Necessity Stocks (NEED)

[dupedbysteve]

Renewable suppying of a basic necessity like lumber products should do very well. I am investing in tree farming in costa rica, primarily fast growing teak, with a harvest in 20 years and 2 thinnings bringing money before that. The company i found is run by Steve Brunner, honest to a fault. Tropical America Tree Farms(TATF). Returns are higher than historical averages for the stock market. The new Kyoto accords on carbon adds a nice profit as well as one teak tree stores 50 pounds or more of carbon.

[Bobby1010]

Totally understand your specific purhase...just speaking in broader economic terms. Not sure about Godiva but actually did see today that premium chocolate brands are faring very well :)

[Tina]

Hi bobby,

Yes, I agree with you about many putting off large purchases

The reason I bought a new washer-

- my old washer's warranty expired
- it now only works on (gentle cycle lol)
- tax free weekend
- 10% off with free delivery
- new washer cleans more thoroughly and can wash more clothes with less water (save on gas and water bill)
- front loading washers spin more efficiently which = less time in the dryer which = more cost savings

IMO the washer will pay for itself relatively quickly. I wouldn't suggest one of these for a single person unless they do a LOT of laundry because they're designed for large loads.

Did you say chocolate? Is Godiva a publicly traded company? lol

[Bobby1010]

Tina...re: your necessity chart. Interesting but believe you also need to consider purchase cycle and elasticity of demand

For example...do I need a washer/dryer? Yes. Do I need one tomorrow...doubtful. In fact given the economy many are likely putting off large consumer durables purchases for a while. Gas on the other hand...very short cycle between purchases and truly a must have product. Highly inelastic to price...due to demand. Food...(at least certain types) same deal.

Typically while not necessary I'm sure you know that products like, chocolate, coke, alcohol and tobacco also tend to trend up in consumption during these highly stressful times.

FYI.

[Tina]

Thanks learning and welcome!

[learning as I go]

Hi Tina, interesting concept for a board.

[Tina]

I'm very disappointed that they didn't carry compost bins.

That's next on my list of things to do.

[Tina]

I just got back from Home Depot and took advantage of the tax free holiday savings for buying energy efficient appliances.

Bought a front loading LG (energy star) washing machine.

[Tina]

Does Green Energy Add 5 Million Jobs?
by Jeffrey Ball
Friday, November 7, 2008
provided by


Calls for a clean-energy system in the U.S. have long met with sticker shock. Now, the cost of making the transition -- hundreds of billions of dollars -- is being touted as a selling point.

President-elect Barack Obama and his energy advisers have been making the case that a multibillion-dollar government investment in everything from wind turbines to a "smart" electrical grid is just what's needed to help revive the economy. The lure is millions of government-subsidized "green jobs."

On the campaign trail, Mr. Obama argued that spending $150 billion over the next decade to boost energy efficiency would help create five million jobs. The jobs would include insulation installers, to make houses more energy-efficient, wind-turbine builders, to displace coal-fired electricity, and construction workers, to build greener buildings and upgrade the electrical grid.

The numbers are debated by the Obama advisers themselves, and are likely to spark debate when Congress considers a stimulus package including green jobs. But a big government push, focused on jobs, may represent the best chance in years for renewable energy and energy efficiency to take root in the U.S., a voracious energy consumer.

"It's a terrible situation that we find ourselves in," says Bracken Hendricks, an energy adviser to Mr. Obama and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning Washington think tank. "But it's exciting that these issues are getting some attention."

The green-jobs argument rests on the notion that big capital investments in new-energy technology today will be more than offset by savings in reduced fossil-fuel costs. Though oil prices have fallen, the International Energy Agency predicted Thursday that once the economy picks up again, they will resume climbing, potentially topping $200 a barrel by 2030. The IEA called the current energy system "patently unsustainable" and called for "radical action by governments."

The added allure of clean-energy spending as economic stimulus is that the industry is relatively young and growing fast. Unlike the fossil-fuel industry, which has matured over decades, it is just starting to build its basic infrastructure -- wind turbines, solar panels and a more-sophisticated electric-transmission grid.

Several studies estimate that $1 invested in renewable energy or energy efficiency would yield up to four times as many jobs as $1 invested in oil and gas, whose basic infrastructure of wells, refineries and pipelines has been around for years. Moreover, those studies say, clean-energy jobs are likely to be centered in the U.S., unlike jobs in the oil and gas industry, which increasingly are spread around the world.

Critics say analyzing only new green jobs misses half the story.

"It's not looking at the other side of the coin: You are spending more money for your energy," says Anne Smith, a vice president at CRA International. The consulting firm wrote a report for the coal-mining industry in April that concluded that, under a bill to cap global-warming emissions, gains in green jobs would be "more than offset" by job losses elsewhere in the economy. That bill failed, but Mr. Obama has said he supports capping emissions.

The green-jobs argument isn't new. In the 1970s, amid an energy and economic crisis, President Jimmy Carter cited job creation as one reason for his calls to increase federal spending on renewable-energy research and development. But the argument has taken on new life in the past few years, as environmental activists have concluded that saving the planet isn't enough to make most Americans support higher government spending.

The job creation number cited by Mr. Obama has its roots in several green-jobs studies. Each projected different numbers, because each made different assumptions -- for instance, about the number of additional jobs that would be created by the spending of every person directly employed in a green job.

Robert Pollin, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, who co-wrote another study, questions the job target touted by the Obama campaign, saying it would cost much more.

Mr. Pollin's study, sponsored by the Center for American Progress, came out in September, after green jobs had become a theme on the presidential campaign trail. It said that $100 billion spent over two years could produce two million green jobs.

Even Mr. Pollin's study assessed only the number of jobs that might be added if the government spent more money on clean energy. It didn't count jobs that might be lost elsewhere in the economy if the country shifted to costlier sources of energy.

Mr. Pollin says he's working on a fuller study now. He and other green-jobs advocates say that, on balance, shifting to cleaner sources of energy creates more jobs than it destroys.

The Apollo Alliance, a San Francisco coalition of environmental and labor groups, also released a study in September. It concluded that five million green jobs could be had with an investment of $500 billion -- more than three times Mr. Obama's number.

Kate Gordon, co-director of the Apollo Alliance, says the numbers are less important than the message. "Honestly," she says, "it's just to inspire people."

Write to Jeffrey Ball at [e-mail]

[Tina]

Thanks Bobby

I'm a firm believe that there's always money to be made no matter what economical conditions we're facing.

[Bobby1010]

Smart approach Tina...considerations in this regard are almost boundless. Much in the B2B (business to business) world also. Example: Travel budgets cut...likely more WebEx/Conference Call meetings. My company is already going this direction. For every cutback there is a resulting opportunity.

Thanks for developing.

[PIZZABUSTER1]

its ok everyone doing same thing so use to pizza,, im sick of seeing pizza-- i eat for breakfast lunch and dinner

[skudaddy]

Its not that funny, ur not missing much lol

[Tina]

thanks pizza, errr I mean gold!

[PIZZABUSTER1]

hey tina like the new boared

[Tina]

ugggh I forgot

and hubby has control over the remote lol

[skudaddy]

MADtv

[Tina]

which one?

[skudaddy]

your show's on now...

[Tina]

well that's a good thing ;)

[skudaddy]

Hey dear :) we meet again

[Tina]

GOV. EASLEY ANNOUNCES CONSUMER SAVINGS ON ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES
Purchase ‘Energy Star’ Items Tax-Free This Weekend
RALEIGH – Gov. Mike Easley announced that North Carolina consumers can find significant savings on the purchase of energy efficient appliances during the state’s first tax-free weekend for energy efficient appliances, which runs Friday, Nov. 7 through Sunday, Nov. 9. The tax-free weekend gives consumers a break from state and local taxes on big-ticket items such as clothes washers, freezers, refrigerators and other appliances that carry the “Energy Star” label.

“In today’s tough economy, families need a break wherever they can find one. This tax holiday will help them save money they can use for food, gas, rent or other necessities,” Easley said. “In addition, purchasing an ‘Energy Star’ appliance is a step toward keeping our environment cleaner, something we should all strive to do.”

“Energy Star” products are designed to operate more efficiently, resulting in the production of less greenhouse gas. The products also use less energy, saving consumers money on their power bills. The products meet the energy efficient standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Clothes washers, freezers, refrigerators, central air conditioners, room air conditioners, air-source heat pumps, geothermal heat pumps, ceiling fans, dehumidifiers and programmable thermostats will be exempt from state and local taxes during the holiday provided they carry the “Energy Star” label. The items will be exempt from state and local sales and use taxes when purchased between 12:01 a.m. Friday and 11:59 p.m. Sunday.

Items purchased for use in a trade or business and for rentals are not covered by the exemption. Purchases of qualifying “Energy Star” products by contractors who will install the products in structures for customers are subject to the tax even when purchased during the holiday.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy, Americans saved enough energy in 2007 to avoid an amount of greenhouse gas emissions equal to the amount released by 27 million cars. Americans also saved $16 billion on their utility bills in 2007 by using “Energy Star” appliances.

[Tina]

Welcome

I was watching Emeril last night on Planetgreen.com and came up with the idea for this board.

Although this board isn't specifically about going green, it's a trend that I've noticed more lately and IMO is tied in with the changing economy. Not only does it make sense to go green to benefit the environment but to conserve and save money as well.

Got to run but will be fixing the ibox up a little more later.