|
Precious Metal Trading Illegal |
Gary Alan DeWaal, senior managing director and group general counsel at prime brokerage firm Newedge, said most non-US FX hedge funds seemed unaware of these obscure, burdensome requirements. "Most hedge funds would not think that they are retail funds. However, all it takes is one US client, who fits into this bracket to make them a retail FX fund.
I think a lot of hedge funds could be forced to either throw out these clients from their funds or change their counterparties," added DeWaal." Forget the liquidity freeze courtesy of Greece. Our own congressional and senatorial idiots are about to do it on their own without any country having to go into default.
Hedge funds trading FX could be caught out by Dodd Frank
Non-US hedge funds trading in FX could be forced to find new US counterparties if they want to avoid being inadvertently fined for non-compliance by US regulators under some of the more obscure provisions in the Dodd Frank Act.
Under Dodd Frank, hedge funds trading FX with a US investor base constituting more than 10% of the overall investors, would fall under US jurisdiction. However, if one single US investor has less than $10 million in investable assets, that fund will be classified as a retail FX fund. This is because Dodd Frank states all investors must be eligible contract participants - not just the fund.
If an FX fund has investors that fail to meet the $10 million threshold, that fund would therefore not be considered an eligible contract participant. This extra-territorial legislation could force some non-US funds to change their counterparties and use certain US Futures Commission Merchants (FCMs) or other US registrants.
Dodd-Frank provisions look set to be implemented within 60 days unless Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission raises any major objections or queries. |
|
" There is something wrong with a government that adds over $4.1 BILLION to its national debt every day." |
Spending is out of control!
Our federal deficit now stands at $1.5 trillion.
And our national debt is a staggering $14.3 trillion.
This ball and chain dragging down our economy burdens every American -- including children -- with $45,000 in obligations!
And you know what Obama is proposing as the solution?
Raising the debt ceiling without a single cut!
Trust me that I am doing everything I can to fight the foolish notion that adding debt will solve the deficit.
PETITION HERE
randpacusa.com/randpac/cfs_petition.aspx?pid=csnl
|
|
"A Trillion Here, a Trillion There..." Redux |
For a truly frightening look at the mess the Washington spending machine has created, have a look at these:
From the Washington Post:
"New Estimate of U.S. War Costs: $4 Trillion"
Amid a growing debate over how to bring down the government’s debt, a new study has concluded that U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan has cost up to $4 trillion over the past decade.
The study, by the nonpartisan Eisenhower Research Project based at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies, also estimates that at least 225,000 people, including civilians, troops and insurgents, have died as a result of the conflicts. Of that number, an estimated 6,000 were uniformed U.S. military personnel.
Pentagon spending accounts for only half of the budgetary costs incurred and represents a fraction of the full economic cost of the wars, according to the study. Among other line items, the study’s contributors — more than 20 economists, political scientists and other experts — estimate federal obligations to care for past and future veterans will eventually total $600 billion to $950 billion.
The estimates are based on reports from the Congressional Budget Office, the Congressional Research Service and myriad other sources.
The $4 trillion estimate could be fodder for lawmakers increasingly concerned that the United States can ill-afford to maintain a large military presence in Afghanistan.
The study’s authors say that’s a debate worth having.
And from usfederalbailout.com [red highlights mine]:
To paraphrase the words generally attributed to the late Senator Everett Dirksen: "A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."
 Read more at Financial Armageddon |
|
"Baby Boomer Financial Apocalypse" |
The coming baby boomer financial apocalypse
As we age, our money managing skills decline. So what happens when the entire nation gets crotchety?
iStockphoto/Salon
As if this country doesn't already have enough to worry about, a tidbit from the Wall Street Journal blindsides us with the prospect that even as our government's ability to manage its finances stumbles from one disaster to another, our population's cognitive ability to handle our own money is also headed for dementia.
The Journal's Mary Pilon summarizes a speech delivered this week by Harvard economist David Laibson at an annual conference hosted by the investment research firm Morningstar. In "The Age of Reason" Laibson recapitulates previously published research findings investigating how one's ability to manage finances is affected by declining cognitive function due to the aging process.
Anyone who has negotiated an elderly family member's perilous journey through such territory won't be surprised at the basic outline. Neither the young nor the old are very good at managing their finances -- but the mean age at which financial mistakes are minimized is 53, and after that, apparently, it's all downhill.
But such is life. The more troubling implications occur when one applies Laibson's findings to national demographic trends.
About 35 percent of wealth is controlled by those 65 or older, Prof. Laibson said, and that number will grow as boomers age. The total balance sheet of U.S. households is $53 trillion, he says.
Egad. You might not be out of bounds to think that it might be in our nation's self-interest to explore whether there is a prudent regulatory approach to minimizing the chaos that could ensue from the micro-mismanagement of 40 percent or more of our nation's wealth. But anyone who has attempted to convince his or her grandmother to stop driving will likely quail at the thought of engaging in some similar effort on a national, baby-boomer-size scale. Throw some Tea Party anti-government rage into the mix and, well, maybe it's best just not to think too much about it.Salon
|
|
"Deflation"... It's so 2008... so 1929 |
Now here's the graph that d Boys might find heartening. Problem however, is that these boyz are sent out into the desert for such vast stretches of time as to make an active, ongoing bearish/deflationary stance untenable. I mean, look how long the touts, greed heads and crooks can keep an inflationary party going (2003 to 2007 for example).
So yeh, the deflation proponents have the contrary high ground once again, and maybe this battle will be won by the last 2 or 3 of them standing some day.
Read more at but... it is what it is |
|
"Dollar Confidence" Update - CME Set to Launch USD/RMB Futures |
As we continue to monitor the decline of the U.S. Dollar and its status as the world's reserve currency, we see that another blow has been dealt.
Zero Hedge reported tonight that the CME has developed USD/RMB futures. This will launch August 22nd, and will allow for the Yuan to get it's foot in the door as a major currency in what we speculate is a major push to remove the USD as the world's reserve currency.
Read the details of the announcement here.
Read more at Boiler Room |
|
"Growing Your Way Out of Debt" Is a Fantasy |
by Charles Hugh Smith
Add rising interest payments and higher taxes to declining assets and incomes and you don't get "growth," you get insolvency.
The Status Quo consensus is that "kicking the can down the road" a.k.a. "extend and pretend" will work because "Greece, Spain, Ireland et al. are going to "grow their way out of debt." That is a fantasy.
Here's why.
1. There's a funny little feature of debt called interest. The Status Quo solution for Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain et al. is A) increase their debt load with more loans and B) roll over their old debt into new loans, without the old lenders taking any "haircut" on the principal.
Both of these "solutions" add more interest costs. That means more of the national income stream must be diverted to pay the lenders their pound of flesh. That means there is less money in the national economy to buy goods and services, which means the economy must shrink to pay the higher interest costs.
This is why unemployment in Spain and Greece has skyrocketed and why 100,000 small businesses have closed in Greece in the past year.
2. A funny little feature of interest is that when people see you're at risk of default, they start charging you more to borrow their money. And it isn't a tiny bit more interest, it's a lot. Think subprime teaser loan at 3% shooting to 8%, or 28% if you're trying to sell new debt on the open market.
For the E.U. to "help" Greece and Ireland by rolling over their already crushing debt loads into new, higher interest loans is like "helping" a sick patient by sticking a knife into their back.
3. Governments over-promise future benefits to win elections in the here and now. This makes sense, of course, because you win the elections and power now and the problem of paying for these excessive benefits is left to future politicos and taxpayers.
But when the phony "growth" (think metasticizing cancer) fueled by rapidly rising debt is finally cut off, then the government has no choice but to raise taxes, and keep raising them, to pay for the extravagant past promises made to citizens.
That means more of the national income is diverted to taxes, only part of which flow through as cash benefits to consumers. Much of the tax revenues flow to cronies, fiefdoms and of course those higher interest payments on the ballooning debt.
4. Cheap abundant credit has a funny little consequence: asset bubbles. When everybody can borrow vast sums of nearly-free money at costs much lower than the outlandish gains being reaped by real estate speculators and punters pouring cash into stocks and commodities, then of course it is a perfectly rational decision to leverage yourself to the max, borrow as much as you can and join the speculative frenzy.
So assets bubble up to frothy levels, and McMansions sprout by the thousands on Irish and Spanish soil. The "demand" is not for shelter; it was all speculative demand for something to flip and churn.
So when the debt bubble pops, so too do all the asset bubbles.
5. Leverage has a funny little feature called collateral and that other peculiar feature, interest. The land and house are the collateral for a mortgage (debt). As the real estate bubble popped, then the value of the collateral plummeted. Now the collateral is worth less than the loan--the borrower is "underwater."
The lender foolishly reckoned this would never happen, and now taking the collateral when the borrower defaults is an unsavory option because the lender will have to absorb a huge loss ("haircut") if they take the property.
So they choose to "extend and pretend," offering the borrower new terms, lower payments, etc., anything to keep the loan value on the books at 100%.
All of this is just artifice, of course; the borrower is insolvent, and so is the lender. As long as the borrower has to pay interest and principal, then there is not enough income left to "grow" anything. As long as the lender keeps the impaired loan on the books at the bogus valuation, then the lender is treading on the thin ice of insolvency.
6. As the national income and asset valuations both decline, the government imposes "austerity" programs which further cut incomes. A funny little feature of government "austerity" is the cuts come from the citizen's side of the expense ledger, not from the crony/fiefdom side.
Here in the U.S., for example, the library hours are slashed and the parks are closed to save $22 million in a $100 billion annual budget (those are the numbers in California) while various favored fiefdoms continue to get their swag. The "pain" of austerity is anything but evenly distributed.
7. People facing financial uncertainty and duress have a funny little habit called saving. As the reality of instability becomes crystal-clear to all, then people rather naturally rally round and circle the wagons, i.e. start saving money to cushion them through the hard times. Trusting in future benefits and bubbles is obviously foolish, and the only avenue of relative safety is cash (or equivalent) in hand.
As people save more of their declining income, there is even less national income left to be spent on goods and services.
8. These forces are self-reinforcing. The worse times get, the more people save. the lower the national income, the more taxes will be raised. The more visible these trends become, the more interest lenders demand as they see the positive feedback loops leading to insolvency.
Once a household or nation is burdened with stupendous debt loads and stagnating earnings, "growing your way out of debt" is impossible. The E.U. may succeed in strong-arming Greece into swallowing even more debt, more austerity and higher interest payments, but that will only speed up the self-reinforcing dynamics of insolvency, and guarantee the losses kicked down the road for a few months will be even more devastating.
www.oftwominds.com/blogjune11/growth-fantasy6-11.html
|
|
"I Think What’s Going On ... Is That We Are In A Depression For 80 Percent Of Americans" |
CBS station KNX 1070 in Los Angeles reports:
More stores across the U.S. that offer deeply-discounted products are seeing their sales decline after years of growth amid America’s “Great Recession” — and one analyst said on Monday it’s another sign of even deeper downturn.
***
“I think what’s going on in those stores is that we are in a depression for 80 percent of Americans,” top retail analyst Howard Davidowitz told KNX 1070.
America’s three largest discount chains — Dollar General Corp., Family Dollar Stores Inc. and Dollar Tree Inc. — all recently missed their quarterly earnings targets.
Davidowitz pointed to the weakness of the dollar and a gloomy consumer outlook as some of the factors behind the stores’ slump.
“In those stores, somebody comes in with $12 to do all their shopping,” said Davidowitz. “The person who used to come in with $12 now comes in with $8.”
“In other words, the economy is continuing to be worse, the Obama depression continues to explode,” he added.
(For more on Davidowitz, see this and this.)
This reminds me of Joe Biden's statement that "it's a depression for millions of Americans", Wal Mart CEO's statement that Wal Mart shoppers are running out of money, and many top economists' assertion that we're in a Depression.
And see this.
Read more at Washington's Blog |
|
"Inflation"... It's so yesterday |
On a flight across country, what do you do to avoid boredom? If you have no internet access, I guess you play Space Cop. Luckily this flight's got WiFi. So the geek takes some time to explore Google, come across the 'Trends' tool and types in 'Inflation'.
What do you read from this graph that shows the volume that the word 'inflation' has shown up in searches and in news items?
Why yes Beuller, you read that inflation searches and mainstream news items became hysterical in the run up to the Armageddon '08 festivities and relatively less hysterical in the run up to the recent mini hysteria, as I have been calling it; although the MSM tried its damnedest to get the public lathered up. I guess this is a bearish divergence in the MSM's ability to foment fear and greed in the average person.
NFTRH and this blog have been stating all along that inflation expectations needed to be tamped down to shut up the 'bad cops' (Plosser, Bullard, Fisher, etc.) and lay the groundwork for coming funny munny policy. But also, the analysis has held that it would probably not be an end of the world type thing as the Wizard reloads the inflation gun. Check.
As the debt squabble labors on, the graph above tells us that the public is approaching the low end of inflation concern scale and the media have all but moved on to other bullshit to baffle the masses with. All good my friends. Well, all not good; but all good where rational market analysis is concerned.
www.biiwii.blogspot.com
www.biiwii.com
Read more at but... it is what it is |
|
$211 Billion in Green Energy Investments in 2010, Up 32% From $160 Billion in 2009 |
China, developing countries are now biggest investors in large-scale renewables while Germany surges ahead on rooftop solar
Wind farms in China and small-scale solar panels on rooftops in Europe were largely responsible for last year's 32% rise in green energy investments worldwide according to the latest annual report on renewable energy investment trends issued by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).
Last year, investors pumped a record $211 billion into renewables -- about one-third more than the $160 billion invested in 2009, and a 540% rise since 2004.
 Credit: UN Environment Programme
For the first time, developing economies overtook developed ones in terms of "financial new investment"--spending on utility-scale renewable energy projects and provision of equity capital for renewable energy companies.
On this measure, $72 billion was invested in developing countries vs. $70 billion in developed economies, which contrasts with 2004, when financial new investments in developing countries were about one quarter of those in developed countries.
The report, Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2011, has been prepared for UNEP by London-based Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
It was launched today by UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner and Udo Steffens, President and CEO of the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management as it was also announced that a new UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance is being inaugurated at the Frankfurt School.
China, with $48.9 billion in financial new investment in renewables (up 28%), was the world leader in 2010. However, other parts of the emerging world also showed strong growth:
South and Central America: up 39% to $13.1 billion; Middle East and Africa: up 104% to $5 billion; India: up 25% to $3.8 billion, and Asian developing countries excluding China and India: up 31% to $4 billion.
Another positive development, highlighted in the report with implications for long-term clean energy developments, was government research and development. That category of investment climbed over 120 per cent to well over $5 billion.
Mr. Steiner said: "The continuing growth in this core segment of the Green Economy is not happening by chance. The combination of government target-setting, policy support and stimulus funds is underpinning the renewable industry's rise and bringing the much needed transformation of our global energy system within reach.''
"The UN climate convention meeting in Durban later in the year, followed by the Rio+20 summit in Brazil in 2012, offer key opportunities to accelerate and scale-up this positive transition to a low carbon, resource efficient Green Economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication," he added.
"The finance industry is still recovering from the recent financial crisis," adds Udo Steffens, President of the Frankfurt School of Finance and Management. "The fact that the industry remains heavily committed to renewables demonstrates its strong belief in the prospects of sustainable energy investments. "
"The investment activity in the developing world is not only leading to innovations in renewable energy technologies. Further more, it will open up new markets as first mover investors are facilitating a range of new business models and support entrepreneurship in the developing world", explains Udo Steffens.
The report points out that not all areas enjoyed positive growth in 2010: there was a decline of 22% to $35.2 billion in new financial investment in large-scale renewable energy in Europe in 2010. But this was more than made up for by a surge in small-scale project installation, predominantly rooftop solar.
Michael Liebreich, chief executive of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, said: "Europe's small-scale solar energy boom owed much to feed-in tariffs, particularly in Germany, combined with a sharp fall in the cost of photovoltaic (PV) modules."
Investments in Germany in "small distributed capacity" rose 132% to $34 billion, in Italy they rose 59% to $5.5 billion, France up 150% to $2.7 billion, and the Czech Republic up 163% to $2.3 billion.
The price of PV modules per megawatt has fallen 60% since mid-2008, making solar power far more competitive in a number of sunny countries.
By the end of 2010, many countries were rushing to make their PV tariffs less generous. Indeed, Spain and the Czech Republic both moving to make retroactive cuts in feed-in tariff levels for already-operating projects "damaged investor confidence," the report says. "Other governments, such as those of Germany and Italy, announced reductions in tariffs for new projects - logical steps to reflect sharp falls in technology costs."
Nevertheless the small-scale solar market is likely to stay strong in 2011, the report suggests.
Further drops in costs for solar, wind and other technologies lie ahead, the report says, posing a growing threat to the dominance of fossil-fuel generation sources in the next few years.
Throughout the last decade, wind was the most mature renewable energy technology and enjoyed an apparently unassailable lead over its rival power sources.
Wind turbine prices have fallen 18% per megawatt in the last two years, reflecting, as with solar, fierce competition in the supply chain.
In 2010, wind continued to dominate in terms of financial new investment in large scale renewables, with $94.7 billion (up 30% from 2009). However, when investments in small scale projects are added in solar is catching up, with $86 billion in 2010, up 52% on the previous year. With $11 billion invested, biomass and waste-to-energy come in third in front of biofuels, which boomed at $20.4 billion in 2006, but fell off dramatically -- to $5.5 billion last year.
The sharpest percentage jumps in overall investment were seen in small-scale projects -- up 91% year-on-year at $60 billion, and in government-funded research and development, up 121% at $5.3 billion, as more of the "green stimulus" funds promised after the financial crisis arrived in the sector.
Two areas of investment showed a fall in 2010 compared to 2009: corporate research, development and deployment (down 12% at $3.3 billion, as companies retrenched in the face of economic hard times) and provision of expansion capital for renewable energy companies by private equity funds (down 1% to $3.1 billion).
Clean energy share prices fell in 2010, with the WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation Index (NEX) down 14.6%, under-performing wider stock market indices by more than 20%. This showing reflected investor concerns about industry over-capacity, cutbacks in subsidy programs and competition from power stations burning cheap natural gas.
Acquisition activity in renewable energy, representing money changing hands rather than new investment, fell from $66 billion in 2009 to $58 billion in 2010. The two largest categories of M&A – corporate takeovers and acquisitions of wind farms and other assets – both fell by around 10%.
The low price of natural gas—which was between $3 and $5 per million BTU for almost all of 2010-- hurt the growth of renewables, the report says. The price of natural gas was far less than it was in much of the mid-2000s, before it peaked at $13 in 2008.
"This gave generators in the US, but also in Europe and elsewhere, an incentive to build more gas-fired power stations and depressed the terms of power purchasing agreements available to renewable energy projects," says the report.
Frankfurt School of Finance & Management and UNEP launch new Collaborating Centre
The report launch marks the beginning of the new UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance at the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management. Its goal is to develop cost-effective ways to reduce energy-related carbon emissions by mobilizing sustainable energy investments and strengthening their associated markets.
This is achieved by working with financial institutions to develop technical know-how, innovative financing approaches and new forms of entrepreneurial and end-user finance.
The Centre's approach combines project implementation on the ground with research, think tank activities, training and education.
One of Europe's leading business schools, the Frankfurt School also builds and strengthens financial sector capacities in emerging markets and developing countries through consulting and training projects. Through its "Sustainable Energy Finance" centre, the Frankfurt School has implemented energy efficiency and renewable energy projects worldwide.
"At the Frankfurt School we look back on profound experience with international advisory in all fields of development finance," says the school's President and CEO Udo Steffens. "The UNEP Collaborating Centre allows us to apply this expertise and knowledge to climate and sustainable energy finance, covering research, advisory and education."
Contacts and sources:
Read more at Nano Patents and Innovations
|
|
$286,860 Cost To Raise Child Born in 2010 Says USDA, $226,920 Cost Adjusted for Inflation |
The Department of Agriculture today released its annual report, Expenditures on Children by Families, finding that a middle-income family with a child born in 2010 can expect to spend about $226,920 ($286,860 if projected inflation costs are factored in) for food, shelter, and other necessities to raise that child over the next 17 years.
This represents a 2 percent increase from 2009. Expenses for transportation, child care, education, and health care saw the largest percentage increases related to child rearing from 2009. There were very small changes in housing, food, clothing, and miscellaneous expenses on a child since 2009.
The report, issued annually since 1960, is a valuable resource to courts and state governments in determining child support guidelines and foster care payments. It is based on data from the Federal government's Consumer Expenditure Survey, the most comprehensive source of information available on household expenditures. For the year 2010, per child annual child-rearing expenses for a middle-income, two-parent family range from $11,880 to $13,830, depending on the age of the child.
The report by USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion notes that family income affects child rearing costs. A family earning less than $57,600 per year can expect to spend a total of $163,440 (in 2010 dollars) on a child from birth through high school. Similarly, parents with an income between $57,600 and $99,730 can expect to spend $226,920; and a family earning more than $99,730 can expect to spend $377,040.
For middle-income families, housing costs are the single largest expenditure on a child, averaging $69,660 or 31 percent of the total cost over 17 years. Child care and education (for those incurring these expenses) and food were the next two largest expenses, accounting for 17 and 16 percent of their total expenditure. These estimates do not include costs associated with pregnancy or the cost of a college education or education beyond high school.
The report notes geographic variations in the cost of raising a child, with expenses the highest for families living in the urban Northeast, followed by the urban West and urban Midwest. Families living in the urban South and rural areas have the lowest child-rearing expenses.
This is the 50th year USDA has issued its annual report on the cost of raising a child. In 1960, the first year the report was issued, a middle-income family could have expected to spend $25,230 ($185,856 in 2010 dollars) to raise a child through age seventeen. Housing was the largest expense on a child both then and now. Health care expenses on a child doubled as a percentage of total child-rearing costs. In addition, some current-day costs, such as child care, were negligible in 1960.
The report also highlights that expenses per child decrease as a family has more children. Families with three or more children spend 22 percent less per child than families with two children. As families have more children, the children can share bedrooms, clothing and toys can be handed down to younger children, food can be purchased in larger and more economical quantities, and private schools or child care centers may offer sibling discounts.
The full report, Expenditures on Children by Families (2010), is available on the web at www.cnpp.usda.gov. In addition, an interactive version of the report where families can enter in the number and ages of their children to obtain an estimate of costs is available at this website.
Read more at Nano Patents and Innovations
|
|
$72 Billion in Tax Credits Under the Gun: Hold On to Your Gonads and Wallets--They're Talking About Simplifying the Tax Code |
Barack Obama’s proposal to end a business tax break worth $72 billion is among the tensions the president may confront as he meets today with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in an effort to revive bipartisan talks over reducing the debt.
Ending the so-called last-in-first-out, or LIFO, provision, a method of accounting for inventory costs, was among options offered by White House officials for raising $400 billion in revenue over 10 years during seven weeks of negotiations led by Vice President Joe Biden, three persons familiar with the issue said on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to comment publicly.
“We think this is part of simplifying the tax code” and leveling the playing field for companies, White House press secretary Jay Carneysaid today. He used the example of an oil company that bought oil when prices lower and sells it when the price is higher, declaring its profit based on the higher price. “We just don’t think that’s right,” he said. MORE
|
|
$CROX Downgraded to Strong Sell |
An analyst lowered his price target for Crocs Inc.'s stock after the footwear company reduced its third-quarter earnings and revenue forecasts, sending its stock tanking.
On Monday, Crocs said its direct-to-consumer sales in the Americas have slowed. Because of that, its profit margins were weaker than expected. The company's shares tumbled $9.29, or 35 percent, to $17.35 in premarket trading.
The Niwot, Colo., company now expects a third-quarter profit of 31 to 33 cents per share on $273 million to $275 million in revenue. It previously forecast a profit of 40 cents per share on $280 million in revenue.
Analysts polled by FactSet had predicted a profit of 40 cents per share on revenue of $280.4 million.
Kenneth Stumphauzer of Sterne, Agee & Leach reduced his price target for Crocs' stock to $30 from $40. In a client note, the analyst said that the reduced outlook was a surprise. He cut his third-quarter earnings estimate to 32 cents from 40 cents per share and slashed his fourth-quarter estimate to 5 cents from 15 cents per share. For the full year, Stumphauzer now expects earnings of $1.19 per share, down from $1.38. Croc's 2012 estimate was cut to $1.42 from $1.69 per share.
The analyst said he still sees strength in the brand, but that the stock will likely "be in the penalty box in the near term." Still, the stock is beaten down enough that Stumphauzer views the weakness as a buying opportunity and reaffirmed a "Buy" rating.
A company representative was not immediately available for comment.
Crocs will report its third-quarter results Oct. 27. |
|
$SPX - Volatile Week |
This upcoming week could be quite volatile with high profile budget news anticipated. I don't think that the bottom is in quite yet, but it does appear to be close to bottoming. 1303 is an important Red trendline. I also see multiple supports in the 1295 area. It is difficult to be precise with smaller movements, and it is possible that the market does not make it below 1300 SPX.
I see Tuesday July 19th being important, and the market may decline on the budget/debt ceiling news initially with a rise in the dollar. However, I see a strong push higher likely into the end of the week with an important time cycle due on July 22nd.
15min Chart
|
|
$SPY Thoughts and Big Ben |
I sold my $SPY just after the open because I was worried what Bernanke might say. I figured the market would move a buck in either direction. Why risk the gains?
So I booked 'em, the market fell back close to flat but then Big Ben came on the scene and the buck move was up! Drat! Should have hit the snooze button one more time and I'd have another buck!
But there's no second guessing. A profit is a profit, and now I'm back to lots of cash waiting for the next game of chance - er, investment.
As I type, the market has slid and we are back near where I sold this morning.
Volatility, baby. Trade it, trade it, trade it.
Read more at The Learning Curve |
|
$USEG - U.S. Energy Corp. (NasdaqCM: USEG ) Raised to Buy |
| U.S. Energy Corp. (NCM) |
 |
|
|
| Compare: |
USEG vs S&P 500 Nasdaq Dow |
|
|
Splits: none
U.S. Energy Corp.
(NCM: USEG )
| Last Trade: |
2.71 |
| Trade Time: |
10:02AM EDT |
| Change: |
 0.09 (3.21%) |
| Prev Close: |
2.80 |
| Open: |
2.83 |
| Bid: |
2.71 x 3000 |
| Ask: |
2.72 x 400 |
| 1y Target Est: |
6.88 |
| Day's Range: |
2.69 - 2.84 |
| 52wk Range: |
1.87 - 6.80 |
| Volume: |
22,301 |
| Avg Vol (3m): |
176,820 |
| Market Cap: |
73.87M |
| P/E (ttm): |
N/A |
| EPS (ttm): |
-0.16 |
| Div & Yield: |
N/A (N/A) |
|
|
'$5000 Gold, $1000 Silver' |
July 17th, 2011  Elisheva Wiriaatmadja
Gold hit its all-time high $1,594 an ounce, taking silver up to $39 an ounce. While some economists in the United States doubt that the gold price is going to continue to climb and that the gold bubble is going to burst any time soon, economic news channels around the world are considering gold to hit $5000 an ounce as a possibility. Peter Hambro, chairman of Britain’s biggest pure gold listing Petropavlovsk says the possibility of a QE3 will eventually drive gold up to $5000 an ounce, “It is very scary: the flight to gold is accelerating at a faster and faster speed.”
“One of the big US banks texted me today to say that if QE3 actually happens, we could see gold at $5,000 and silver at $1,000. I feel terribly sorry for anybody on fixed incomes tied to a fiat currency because they are not going to be able to buy things with that paper money,” he adds.
A lot of countries have limited their exposure to the US dollar and have diversified their reserves into euros over the last decade. However, currently the European monetary union is facing a crisis itself and therefore there is no other safe-haven currency, not even the Swiss franc, Canada, Australian dollars and the Korean won. The countries that have been diversifying their reserves are China, Russia, Brazil, India and the Mid-East petro-powers. Besides holding the euros, they have also been buying gold, while the west have sold most of their gold at the depth of the bear market about a decade ago.
Telegraph.co.uk writes,
Step by step, the world is edging towards a revived Gold Standard as it becomes clearer that Japan and the West have reached debt saturation.” World Bank chief Robert Zoellick said it was time to “consider employing gold as an international reference point.” The Swiss parliament is to hold hearings on a parallel “Gold Franc”. Utah has recognised gold as legal tender for tax payments.myloansconsolidated.com
|
|
'Eurozone On Verge Of Econ. Collapse' |
Billionaire investor George Soros
Billionaire George Soros says Europe's debt crisis has brought the eurozone to the brink of an "economic collapse" and inevitably some of its members will leave the union.
presstv
"There's no arrangement for any countries leaving the euro, which in current circumstances is probably inevitable," Soros said at a panel discussion in Vienna, Austria on Sunday, Bloomberg reported.
He added, "We are on the verge of an economic collapse which starts, let's say, in Greece, but it could easily spread. The financial system remains extremely vulnerable."
"I think most of us actually agree that Europe's crisis is actually centered around the euro," the 80-year-old investor added.
"It's a kind of financial crisis that is really developing. It's foreseen. Most people realize it. It's still developing. The authorities are actually engaged in buying time. And yet time is working against them," he said.
The comments come as Greek politicians are debating a new round of austerity measures tied to the country's bailout.
A vote is expected on Wednesday amid widespread protests against plans to further slash the public sector and hike taxes.
Greece was the 12th country to adopt the shared currency in 2001, while Estonia is the newest member of the euro region, joining in January 2011.
Soros: EU on verge of economic collapse; some countries will have to exit the Euro
US/UK Hungarian born billionaire investor George Soros says a country will eventually exit the Euro zone and urged policymakers on Sunday to come up with a “plan B” that could rescue the European Union from looming economic collapse. The Euro has no provision for correction, says the billionaire
Soros, famous for making 1 billion US dollars by betting against the British pound in 1992, did not name any country he thought might exit the currency, but speculation is mounting about the fate of Greece as its politicians struggle to agree more austerity measures demanded by international lenders as the price for staving off bankruptcy.
Soros reiterated his view in a panel discussion in Vienna that the Euro had a basic flaw from the start in that the currency was not backed by political union or a joint treasury.
Read More At mercopress> >
|
|
'Facebook Rule' Would Delay IPOs, Open Door to Secondary Market Excesses |
You may not yet have heard of the "Facebook Rule," but it's cause for concern.
Its formal name is the Private Company Flexibility and Growth Act (HR 2167), and it was introduced to the House of Representatives on Tuesday by Rep. David Schweikert, R-AZ.
Officially, the bill aims to increase from 500 to 1,000 the number of investors a company can have before it is required to publish its financial information. But in reality, it would simply delay companies from going public - thereby encouraging trading in secondary markets that are rife with questionable practices and shutting out the average investor.
It has been dubbed the "Facebook Rule" because the social media giant would be a primary beneficiary. Facebook Inc. has sought to stay private but intense interest from private investors has pushed it to the threshold of the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) 500-shareholder rule. Schweikert says that's unacceptable, and that his bill would make it so companies like Facebook don't have to go public until they're ready. But there would also be side effects. Delaying the IPOs of many companies - particularly tech companies that tend to be popular among private investors - would also drive up valuations in the secondary markets, which exclude all but the wealthiest "accredited" investors (people who have $1 million in assets or make at least $200,000 a year). And although those secondary markets - which so far have remained unregulated - would clearly benefit from the higher investor threshold, dubious behavior among some participants suggests the extra cushion easily could be abused. So-called "middlemen" such as Felix Investments already have been using a workaround for the "500 rule" by pooling money into funds and then investing the fund into the target company. The fund then counts as just one investor, even though hundreds or even thousands of investors may own shares in the fund. In January Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS) launched a similar $1.5 billion fund for those wishing to invest in Facebook, which pushed its valuation to $50 billion. And that's not the only questionable way "connected" investors are acquiring stakes in private companies. Employees of many companies, especially tech start-ups, are given shares in their company, which private investors want to buy in the secondary markets. So the middlemen act as a go-between, finding accredited investors for employees willing to sell their shares. Indeed, raising the threshold of shareholders to 1,000 for companies to disclose financial information carries the risk of fostering more such unregulated investing. Even some private investment firms are questioning the wisdom of Schweikert's bill. "Private companies that are successful and able to attract ‘real funding' never have an issue with the 500 shareholder rule hurting future funding efforts," Giles Somerville, managing partner with private investment firm Clearview Capital Partners wrote in a comment on the Private Equity Hub Web site. "This rule is completely for the benefit of shareholders and secondary market participants," Somerville continued. "The extra liquidity that will be provided by an expansion of the allowable shareholder base will all go to shareholders, internal and external, not the actual company itself. As an investor in the secondary market I am all for the expansion; I just find it a little bit frightening that once again the governing bodies are so completely clueless." Others worry about the lack of transparency in the secondary markets, and the possibility of more investors putting money into companies they know very little about. That's why the rule exists in the first place. "We need more transparency - not less," Lawrence Aragon, an editor of Venture Capital Journal and Private Equity Week, wrote on Private Equity Hub. "This will only encourage more companies to stay private and trade on secondary exchanges, where they can keep their shareholders in the dark." There's also the concern that the average investor will be left out of early gains of desirable companies, because a hot company's IPO price will be much higher by the time it goes public. Still, the bill most likely will become law, since it has bipartisan support and few opponents. Schweikert argues that the SEC rule, imposed in 1934, is out of date and impedes the early development of companies that need capital but aren't ready for an IPO. "Our goal is simple-to create another path for capitalizing a business instead of business owners going straight to venture capitalists or saying, let's go public even though we're not ready," Schweikert told The Wall Street Journal. Yet the trade group that represents the venture capital industry, the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), reacted less than enthusiastically to the proposed change "The implied need for even a limited number of companies to remain private longer, or indefinitely, is indicative of a much larger problem in the U.S. capital markets," Mark Heesen, president of the NVCA, said in a statement. "It must once again be compelling for our country's most promising companies to enter the public markets and continue on their growth trajectory as public companies." News and Related Story Links:
Tags: Facebook Rule
 Read more at Money Morning |
|
'Market Rally Collapses' After Bernanke Pulls The Rug Out: Here's What You Need To Know |
For once it wasn't about Greece, and there wasn't even much economic news. It was all Bernanke all the time.
But first, the scoreboard:
Dow: -83.59
NASDAQ: -18.76
S&P 500: -8.28
And, the top stories:
- After Greece passed its big vote yesterday, the Europe stuff went on the backburner for a bit. But there was a bit of a "sell the news" tone all day. Europe was mostly lower, though not dramatically so. Nothing special happened in Asia overnight.
- In the US, futures were lower going into the day, though they ended up coming back nicely in the mid-day. Again, not dramatic in one direction or another. The big news was on the corporate front: FedEx reported strong earnings. Nobody seemed much to care.
|
|
'Misery Index' Highest In 28 Years! |
When it comes to measuring the combination of unemployment and inflation, it doesn’t get much more miserable than this.
In fact, misery, as measured in the unofficial Misery Index that simply totals the unemployment and inflation rates, is at a 28-year high, reflective of how weak the economic recovery has been and how far there is to go.
The index, first compiled during the soaring inflation days of the 1970s by economist Arthur Okun, is registering a nausea-inducing 12.7—9.1 percent for unemployment and 3.6 percent for annualized inflation—a number not seen since 1983. The index has been above 10 since November 2009 and had been under double-digits from June 1993 through May 2008.
The good news, of course, is that the Fed-led Paul Volcker embarked on a highly successful inflation-slaying campaign that brought the level of misery down sharply through the rest of the ’80s recovery decade.
The bad news, of course, is all the bad news.
Put another way, by Paul Dales at Capital Economics:
“The good news is that other measures suggest conditions aren't quite that bad and over the next 18 months the gloom should lift a little,” the firm’s chief US economist wrote in a Misery analysis. “The bad news is that households won't be in the mood to boost their spending significantly for several more years.”
Dales says all the misery may not be as bad as it appears. An alternative measure, put forth in 1999 by Robert Barro, encompasses a wider swath of misery, measuring employment against the so-called “natural rate” and compares inflation against the previous 10 years. The Barro measure also looks at whether gross domestic product is below its “potential” and compares yields on the 10-year Treasury note against the yields of the previous 10 years.
With all that rolled in, Dales says the Barro index is indicating that while things aren't expected to get dramatically better, the level of misery is probably at a peak and should roll back over the next 18 months.
“The upshot is that Americans might not be quite as miserable as the Okun misery index appears to suggest,” Dales said. “And as inflation falls back, some of the gloom will lift.”
Still, the level of misery, whatever the measure, is high, with many unconvinced that inflation is, as Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke suggests, transitory, or that the economy is in a mere soft patch that will fade.
more here
|
|
(Mis)understanding Inflation |
The recurrent hikes in fuel prices over the last one year are a cause of concern. For, fuel is a basic commodity and it enters as an input directly or indirectly into the production of all commodities – agriculture, manufacturing and services. About a year back, an “expert” committee headed by Kirit S Parikh recommended a partial deregulation/liberalization of fuel prices. This has eased the financial burden of the government. In addition, economists have posited that deregulation will enable markets to become efficient (subsidies and taxes distort efficiency). In any case, the role of the government has been changing rapidly too – from that of a provider to that of an enabler (to quote our Chief Economic Advisor, Kaushik Basu).
A couple of days back, our esteemed Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia told the media that the recent hikes in fuel prices was a strategic move. According to him, the hike in prices of petroleum products would help ease inflation in the long run as it would suck money from the system. This post examines this statement by trying to understand the mechanism of inflation.
INFLATION
Inflation, as we know, refers to a continuous increase in the price level over a period. To make sense of this seemingly simple statement, we must have a clear understanding of the two concepts based on which we understand inflation. It is on the basis of this understanding that policy decisions are made both by the RBI as well as the Central Government to control inflation. The two concepts are:
(1) Time: the price rise has to be continuous over a certain period.
(2) Index number: inflation is studied by making use of these special averages
Time
How much time must elapse before we can characterise the price increase in an economy as inflationary? In theory, economists solve this problem of having to fix the time period by introducing the distinction between short-run and long-run. However, this distinction does not solve the problem, but only adds to the complexity. What do we understand by short-run? Does it refer to one week, one month, 6 months or one year? Interestingly, there is no fixed answer to this. The distinction between short-run and long-run shows how creative economists are, although its utility is questionable. Short-run refers to the time during which the variables under consideration do not have adequate time to adjust or settle (at their equilibrium positions). Whereas, long-run refers to a period (point?) when all the adjustments are over and all the variables have settled. How convenient! The long-run will remain a mirage.
Given these unsettled issues, how does our Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commissions confidently maintain that fuel price hikes will ease inflationary pressures? This statement is meaningless because the long-run is a fictitious concept. Such statements indicate the misplaced confidence economists possess as well as the poverty of economic theory.
Index numbers
Price level is what we examine in theory when trying to understand inflation. In applied work, we trace changes in indices such as WPI and CPI (which is a proxy for the general price level in an economy) in computing inflation. The construction of a good index number is a difficult task. Selection of relevant variables, choice of base year, the kind of index number to use – Paasche, Laspeyre or Fisher – are some of the issues which have to be tackled. A detailed discussion of index number will feature as a blog post in the future.
Ahluwalia, one of our economic planners, maintains that fuel price hikes will ease inflation in the long run. The explanation he provides for this occurring is both logically and factually incorrect. He said that fuel price hikes “suck excess money out of the system.” Firstly, this statement is based on a particular view or understanding of inflation, namely the neoclassical one. Inflation is seen by this group as a result of excess money in the economy. In the words of economics textbooks, which do an excellent job at indoctrination, inflation occurs when too much money chases too few goods. It is this factually incorrect view which dominates academia as well as the policy arena. In fact, it is this view which is widely communicated in the media as well. Several economists have questioned this notion but with limited success. For, if inflation is not a monetary phenomenon, how will the central banks survive? In any case, this view is not a correct representation of reality because manufactured products and services are not priced on the basis of demand (unlike agricultural prices which are largely demand-determined). [See Who prices the Products? and On Prices/Values] If the prices increase from non-monetary factors, such as production conditions, expensive labour, from a higher profit margin, corruption or rise in fuel prices, how will removal of money reduce inflation? In fact, how does one arrive at a benchmark for computing ‘excess” money? Fuel price hikes, on the other hand, will threaten the livelihood of both the poor consumers and poor producers.
What does our planner mean when he talks of the “system”? A closed economy? An open one? Will the money not still be circulating in the economy even after the fuel price rise? Without clarifying the above mentioned issues, the statement made by the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission holds no ground, however scientific it might sound! Such statements only reinforce the arrogance of economists and the poverty of economics!
Read more at Undergraduate Economist |
|
02Micro International Limited |
OIIM |
|
1 |
|
|
1-800 Contacts, Inc. |
CTAC |
|
1-800 FLOWERS.COM, Inc. |
FLWS |
|
1.9 Million Fewer Americans Have Jobs Today Than When Obama Signed Stimulus |
(CNSNews.com) – Twenty-eight months after Congress passed President Obama’s signature economic stimulus law, and nearly one year after he declared the summer of 2010 to be “Recovery Summer,” 1.9 million fewer people are employed.
In February 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that 141.7 million people were employed. By the end of May 2011 – the last month for which data are available – that number had fallen to 139.8 million, a difference of 1.9 million.
While the number of people with jobs has increased slightly from its low point during the recession – 137.9 million in December 2009 – those 1.9 million jobs have been lost despite $800 billion in stimulus spending.
This does not mean that the economy is not creating jobs, but rather that it is not creating jobs fast enough to keep up with a combination of layoffs and people entering the job market for the first time.
In a Washington Post op-ed, former White House chief economist Larry Summers noted that the percentage of the population that has a job has not improved, even though the economy is technically in recovery.
“From the first quarter of 2006 to the first quarter of 2011, the U.S. economy’s growth rate averaged less than 1 percent a year,” Summers wrote. “The fraction of the population working remains almost exactly at its recession trough, and recent reports suggest that growth is slowing.”
The fraction of the population with a job has in fact fallen in the 28 months since Congress passed the stimulus – down from 60.3 percent in February 2009 to 58.4 percent in May 2011.
The economy cannot create jobs fast enough to keep pace with layoffs and recent high school and college graduates seeking employment. If the trend continues, as Summers notes may happen, the economy will suffer further in the future as college graduates delay entry into the labor force, reducing their lifetime productivity.
“Beyond the lack of jobs and incomes, an economy producing below its potential for a prolonged interval sacrifices its future,” argued Summers. “Huge numbers of new college graduates are moving back in with their parents this month because they have no job or means of support.”
As both Summers and the BLS data make clear, the economy is not creating new jobs fast enough to make up for layoffs and new graduates, calling into question Obama’s oft-repeated claim that the economy is recovering and creating jobs.
In fact, by citing figures from the first quarter of 2006, Summers is understating the economy’s poor performance. According to BLS data, the number of people with jobs peaked at 146.6 million in November 2007, meaning that over the entire recession – which officially began in December 2007 – the number of people employed has fallen by 6.8 million.cnsnews.com |
|
10 - 30 Year US Treasuries Are A Suicidal Investment |
It’s a suicidal investment to own 10-year or 30-year U.S. Treasuries. U.S. government bonds are junk bonds. As long as they can print, they can pay the interest. But another way to default is to pay the interest and principal in depreciating currency.- in MarketWatch.com
Contrarian Investor Dr.Marc Faber is an international investor known for his uncanny predictions of the stock market and futures markets around the world.
Read more at Marc Faber Blog |
|
10 Countries Where Consumer Spending Could Explode |
Mamta Badkar|Jun. 23, 2011
Countries with higher savings rate tend to have larger potential for consumer spending growth. The less a family needs to save for crucial health bills or retirement, the more likely it is to spend on consumer goods. Right now, China is moving toward a more substantial safety net for just this reason.
We found 10 countries across Asia and the Pacific with high gross domestic savings rates, according to the UN Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific, and highlighted social spending in each country.
Some countries on our list have stepped up social spending to quell civil unrest and others have a long way to go. They may be developing fast, or slow. Either way, they all have the potential to explode with new spending, if their consumers start saving less.
#10 Iran
Savings as a percent of 2010 GDP: 38%
Savings as a percent of 2001 GDP: 25.4%
Over the last decade Iran, has used its oil revenues to pay for social spending programs. Such spending is actually now damaging the country's budget.
Iran's savings rate might decline if the country's government moved in line with international demands. Markets may then open up for goods to enter Iran.
Source: UN Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific
#9 Malaysia
Savings as a percent of 2010 GDP: 39.1%
Savings as a percent of 2001 GDP: 47.4%
Healthcare spending accounted for 4.3% of Malaysia's GDP in 2009 and its health ministry has said that public and private spending on healthcare needs to rise to 7% of GDP by 2020. The government plans to launch a new national health insurance scheme.
An increase in government spending on healthcare may free up consumers to spend more on retail items.
Source: UN Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific
#6 Kazakhstan
Savings as a percent of 2010 GDP: 45.5%
Savings as a percent of 2001 GDP: 16%
Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev has ordered an increase in social spending. The portion of the budget earmarked for social spending has been increased eight times since 2001. If the consumer spending rate is to fall, and retail spending rise, consumers must be made more confident that the government's social spending programs will protect them.
Source: UN Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific
MORE HERE
|
|
10 Middle-Class Jobs That Will Vanish by 2018 |
By the year 2018, the manufacturing industry will lose 1.2 million more jobs, the mining and oil/gas extraction industry will lose another 104,000 jobs and even the utility companies will see 59,000 job losses according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
But outsourcing and foreign competitors aren't the only reasons we're witnessing shrinking industries. The needs of our economy have changed in recent years while companies have become leaner and meaner in order to survive.
And though these cuts and shifts have been painful for millions in the past and present, they are making our country more competitive for the future.
We've seen dramatic advancements in technology and operations techniques that have more than doubled the output per worker since 1970.
Our manufacturing industry has progressed from making simple household appliances, cars and textiles to producing cutting-edge medical technologies, life-saving medicines and light-speed computer processors with worldwide demand.
But as any nation's economy grows and progresses, the loss of older industries and professions will be a cause of hardship for many. And many of those professions lost will be middle-class jobs.
[InvestingAnswers Feature: Employees Wanted:10 Middle-Class Jobs That Are Actually Growing]
These middle-class professions -- in order from smallest to largest in percentage rate of decline -- may soon face the fate of the milk man, the telegraph operator, the stagecoach driver and the switchboard operator, joining them in obsolete-job heaven.
This article originally appeared on InvestingAnswers
Author: Christian Hudspeth
10 Middle-Class Jobs That Will Vanish by 2018
Read more at Investing Answers |
|
10 of the Shortest CEO Tenures of All Time |
Some of the most astonishing corporate collapses in recent history reinforce the adage that a company is only as good as its leadership. It is important for investors to realize the vital role competent CEOs plays in safeguarding their interests.
Most of the CEOs are on this list because of incompetent decision-making, while a select few chose to end their tenures early. Read on to find out which CEO lasted only 18 days, but made $19 million. (That's $44,000 an hour!)
ShareEmbed this image
<a href="<a class="external" href="http://www.investinganswers.com/a/10-shortest-ceo-tenures-all-time-2957"" rel="nofollow" target="_new">www.investinganswers.com/a/10-shortest-ceo-tenures-all-time-2957"</a> _cke_saved_href="<a class="external" href="http://www.investinganswers.com/a/10-shortest-ceo-tenures-all-time-2957"" rel="nofollow" target="_new">www.investinganswers.com/a/10-shortest-ceo-tenures-all-time-2957"</a> alt="10 of the Shortest CEO tenures of All Time"> <img alt="" src="LINK`http`www.investinganswers.com/"<a class="external" href="http://web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" rel="nofollow" target="_new">web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""</a>`www.investinganswers.com/"<a class="external" href="http://web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" style="web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" rel="nofollow" target="_new">LINK</a> _cke_saved_src="LINK`http`www.investinganswers.com/"<a class="external" href="http://web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" rel="nofollow" target="_new">web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""</a>`www.investinganswers.com/"<a class="external" href="http://web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" style="web.investinganswers.com/images/Shortest-CEO-Tenure-Infographic-Article.jpg""" rel="nofollow" target="_new">LINK</a> alt="10 of the Shortest CEO tenures of All Time" /> </a>
View Booz & Company's full CEO Succession 2010 report here.
This article originally appeared on InvestingAnswers
Author: Luke Stenis
10 of the Shortest CEO Tenures of All Time
Read more at Investing Answers |
|
10 Of Today’s Hottest Jobs: Proof That America Is Doomed |
| Power Your Future – Thu, Aug 4, 2011 2:46 PM EDT
Provided by
by Martha Craver and Michael DeSenne
Believe it or not, even with the unemployment rate stubbornly high and many industries reluctant to staff up, there are employers out there who still can't find enough qualified applicants. Some are offering six-figure salaries to the right job seekers. The trick, of course, is unearthing these hidden opportunities.
We started by asking CareerBuilder to mine its vast employment database to identify promising occupations that are experiencing an under-supply of qualified applicants relative to the number of available jobs. The resulting ratio is a good indicator of hiring demand -- the lower the ratio, the greater the need for applicants. A ratio of 10.0, for example, means there are ten job seekers for every open position. A ratio of 0.5 means there are two open positions for every job seeker.
We also took a hard look at pay and growth prospects, based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Annual salary ranges reflect the rates in the 25th and 75th percentiles. Ten-year growth projections are based on BLS's expected change in the number of positions between 2008 and 2018. Finally, we filtered our choices to represent a range of industries and educational requirements. Check out our list of ten of today's hottest jobs.
1. Nurse Practitioner
Hiring demand: 0.25 active job seekers for every open position
Annual salary range: $52,980-$79,020
10-year growth projection: 22%
Job description: A picture of health. The first baby-boomers are reaching retirement age at a time when there's a shortage of primary-care physicians. Nurses are needed to close the gap. They perform many duties, from medical histories to disease management, previously handled by doctors. While hospitals are the largest employers of nurses, the fastest growth -- and best pay -- can be found in physicians' offices. At minimum, you'll need to complete a formal training program. Some nursing positions call for an associate's, bachelor's or even master's degree.
2. E-Mail Marketer
Hiring demand: 0.65 active job seekers for every open position
Annual salary range: $43,840-$84,430
10-year growth projection: 28%
Job description: Spam I am. The fragmenting of the information market makes it harder and harder to get the attention of consumers. Just as a fisherman has better luck if the bait ends up where the fish are, more companies are turning to targeted e-mail efforts to get the right message to the right audience. Technical and quantitative skills are a plus to manage large distribution lists and analyze reports on the success or failure of electronic campaigns. A bachelor's degree typically is expected of job applicants.
3. Network Security Engineer
Hiring demand: 1.07 active job seekers for every open position
Annual salary range: $57,240-$97,660
10-year growth projection: 30%
Job description: Climbing a firewall of worry. The Internet has made information more accessible, but it has also created a rich environment for identity thieves, hackers and others looking to profit by misappropriating sensitive data. Specialists in network security must be well-versed in the latest technologies for fending off cyber-attacks. A formal degree is less important than relevant computer skills. Knowledge of all aspects of information technology, from software and hardware to networks and databases, pays dividends.
MORE HERE
|
|
10 Really Stupid Things The Mainstream Media Has Said About The Bilderberg Group In 2011 |
 This weekend, dozens upon dozens of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world will be gathering behind closed doors at a luxury hotel in Switzerland. All of the participants are sworn to secrecy and swarms of heavily armed security guards are making sure that nobody unauthorized gets in. Decisions will be made at this meeting which will fundamentally change our future. The CEO of Amazon.com will be there, as will the head of Google, one of the co-founders of Facebook and one of the top executives from Microsoft. The president of the EU will be in attendance, along with the president of the World Bank, the president of the European Central Bank, the head of the World Trade Organization and the top commander of NATO. Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller will be there. Royalty from all over Europe will be attending as well. Past attendees have included several U.S. presidents, Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Prince Charles, current British Prime Minister David Cameron, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates and current Texas governor Rick Perry. You would think that these meetings would be something that the mainstream media would want to cover. But unfortunately, the mainstream media mostly ignores the Bilderberg Group meetings, and if they do cover them they just crack a bunch of jokes about "conspiracy theories" and they do their best to play down the importance of the meetings.
Under normal circumstances, a gathering of top executives from Google, Facebook and Microsoft would have the media salivating. So would a gathering of some of the most important international politicians on the globe.
So why doesn't the mainstream media want to talk about the Bilderberg Group?
From June 9th to June 12th, over a hundred of the most powerful people on the planet will meet in utter secrecy and will discuss the future of the world.
All of the participants have been sworn not to reveal what is discussed.
Yet this doesn't interest the mainstream media at all?
Every year since 1954, the Bilderberg Group has been holding these meetings. For years, even the existence of this group was denied. On U.S. talk shows anyone that dared to suggest that the Bilderberg Group existed was mocked as a "conspiracy theorist".
Well, in recent years the alternative news has brought so much attention to the Bilderberg Group that everyone finally admits that, yes, the Bilderberg Group really does exist.
But now the mainstream media does everything they can to downplay the importance of the organization.
They suggest that anyone that believes that there is anything wrong with dozens of the most powerful people on the planet meeting in utter secrecy to discuss the future course of world events is "crazy".
If the Bilderberg Group is so unimportant, then why would people like Bill Clinton, Prince Charles, David Cameron, Tony Blair, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Angela Merkel, Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner, Rick Perry, David Rockefeller, Herman van Rompuy, Jean-Claude Trichet, Jeff Bezos, Chris R. Hughes, Eric Schmidt, Craig J. Mundie, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Richard Perle, Paul Volcker, Lawrence Summers, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden take the time to attend?
A full list of the "official attendees" of the Bilderberg Group in 2011 can be found here.
However, the truth is that the "unofficial attendees" are often even more interesting.
But the mainstream media acts like all of this is no big deal.
If they do decide to talk about the Bilderberg Group, they tend to crack jokes and make fun of "conspiracy theorists".
The following are 10 really stupid things that the mainstream media has said about the Bilderberg Group in 2011....
#1 CNBC: The 120 participants attend in a private capacity and, officially, they do not forge agreements over global economic policy.
#2 BBC News: The gnashing of teeth over Bilderberg is ridiculous, says Times columnist David Aaronovitch. "It's really an occasional supper club for the rich and powerful," he argues.
#3 Time Magazine: A vestige of the Cold War, the only drawback of the meeting could be that the Chinese and the Russians are still missing.
#4 Forbes: Admittedly, it’s fascinating that some secret society, like the Wizard of Oz, choreographs events on a global stage. Puppet masters of the public’s fate. Conspiracy theories punctuate the otherwise mundane din of modern life, but riveting as it all appears, I’m not buying it. Would they? Absolutely. Could they? Implausible.
#5 Fox News: But the secretive nature of the meetings, that first began in 1954, has sparked countless conspiracy theories by those who believe the group is trying to form a new world order of sorts.
#6 CNBC: Its secrecy only serves to add fuel to the innumerate conspiracy theories that circulate around the event, with Internet message boards often channelling Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown and putting the "club" in the same bracket as the Freemasons and "Illuminati."
#7 BBC News: Secret cabals extend beyond the Bilderberg Group. The Illuminati, which derives from a 16th Century Bavarian secret society, is alleged to be an all powerful secret society, including US presidents, that has controlled major world events. The Freemasons - famous for their peculiar handshakes - is a secret fraternity society that has become more open in recent years after extensive criticism.
#8 The Baltimore Sun: I suppose the Bilderberg Group, which was founded in 1954 at the Hotel Bilderberg in Holland, can supply us with a few thrills while we wait for Dan Brown to knock out another book. But a hotel in St. Moritz -- especially one that features Teddy's World for kids -- doesn't seem like the place to plot world domination. Shouldn't they be meeting in a secret underground lair?
#9 NBC Affiliate KETK: If you believe Mafia hitmen hired by Castro killed JFK, or President Clinton was involved in murder, or George W. Bush planned 9-11…then this story is for you. That’s because the real Masters of the Universe are gathered in St. Moritz to decide your future. It’s called the Bilderberg conference, and it means more to European reporters than anyone here.
#10 BBC News: Some people are more susceptible than others to believing in wacky cabals, says Prof Chris French, of Goldsmith College's psychology department. "It's people who tend to be alienated by the mainstream, who feel powerless. They have a need to have a sense of control."
Look, the truth is that dozens of the most powerful people on the planet are not meeting in utter secrecy just to play poker and smoke cigars.
They are having very real discussions that will have a very real influence on the direction of world events.
If that doesn't fit in with how you prefer to view the world, that is too bad. The ultra-elite are going to keep on doing what they are doing whether you acknowledge them or not.
In fact, they would very much prefer for most people to keep on ignoring them because that makes it so much easier for them to achieve their goals.
Sadly, most Americans will completely ignore the Bilderberg Group in 2011 because the mainstream media is telling them that it is not an important event.
So what do all of you think about the Bilderberg Group? Please feel free to leave a comment with your thoughts below....
Read more at The End of the American Dream |
|
10 Really Stupid Things The Mainstream Media Has Said About The Bilderberg Group In 2011 |
This weekend, dozens upon dozens of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world will be gathering behind closed doors at a luxury hotel in Switzerland. All of the participants are sworn to secrecy and swarms of heavily armed security guards are making sure that nobody unauthorized gets in. Decisions will be made at this meeting which will fundamentally change our future. The CEO of Amazon.com will be there, as will the head of Google, one of the co-founders of Facebook and one of the top executives from Microsoft. The president of the EU will be in attendance, along with the president of the World Bank, the president of the European Central Bank, the head of the World Trade Organization and the top commander of NATO. Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller will be there. Royalty from all over Europe will be attending as well. Past attendees have included several U.S. presidents, Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Prince Charles, current British Prime Minister David Cameron, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates and current Texas governor Rick Perry. You would think that these meetings would be something that the mainstream media would want to cover. But unfortunately, the mainstream media mostly ignores the Bilderberg Group meetings, and if they do cover them they just crack a bunch of jokes about "conspiracy theories" and they do their best to play down the importance of the meetings.
Under normal circumstances, a gathering of top executives from Google, Facebook and Microsoft would have the media salivating. So would a gathering of some of the most important international politicians on the globe.
So why doesn't the mainstream media want to talk about the Bilderberg Group?
From June 9th to June 12th, over a hundred of the most powerful people on the planet will meet in utter secrecy and will discuss the future of the world.
All of the participants have been sworn not to reveal what is discussed.
Yet this doesn't interest the mainstream media at all?
Every year since 1954, the Bilderberg Group has been holding these meetings. For years, even the existence of this group was denied. On U.S. talk shows anyone that dared to suggest that the Bilderberg Group existed was mocked as a "conspiracy theorist".
Well, in recent years the alternative news has brought so much attention to the Bilderberg Group that everyone finally admits that, yes, the Bilderberg Group really does exist.
But now the mainstream media does everything they can to downplay the importance of the organization.
They suggest that anyone that believes that there is anything wrong with dozens of the most powerful people on the planet meeting in utter secrecy to discuss the future course of world events is "crazy".
If the Bilderberg Group is so unimportant, then why would people like Bill Clinton, Prince Charles, David Cameron, Tony Blair, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Angela Merkel, Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner, Rick Perry, David Rockefeller, Herman van Rompuy, Jean-Claude Trichet, Jeff Bezos, Chris R. Hughes, Eric Schmidt, Craig J. Mundie, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Richard Perle, Paul Volcker, Lawrence Summers, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden take the time to attend?
A full list of the "official attendees" of the Bilderberg Group in 2011 can be found here.
However, the truth is that the "unofficial attendees" are often even more interesting.
But the mainstream media acts like all of this is no big deal.
If they do decide to talk about the Bilderberg Group, they tend to crack jokes and make fun of "conspiracy theorists".
The following are 10 really stupid things that the mainstream media has said about the Bilderberg Group in 2011....
#1 CNBC: The 120 participants attend in a private capacity and, officially, they do not forge agreements over global economic policy.
#2 BBC News: The gnashing of teeth over Bilderberg is ridiculous, says Times columnist David Aaronovitch. "It's really an occasional supper club for the rich and powerful," he argues.
#3 Time Magazine: A vestige of the Cold War, the only drawback of the meeting could be that the Chinese and the Russians are still missing.
#4 Forbes: Admittedly, it’s fascinating that some secret society, like the Wizard of Oz, choreographs events on a global stage. Puppet masters of the public’s fate. Conspiracy theories punctuate the otherwise mundane din of modern life, but riveting as it all appears, I’m not buying it. Would they? Absolutely. Could they? Implausible.
#5 Fox News: But the secretive nature of the meetings, that first began in 1954, has sparked countless conspiracy theories by those who believe the group is trying to form a new world order of sorts.
#6 CNBC: Its secrecy only serves to add fuel to the innumerate conspiracy theories that circulate around the event, with Internet message boards often channelling Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown and putting the "club" in the same bracket as the Freemasons and "Illuminati."
#7 BBC News: Secret cabals extend beyond the Bilderberg Group. The Illuminati, which derives from a 16th Century Bavarian secret society, is alleged to be an all powerful secret society, including US presidents, that has controlled major world events. The Freemasons - famous for their peculiar handshakes - is a secret fraternity society that has become more open in recent years after extensive criticism.
#8 The Baltimore Sun: I suppose the Bilderberg Group, which was founded in 1954 at the Hotel Bilderberg in Holland, can supply us with a few thrills while we wait for Dan Brown to knock out another book. But a hotel in St. Moritz -- especially one that features Teddy's World for kids -- doesn't seem like the place to plot world domination. Shouldn't they be meeting in a secret underground lair?
#9 NBC Affiliate KETK: If you believe Mafia hitmen hired by Castro killed JFK, or President Clinton was involved in murder, or George W. Bush planned 9-11…then this story is for you. That’s because the real Masters of the Universe are gathered in St. Moritz to decide your future. It’s called the Bilderberg conference, and it means more to European reporters than anyone here.
#10 BBC News: Some people are more susceptible than others to believing in wacky cabals, says Prof Chris French, of Goldsmith College's psychology department. "It's people who tend to be alienated by the mainstream, who feel powerless. They have a need to have a sense of control."
Look, the truth is that dozens of the most powerful people on the planet are not meeting in utter secrecy just to play poker and smoke cigars.
They are having very real discussions that will have a very real influence on the direction of world events.
If that doesn't fit in with how you prefer to view the world, that is too bad. The ultra-elite are going to keep on doing what they are doing whether you acknowledge them or not.
In fact, they would very much prefer for most people to keep on ignoring them because that makes it so much easier for them to achieve their goals.
Sadly, most Americans will completely ignore the Bilderberg Group in 2011 because the mainstream media is telling them that it is not an important event.
So what do all of you think about the Bilderberg Group? Please feel free to leave a comment with your thoughts below....
Read more at The End of the American Dream |
|
10 Reasons Why Lindsay Lohan Is Right About The Federal Reserve And The Price Of Food |
 Does Lindsay Lohan understand monetary policy better than Ben Bernanke does? The other day, her Twitter account sent out the following message: "Have you guys seen food and gas prices lately? U.S. $ will soon be worthless if the Fed keeps printing money!" Well, it turns out that it was a "sponsored tweet" that Lohan was paid to send out, but in a subsequent tweet Lohan explained that "i actually do care about gas and food prices, so whether it's an #ad or no, it's important for people to be aware of it." Okay, so we probably will not see Lohan at any "End the Fed" rallies, but it turns out that in her own bizarre way she has brought a little bit of attention to some very important issues. Food and gas prices are skyrocketing, and a lot of the blame for that can be placed on the shoulders of the Federal Reserve.
So does Lindsay Lohan really understand what is going on in the world of economics?
Of course not.
But if we can get celebrities talking about the Federal Reserve and rising prices that is a good thing.
Why?
Well, because Americans listen to celebrities. When a top celebrity says something controversial it gets a lot of attention. The more attention that we can draw to the problems the Federal Reserve is creating the better.
The reality is that the Federal Reserve has been at the heart of our economic problems for decades but most Americans don't understand the Fed or how it works. The more Americans that get educated about the Federal Reserve the better.
The following are ten reasons why all Americans should be concerned about the Federal Reserve and rising food prices....
#1 What we are witnessing right now is part of a long-term inflationary trend. Since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, the U.S. dollar has lost over 95 percent of its value. An item that cost $20.00 in 1970 would cost you $116.48 today. An item that cost $20.00 in 1913 would cost you $456.49 today.
#2 Over the past couple of years, the Federal Reserve has used a process called "quantitative easing" to pump hundreds of billions of new dollars into the financial system. This has helped push the cost of food, gas and just about everything else up. Even though "QE2" has now come to an end, the Federal Reserve has announced that they are going to continue to "reinvest" hundreds of billions of dollars into the financial system.
#3 The Federal Reserve is not the only central bank that has been doing this sort of thing. Sadly, central banks all over the world have been recklessly printing money over the past several years. This is creating inflation all over the planet.
#4 Prices are going up but wages are not. One recent survey found that 9 out of 10 U.S. workers do not expect their wages to keep up with soaring food prices and soaring gas prices over the next 12 months.
#5 We have already seen a tremendous amount of food inflation in the United States during the last 12 months. According to a recent CNBC article, over the past year many of the most popular foods in America have absolutely skyrocketed in price....
Coffee, for instance, is up 40 percent. Celery is 28 percent higher while butter prices rose 26.4 percent. Rounding out the top five are bacon, at 23.5 percent, and cabbage, at 23.3 percent.
#6 In many areas of the world food inflation is far worse than it is in America. Over the past year, the global price of food has risen by 37 percent and this has pushed approximately 44 million more people around the world into poverty.
#7 When the Federal Reserve and other central banks create new money, it usually goes to big banks and major financial institutions first. So what have the big banks and the major financial institutions been doing with this new money? Well, they have been sinking a lot of it into hard assets such as oil, precious metals and agricultural commodities. Over the past 12 months, almost every single agricultural commodity has risen substantially in price. For example, the global price of wheat has approximately doubled over the past year. But it is not just wheat that has been skyrocketing. Check out what a recent Bloomberg article had to say about what has been happening to many key agricultural commodities over the past year....
Corn futures advanced 77 percent in the past 12 months in Chicago trading, a global benchmark, rice gained 39 percent and sugar jumped 64 percent.
#8 Many areas of the world are experiencing severe drought right now, and this is also harming food prices. For example, the Horn of Africa is experiencing the worst drought that it has seen in 60 years.
#9 The United States is also having crop problems as well. All of the flooding, wildfires and tornadoes that we have seen this year have certainly not helped things. There is even a major "east coast stink bug epidemic" which is causing chaos for large numbers of farmers. In general, U.S. agricultural production has not been blessed this year. It just seems like there is crisis after crisis.
#10 A lot of agricultural production that would go for food is now going for other purposes. For example, almost a third of all corn grown in the United States is now used for fuel. This is putting a lot of stress on the price of corn.
So how concerned about food prices should we be?
Well, renowned investor Jim Rogers recently put it this way....
"We’ve got to do something or we’re going to have no food at any price at times in the next few years."
That doesn't sound good.
But it is not just the price of food that is going up.
The price of gas has also gotten crazy.
Right now, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States is approximately $3.54.
One year ago, it was $2.76.
Thankfully, the price of gas has actually come down a bit recently. Earlier this year it hit $3.99.
Sadly, back in the 90s you could go to just about any gas station and fill up for about a dollar a gallon. Over the past couple of years we have gotten comfortable with outrageous gas prices, but the reality is that what we are seeing now is part of a very disturbing long-term trend....
Health care costs are also spinning out of control. In a recent article about health care statistics, I noted some of the stats that show that the price of health care in the U.S. has been absolutely soaring. The following are a couple of those statistics....
*According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today they account for approximately 16.3%.
*The United States spent 2.47 trillion dollars on health care in 2009. It is being projected that the U.S. will spend 4.5 trillion dollars on health care in 2019.
Education has also gotten insanely expensive as well. In a recent article I wrote entitled "Is College Worth It?", I noted that since 1978 the cost of college tuition in the United States has gone up by over 900 percent.
Today, Average yearly tuition at U.S. private universities is up to $27,293. That number has soared by 29% in just the past five years.
Unfortunately, it appears that things are going to get even worse. Thanks to dramatic budget cuts by many state governments, it is being projected that college tuition costs are going to rise even faster this year.
All of these rising prices are really squeezing the budgets of families all across America.
Things are getting really tough out there.
So if food prices keep going up this rapidly, what are we all going to eat?
Well, one scientist claims that he has been able to create an "edible steak" out of human feces.
How gross is that?
But don't laugh - if the price of food keeps going up this rapidly many Americans might have to literally eat garbage someday.
The U.S. economy is in the middle of a long-term economic decline and thousands more Americans fall out of the middle class every single day.
Until the past couple of years, the vast majority of Americans believed that things would always be wonderful in America.
Now that has completely changed.
According to a new poll by CBS News and The New York Times, 39 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. economy has now entered a "permanent decline".
As prices continue to rise, the number of American families that will not be able to put food on the table is going to continue to go up. Already there are 44 million Americans on food stamps. People are going to get desperate. Society is going to continue to crumble.
So yes, there are lots of reasons why Lindsay Lohan and everyone else in America should be very concerned about the Federal Reserve and the price of food.
Once our economic prosperity is gone it is going to be incredibly difficult to get back.
Read more at The End of the American Dream |
|
10 Ways to Dig Yourself Out of Credit Card Debt |
Many Americans have struggled with the burden of credit card debt at one time or another. And getting out of the red and into the black can often seem overwhelming.
If this is any consolation, you're not alone. Credit card debt affects nearly one-third of Americans. At the end of 2010, the average consumer in the U.S. owed $4,200 to credit card companies.
While that number is down slightly from years past, it remains startlingly high. If you are one the millions of Americans burdened by credit cards, here are 10 ways to help you dig yourself out of trouble.
1. Stop Using Your Cards
The first step in ridding yourself of credit card debt is to stop adding to your balance. Credit cards are convenient, but if each purchase is increasing your charged interest, the card isn't worth it. It will be difficult at first, but switching to an all-cash system will help you stay within your monthly budget. Spending with cash is another way to become aware of what you spend so that you can waste less and apply more toward quickly minimizing the balance.
2. Track Spending
Behavioral studies have shown that individuals who keep a record of every purchase spend less money. You can do this electronically or with the old-fashioned pen and paper. Of course, it's best to do it with a written budget, but even with no budget in place, just becoming aware of what you spend through tracking has been proven to positively affect your bottom line. Review your results weekly to see if your spending is on track with your goals.
[InvestingAnswers Feature: 8 Step to Creating a Smart Financial Plan]
3. Prioritize Your Debt
Not all debt is created equal. If you have two credit cards and one has a 6.5% interest rate and another has 12%, the long-term cost of the loans will be different. By shifting resources from the lower-interest card to the card with higher interest means a lower total payment.
Some financial experts recommend the "debt snowball" technique, which involves starting with paying the smallest debt first. The idea is that eliminating the lowest balance will create positive momentum. Plus, the minimum payment of the recently cleared debt can then be applied to the balance of the next in line.
4. Get a Game Plan
Paying credit card debt can seem like endlessly throwing cash into a black hole. A great way to take charge is to determine the maximum amount you can pay and how many months it will take you to become debt-free. Having a plan will help you reach your goals faster, and having a "debt-free date" can keep you on track when times get tough.
[InvestingAnswers Feature: 7 Steps to Perfect Credit]
5. Reduce Expenses
It might sound obvious, but it is essential to live within your means in order rid yourself of credit card debt. If you haven't already, take a good look at where your money goes every month and cut out all non-essential expenses. Eating out is one common area where funds can drain your monthly budget. Overspending at the grocery store, impulse buys on the weekends and daily lattes are other areas where the fat can often be trimmed.
6. Consolidate Balances
If you have balances on multiple credit cards, it could be in your best interest to consolidate them. Consolidation involves transferring the money owed on one card to one that has a lower interest rate. This move can simplify the repayment process and could save you hundreds of dollars in interest payments. Keep in mind that balance transfers often involve a fee of $250 or more -- so be sure the long-run savings outweigh the hit you'll take in transfer fees.
7. Drain Your Savings Account
Saving money is important, but the interest earned from a savings account pales in comparison to the interest you're paying on a credit card. For example, if you have $1,000 in a CD earning 2% (or less) and $1,000 owed to a credit card with 18% interest, any earnings from your savings account will be lost to the higher interest of the credit card. The better solution is to reduce the amount owed on a credit card by liquidating a savings account. Then after the debt is paid off, you can begin to build back your savings. Throwing all available resources onto your debt will help you become debt-free that much faster.
8. Sell Your Stuff
If you're like most people, you have plenty of stuff around your house that you never use. Hosting a garage sale or posting items on Craigslist can help you free up closet space and make money to put toward your credit card bills. There are also a number of new websites that offer swapping services [www.thredup.com/]. While you won't make anything by selling your items, you can trade goods you don't need for those you do -- say, baby clothes for toddler clothes -- and save yourself any new expense.
9. Get a Second Job
There are basically two ways to get your finances back in order: by reducing expenses or increasing income (or both). A part-time job is a surefire way way to increase your monthly income and an effective means for eliminating debt -- as long as you're adamant about using the extra income only for that purpose Whether its waiting tables, baby sitting, freelance writing or filling out online surveys, find a way to increase the money you bring in each month and pay it straight to your debt.
10. Negotiate with Creditors
Negotiating with credit-card companies isn't the optimal solution, but depending on your situation, it could offer a viable resolution. It provides the opportunity to pay a lump sum to clear the debt, which is often less than the amount owed, or lowering your payments for a few months while you get your head above water. Just remember, a lump-sum settlement can severely penalize your credit score (it's ultimately considered a default), so be sure you're clear on the implications before you agree to the terms.
The Investing Answer: Credit card debt can be a mental weight that keeps you feeling defeated and overwhelmed. As you begin to shed these obligations, you'll find that with every card paid off, a burden is lifted off your shoulders. It's not an impossible task, and with a solid game plan and small behavioral changes, you can achieve your financial goals.
This article originally appeared on InvestingAnswers
Author: Brian Reed
10 Ways to Dig Yourself Out of Credit Card Debt
Read more at Investing Answers |
|
10 yaear |
|
|
10 Year US treasury note yield |
10 Year US treasury note yield versus the SP 500 index
1) Focus on that key support level
2) ABC pattern ? Or was "A" just a fake move" ??
We shall soon find out
Read more at Alpha Global Investors |
|
11 Silver Investor Mentality Shifts |
By Silver Shield,on July 13th,2011
dont-tread-on.me
We are going to see a huge shift in silver investor mentality. (By the looks of today’s action it could be today.) Silver buyers will no longer be “nerdy”guys talking about Austrian Economics or “momentum monkeys”trying to make a quick buck trading metals. It will be wide eyed panic buying as people wake up to the fact they everything they have ever worked for is being destroyed by the massive money creation from the world’s central banks. Once people see that the only answer the bankers have is to print more money and that the only answer the politicians have is to spend more money, they will see that there is no safe place on earth to store their wealth other than real tangible assets. And of course the best real tangible asset is silver. (Read the Silver Bullet and the Silver Shield.)
I predicted that silver,at one point,would not be available at any dollar price. You can throw away all of your $50, $100, $500 price targets, because society would finally see the enormity of the fraud in the silver market. Once this fraud exposed,no person on earth would dare let go of their silver for fiat paper money. Sure a couple of ounces might be available at the local shop, but the vast majority of the silver markets will be as barren as the shelves of a post collapse Soviet Union grocery store. This global mentality shift in asset values will lead to a paradigm shift where the world no longer wants debt money. Only real money will do in the new paradigm.
1. Physical investors who have been stacking physical silver will be stunned by the sudden appreciation. It will be akin to someone winning the lottery. They will shocked at the enormity of their new found wealth which occurs at the same time the economy becomes an absolute horror show. A shift in the perception of wealth will confirm that they are holding something truly precious. The years of being told they are crazy for buying silver will finally give way to, “you were right.”After the shock wears off, these newly minted kings will seek to make the most off of this once in a life time opportunity. These men were astute enough to buy silver when everyone said they were nuts, they are certainly now not going to give up what they have for some dirty dollars that they did not want years ago. They will wait for something much, much better. They will not see immediately many opportunities to invest their new wealth in, because the final throes of the debt based economy will be horrific. No one will invest when it is not certain what will happen to humanity. They will have no choice but to wait until the act plays out and the music stops.
2. Long term paper investors who have been sitting on the sidelines, will rush to buy silver this time around. I cannot tell you how many people I know that are literally dragging their feet buying silver. ( You know who you are.) They understand why to buy, but it is just so hard for them to pull the trigger. Unfortunately,it will not be until much higher prices that they will finally pull the trigger. When they do buy, they will be joining a fast and furious rush as those fence sitters finally panic for the exits. They will see that Europe’s debt problem, is the world’s debt problem. We cannot solve debt with more debt. They will see a world awash in more debt/money. They will see that no paper asset is safe with the amount of money printing that will occur this next round of “too big to fails.”This time the “too big to fails”won’t be some puny, billion dollar company, it will be trillion dollar nations. I have said that there is quadrillions of dollars in paper assets and only a few million ounces of real physical silver on the market. Right now, there is probably less than 1% of people invested in silver,what will the price of silver be if it went back to 15% of the population like it did in the 80′s? Don’t forget the last time precious metals went up it was really only the Western nations that participated in that bull run. This time, it is truly a global reality with China leading the way.
3. Silver retailers will be stunned as people throw their fiat dollar for real tangible metals. Some retailers will celebrate and sell everything they have at higher and higher prices. They will expect to buy back in at a lower price, but this time instead of correcting, it keeps going up. After a short while these former precious metals players will see that the world changed and that they were on the wrong side of the trade. They will then become one of those panic buyers that they once celebrated selling to.
4. The smart silver retailer will see mentality shift of these silver buyers and take silver off of the market. They will see a mentality that is not one of a monetary or freedom “nerds”. It is not the mentality of a momentum monkey trying to make a quick buck trading metal. It will be one of wide eyed sudden panic that people’s entire life’s savings are at risk and that they need to buy silver (or other real assets.) These new buyers will not be letting go of their silver anytime soon,because they will no longer trust the dollar,the stock market,the banks,or the government. The smart retailer will now see that the real money is not selling the metal,but in holding the metal. The longer they hold it,the more that they may never sell the metal for paper money again. They will join the rest of the strong handed investors that will not sell until there is a new monetary paradigm established or they can sell/leverage their silver directly for other income producing assets.
5. Momentum monkeys, who play the paper markets on real assets, will seize upon the new mentality a drive the paper markets higher as they smell blood in the silver short water. Hedge funds will jump all over this market as they seek to squeeze every dollar out of the silver market. Vast paper wealth will be made in a very short time. These momentum monkeys will fail to see that while they were right on the trade but they were in the wrong vehicle. The paper market will cheat them of their ultimate reward of wealth. The mentality shift in asset values that will send real assets soaring at the same time all paper asset markets fail. Even if the momentum monkeys are “right”with their long silver bet…
- there is nothing stopping the CRIMEX from changing the rules for paper traders capping their gains.
- there is nothing stopping a failure of their brokerage account or their bank as the paper markets seize.
- there is nothing stopping people from not accepting their paper “winnings”for the real physical silver.
- there is nothing stopping the very dollars they “won”from not having any value at all.
6. JP Morgan the ultimate silver buyer? In the final act I do not expect JP Morgan to fall on the sword to defend a failing system. JP along with many other banks know full well the reality of the physical silver market. They have been perpetuating this fraud on a massive scale for years. They have kept the regulators at bay by having their boys actually become the regulators. They know full well that they are trading 100 paper ounces to 1 physical ounces. They are doing this because it is easy money to make now. During this mentality shift they will change with the wind and be first in line for the real metal that they are in control of. These banksters will most likely shift their losing silver short positions on to some other shell company,pension fund,the Federal Reserve or most likely the tax payers. These former silver shorts could ride the physical silver market all the way up. (I may have to change my Blythe Masters Rides The Silver Rocket pictures to ones of ecstasy…)
7. Institutional silver sellers will take their silver off the market. Most people do not realize that the recent depletion of silver on the CRIMEX from 41 million ounces to 28 million ounces has NOT been from people buying and taking delivery of physical silver. It has been from cancellation of warrants of sellers no longer wishing to sell. This is a huge factor from the supply side of silver that will push the price up further.
8. Miners will no longer seek to rush to push more real metal into the paper markets. If they do sell their metal they will most likely sell it in Asia where there will be a huge demand for the metal. These miners will also see that like OPEC or DeBeers,there is great power in restricting output of their product. Most silver is merely a byproduct of mining other metals. Smart miners would be wise to sell their zinc or other metals and keep their silver byproduct as profit. This silver would grow in value and not be taxed. Since they never sell it,there is no tax on its increasing value. This increasing value would be monetized through the appreciation of their stock price as their balance sheet becomes more and more attractive. (Somewhere,someone is smiling at this thought…)
9. Corporations who were once comfortable with paper contracts guaranteeing delivery of their metal, will only want immediate physical delivery. Silver is such a strategic metal and is used in such small quantities. There are billions of dollars in corporate valuations at risk if corporations cannot secure the basic components for their products. Companies like Apple computer will whip out the big check book for only the real thing. Corporations will use their power to create a stock pile which will add further demand. Most likely they will bypass the paper markets all together and deal directly with the corporations who mine the silver. What a power shift that will be when tech giants have to go hat in hand to a small mining company to get their metal. Who knows,maybe these tech giants will use their wealth and just buy the whole mining company…
10. Mining nations will make their move. So many mines are in nations that can and will,at the drop of a hat,nationalize mines. Nations will be facing tremendous social upheaval and will not hesitate to steal wealth from the mines that rest in their lands. China once the largest exporter of silver only 5 years ago is now the largest importer of silver. Bolivia was on the verge of nationalizing their mines last May,they could pull the trigger anytime they want. Even in the United States,do you really think the thieves in Washington will not steal the mines in America? Or the CRIMEX or the SLV? Or even it’s citizens?
For the record,I do not think they will go for the little guys like us. First the majority of silver holders are smart enough to hide their silver beyond the sight the Federales. Second,the majority of silver owners I know are former military,gun owners who don’t trust the government. They would never willingly give up their silver anymore than they would give up their guns,food or children. If they won’t give it up,what are they going to do send in the SWAT team to grab some Mercury dimes? Finally,I believe that the government will have much bigger problems on its hands with riots and starvation to mount any effort for confiscation. All of this assumes that these bozos even understand how important silver is.
11. The Anti-Hegemon makes it’s move. I have written that there is a group of nations that have not benefited from the current world order and are seeking a way to end it. They have been very wise to not agitate the mortally wounded beast of the Anglo American Empire. They have been sitting on the side lines sharpening their knives waiting for the right time to carve up the remains. China is leading these nations with their huge reserves and the opening up of new markets like the Pan Asian Gold Exchange and the Hong Kong Mercantile Exchange. These nations have been using their paper assets to buy real assets all over the world. China is now in every continent buying oil,farms,and mines. They do not waste their wealth on frivolous showcase properties like the Japanese did when they bought golf courses and Manhattan sky scrapers. They are buying assets that will be the basis of power in the new paradigm of real wealth.
This mentality shift in real asset values will ultimately lead to a paradigm shift in power. Those that have the real assets will be the ones making the rules. Those investors who hold the physical metal will finally have the upper hand over the paper manipulators. Those miners will finally become more valuable then these frivolous companies like Facebook. Those nations that have the natural resources will have the upper hand economically over nations that have nothing else to offer but debt and death. This shift is power will be from those that produce nothing to those that produce something. Reality will take hold and the day of something for nothing will be over for good.
When the game changes you will see that the counter party risk becomes the most important aspect of investing. Paper assets rely on another party to fulfill their end of the bargain,real assets do not. When the world is panicking, it will be every man for himself. There are many more powerful people higher up the food chain that will get theirs before you get yours. A very wise man,Ponce,once said. “if you don’t hold it, you don’t own it.”When this shift happens, will you be in the right place, at the right time? Got physical silver?
|
|
11 Stocks Breaking Down |
The stocks below are showing signs of, or already in the process of, breaking down as the smart money appears to be leaving them in a subtle manner. There are stocks trading at its peak and finally showing some vulnerability, while on the other extreme, there are stocks that have been in a channel near or at their lows, before finally breaking down below those lows.
Here's my favorite of those listed below - Acorda Therapeutic (ACOR) - If it can break below $30, I think there will be an immediate push lower to the $27 to fill the gap made back in May, which would provide a very nice return on your investment.
Here are 11 Stocks Breaking Down.
Read more...
 Ryan Mallory is the co-founder of SharePlanner Inc, a financial website devoted to Day-Trading, Swing-Trading (both long & short) and exchange-traded funds. Ryan makes a strong emphasis on risk mitigation strategies, trading transparency, and trader education - not to mention a great set of stock screens as well.
Be Sure to Check out Ryan's Site at Shareplanner.com
Read more at SharePlanner
|
