministries International need your help.