Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
How Firms Tap Overseas Cash
By Kate Linebaugh | The Wall Street Journal – 15 hours ago.
U.S. companies say much of their cash is trapped overseas. But that doesn't mean they can't put it to use at home.
With some careful structuring, companies including Hewlett-Packard Co. and General Electric Co. have set up ways to borrow money from their foreign subsidiaries. In some cases, the firms use the funds for daily operations or to buy back stock.
The loans have to be short term. Yet when the borrowing is carefully set up to comply with Internal Revenue Service rules and U.S. auditing standards, the funds can be used over and over without incurring taxes.
Companies are not required to disclose these moves, which makes it difficult to assess how many use them. In interviews, corporate treasurers, chief financial officers and tax attorneys say the practice is common as more cash piles in overseas accounts.
[entire article.....]
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/firms-tap-overseas-cash-025500478.html
Systemic Risk is the new word we use for the abuse of credit and the financial collapse in 2008.
It's not about some conspiracy and yet there were a very small percentage of the population influential in the failure.
It's about throttling human ambition, fear and security.
------------------------------------------------------
The future of the world rests on a World Court.
We are a Nation of Laws and, in time, we must develop a system of justice that the World can accept.
This is the New World Order.
In My Humble Opinion.
Good point!
Fiat currency can be produced faster and in greater quantities than the back-breaking work and energy needed to mine gold.
There's a real incentive to hold down Gold and Silver price......
To maintain the value of paper.
For the past year (18 months) Gold price has drifted.
Real demand from the jewelry industry and investor sentiment has been muted, perhaps from the rise of the US stock market or low interest rates.
Both are due to the Fed's injection of paper.
Japan is printing and Europe is 'creating'.
It's a slow smolder at this time......
With banks buying 12% of production this rocket just needs a spark.
I don't know whom to believe.......
Forbes reports .........
3/27/2013 @ 3:29PM
Central Banks Bought More Than $3B In Gold In 2013: UBS
http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2013/03/27/central-banks-bought-more-than-3-trillion-in-gold-in-2013-ubs/
................from their article:
"As prices have dropped and investors lost faith, central banks have been on the opposite side of the trade, gobbling up bullion at a rate of 27-metric tons a month"
[total world production in 2011 was 2700 metric tons]
http://goldsheetlinks.com/production2.htm
[total gold recycling declined in 2012]
http://www.kitco.com/reports/KitcoNews20130214AS_b.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
The question is:
Who's on the profit side of the trade?
The sellers who exit the ETFs and sell to capitalize on earnings,
Or
The Bankers,
Who use Gold as an asset. Buying about 12% of production with no real improvement in spot gold price.
Let me quote you:
Bullets should cost as much as cigarets.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_true_cost_of_manufacturing_a_carton_of_Marlboro_cigarettes.
Here is a typical manuacturing model from "Health Canada" website.
Notice taxes taking $42.89 out of the proposed $53.01 wholesale price. This is a Canadian site and dollar amounts are Canadian. US and Canadian exchange rates at time of article (2002) are apporximately $1 Canadian =$.63 US. Canadian taxes have typically been higher than US rates on tobacco products. Production costs in US are believed by many to be less due to superior automation and local tobacco farming.
"To analyse the impact of an ignition propensity standard on cigarette manufacturing costs, a baseline model of the cost structure of a representative cigarette manufacturer was developed. Exhibit 2-9 presents this model.
The figures in Exhibit 2-9 show that total manufacturing costs (i.e., before operating profits and taxes) for a representative cigarette manufacturer are approximately $5.70 per carton. Of this amount, materials comprise the major cost factor, while labour constitutes a relatively small portion of costs, reflecting the largely automated nature of cigarette production. Purchased leaf tobacco is the largest single cost input at $1.15 per carton, or more than 20 percent of total costs. Handling, transport and storage costs for tobacco at the early stage of production are also significant, at approximately 17 percent of total costs. Subsequent steps in the production process - tobacco processing, plug making, and cigarette making - together account for approximately 19 percent of total costs. Packaging and shipping costs represent 14 percent of the total, while general business expenses (which include building depreciation and overhead) account for the remaining 30 percent.
The model estimates operating profits of $4.43 per carton. Thus, operating profits represent approximately 44 percent of the before-tax wholesale price of a carton of cigarettes. When taxes are taken into account, however, the price charged by manufacturers - an estimated $10.12 per carton - represents only 19 percent of the estimated wholesale price of $53.01 per carton.
Exhibit 2-9 - Cost Structure of a Representative Cigarette Manufacturer
(2002 Canadian Dollars per Carton of 200 Cigarettes)
Labour Energy Materials Depreciation Total
Purchased Leaf Tobacco $1.152 $1.15
Handling, Transport and Storage $0.98
Tobacco Processing $0.00 $0 .032 $0.22
Plug Making (1) $0.081 $0.007 $0.326 $0.004 $0.42
Cigarette Making (2) $0.148 $0.014 $0.253 $0.036 $0.45
Packaging/Shipping (3) $0.220 $0.020 $0.511 $0.015 $0.77
Business Expenses $1.71
Operating Profits $4.43
Taxes (4) $42.89
Total Wholesale Price = $53.01
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_true_cost_of_manufacturing_a_carton_of_Marlboro_cigarettes.
Modern Presidents use contrived International conflicts for political gain.
Real humans are involved as fodder for the games of political posturing.
It's just a game....just a means to and end.
Karma is an act.
Reminds me of a song........Karn Evil;
Emerson Lake and Palmer - Welcome Back (Karn Evil 9 1st Impression part II) - live 1977.avi
Genetic monopoly? Scarey!
People are our greatest asset.
There is no product or service without this very basic commodity.
There is no vendor or buyer.
The word symbiotic comes to mind.....
sym·bi·o·sis (smb-ss, -b-)
n. pl. sym·bi·o·ses (-sz)
1. Biology A close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member.
2. A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Symbiotic
There can be no economy without people.
Our path in this world is personal.
Our potential growth is evolutionary!
We must develop together as a species.
Together we form our government.
The principals of government, our elected officials,
Must adhere to Jefferson's Constitutional dictate:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Maybe Jefferson understood why people can produce product/service when their children are feed.
Funny you should mention Bitcoin.....
Front page of section C 3/22/2013:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324373204578374611351125202.html
By JEFFREY SPARSHOTT
The U.S. is applying money-laundering rules to "virtual currencies," amid growing concern that new forms of cash bought on the Internet are being used to fund illicit activities.
The move means that firms that issue or exchange the increasingly popular online cash will now be regulated in a similar manner as traditional money-order providers such as Western Union Co. WU +0.21% They would have new bookkeeping requirements and mandatory reporting for transactions of more than $10,000.
Moreover, firms that receive legal tender in exchange for online currencies or anyone conducting a transaction on someone else's behalf would be subject to new scrutiny, said proponents of Internet currencies.
The rising popularity of virtual currencies, while no more than a drop in the bucket of global liquidity, is being fueled by Internet merchants, as well as users' concerns about privacy, jitters about traditional currencies in Europe and the age-old need to move money for illicit purposes.
The arm of the Treasury Department that fights money laundering said Monday that the standard federal banking rules aimed at suspicious dollar transfers also apply to firms that issue or exchange money that isn't linked to any government and exists only online.
One of the fastest-growing alternative cash products is Bitcoin, an online currency launched in 2009 that isn't backed by a central bank or controlled by a central administrator. Currency units, known as "bitcoins" and consisting of a series of numbers, are created automatically on a set schedule and traded anonymously between digital addresses or "wallets." Certain exchange firms buy or sell bitcoins for legal tender at a rate that fluctuates with the market.
It isn't clear if the latest guidance would apply to a merchant's online scrip. Amazon.com Inc., AMZN +0.05% for example, in February announced Amazon Coins, which starting in May can be used to buy apps and games on Kindle Fire. An Amazon Coin is worth one cent.
Amazon didn't respond to a request for comment.
"We are beyond the stage where this was just funny money and a fun online thing. This is used as a currency," said Nicolas Christin, associate director of Carnegie Mellon University's Information Networking Institute.
Bitcoins can be used in a host of legitimate transactions—for example, website Reddit allows users to upgrade services using bitcoins and blog service Wordpress.com's store accepts them as a form of payment. Pizzaforcoins.com also lets bitcoin savers pay for deliveries through Domino's and other pizzerias.
[much more to the article ]
Swiss to vote on central bank gold reserves
by Urs Geiser, swissinfo.ch
Mar 20, 2013 - 17:34
A rightwing group has submitted more than 106,000 signatures to the federal authorities, seeking a vote on stopping the sale of gold reserves held by the Swiss National Bank (SNB). It also wants gold bars stored in the US to be returned.
The group, led by members of the Swiss People’s Party, the far-right Swiss Democrats and the Lega dei Ticinesi movement, is confident a nationwide vote will be called on the issue once the signatures are verified. A date still has to be set by the government.
The collection of the necessary 100,000 signatures over 18 months was hard going but a last-minute effort ensured they reached the goal in time, activists said on Wednesday.
People’s Party parliamentarian Luzi Stamm criticised the sale of gold reserves which started 13 years ago following a decision to abandon the gold standard.
“Gold reserves guarantee the stability of the Swiss franc. They ensure that that private savings, salaries, pension keep their value,” Stamm said.
He warned gold must not be the object of speculation for the SNB or for politicians.
The initiative also seeks to enshrine in the constitution a clause obliging the central bank to keep a minimum of 20 per cent of its assets in gold, twice the current level. Promoters say higher gold reserves will boost the SNB’s credibility.
In addition, they want to force the government to disclose where the gold reserves are stored.
An important part of the reserves are kept in the United States, according to People’s Party parliamentarian Lukas Reimann. He doubts whether the heavily indebted country can be trusted with the Swiss gold.
“It is only in safe hands if it is kept in Switzerland,” he told journalists.
Keeping prices stable
The SNB, which has to guarantee price stability in Switzerland, currently holds about 1,040 tons of gold reserves after gradually selling off at least 1,550 tons.
The rightwing campaigners said the bank made a meager surplus off the gold it sold, which went for a “pathetic price” of CHF16,000 ($16,900) per kilogramme on average.
By 2005, the proceeds of CHF21 billion had been distributed among the 26 cantons and the national government.
A previous proposal by the People’s Party to spend all the proceeds on the state’s old age pension system was rejected at the ballot box in 2002. A government plan to use part of it to fund humanitarian projects was also thrown out.
Urs Geiser, swissinfo.ch
Just my humble opinion:
Laundering money is rampant and transparency is the illusion for currency/banking.
The little island of Cyprus draws the world closer to the question of our financial system:
When will our financial system become more expensive to maintain/support than the cost of collapse?
Or:
When will the expense of supporting our financial system exceed the benefits it brings?
Or:
When do we say; "You need me more than I need you?"
___________________________
Haft time is over for the Euro.
We've had our respite.
Now the Third quarter has started.
Every Euro is secured by the labor/production/service of the population.
Forgive me as I'm not European, I'm American and the same ominous debt is on my shoulders...........
Americans guarantee our Dollar just as Europeans do the Euro.....
With the full integrity of the masses.
So when will we decide that the financial system takes more than it gives to the human condition?
Politics is manipulated by power and wealth.
Cyprus brings us closer to a question posed just four years ago;
Should our financial system be supported?
Here's a few assertions:
The World monetary system is guaranteed by the citizens.
There is no absolute value on currency derived from economic realities such as gold which must be mined and refined.
Cyprus brings us closer to the ultimate question:
At what point do we find our financial system as a detriment?
Or:
How much are we willing to spend for financial security?
Or, the ultimate question:
When do financial institutions become more expensive than they are worth??!!!!!!!!!
The result is a loss of integrity in the banks that secured guarantees on deposits.
Socialism? No, socialism has no bearing.
This is a documented account of investor's president over depositor's souvergnty.
It's a coercion of principle;
The depositor has a real value in the deposit made and should secure a modest interest as the money is used by the bank to loan.
The investor has no such guarantee.
This is a reversal of risk.
A manipulation of the very constructs of a financial market.
Financial wealth is subject to the labor that produces.
We've grown to accept something irrelevant to this basic fact.
If Gold were a standard than the cost of production would be the underlying driver to value.
That cost would be human; the labor to extract oil for energy, to manufacture generation, to build/engineer the mechanics to mine the gold.
Essentially, we value or currency with the integrity of the nation on the paper we print.
That integrity is human. It is the population. It is the guarantee of every individual citizen of that nation.
When this simple fact is apparent to the unwashed masses that labor to support our currency ........
That would be empowering!
We, as Americans, take enormous pride in the word 'Freedom'.
The same word is used against us. It's used to subjugate and deprive us........
Take the phrase: "Free Market Capitalism"
The only market our government was intended to protect is a market.
Fairness and justice is an entire branch of the Federal Government.
The Judicial Branch.
The Executive branch was established to lead (our military and represent the population in it's affairs) and uphold the law.
The Legislative Branch creates law, establishes funding through taxes, creates a budget and has always been in contention.
The system has, since inception, been subject to outside forces and internal deal making.
It's imperfect. We knew that 230 years ago.
Unfortunately, the Politics and Money is corrupted by a wealth structure that is totally dependent on the statis quo.
In other words;
The extremely wealthy, the very .1% of the world population,
is completely dependent on the government of many nations to enforce a caste system to prevent a fair market.
The currency of all the nations of the world has no basic value other than the a comparison of one currency to the next.
All currencies are National and guaranteed by the population.
Can we, as minions, own the wealth?
Yes! We are the ones who use our talents, sell our products, produce and serve our customers.
And the costumer is us at some point in a fair market.
------------------------------------------------
We must understand the difference between freedom and fairness in a market.
Freedom is a market open to everyone.
Fairness is a market that sells a product/service that is consistent with buying.
What pisses me off is the bonus these managers get.
We should all be pissed by the taxpayer support that these banks enjoy....
But, PLEASE!
Using other peoples money, Ina Drew (and all of the banking managers) enjoy the benefits of capitalization without any risk!
"Drew, 55, was awarded about $29 million in total compensation for 2010 and 2011, according to JPMorgan’s regulatory filings. She retired May 14 with about $57.5 million in stock, pension and other pay, according to bank disclosures and estimates from consulting firm Meridian Compensation Partners LLC. About $21.5 million of that money, based on the May 14 closing price, would have been automatically forfeited if she had been fired for cause."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-13/dimon-says-ina-drew-offered-to-return-2-years-of-compensation.html
Mrs. Drew will suffer a claw back.
What is important is that those profits that may have been made if the deal proved productive,
were not shared with the American population that supported this bank.
So, it seems:
Shame me if we fail,
Bless me if we succeed.
That may be relevant only when Mrs. Drew used her own capital.
Mr. Dimon is the head of JP Morgan and should be fired.
The complexity of the bank is beyond his control.
I'm pissed about the use of drone warfare.
We've sacrificed hours waiting to board a plane.
We've sacrificed our anonymity on the internet with every post.
We know our land based and cellular conversations are monitored.
What the hell?
I'm not sure but maybe I'm not that important!
Maybe my freedom is.
Maybe I'm typing in my home and don't feel the danger that our country must spend billions of dollars protecting me from.
Maybe we can balance Government spending if we avoid the cost of
PARANOIA!
Murder will be justified as a commercially driven enterprise.
Today we justify it for security.
Great post.....
Warfare is an indescribable horror that should only be used as a last resort.
In defense.
Medals should be for sacrifice, personal risk, moral conviction.
The XBox medal should be purchased on EBay.
http://www.medalsofamerica.com/Category--Military-Medals--m-593?src=SpecificMedals&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=General%2BMedals%2B-%2BBest%2B0611&9mtype=e&9mkw=18048694232&9mad=1603009708.2&9mraw=military%20medals%20and%20ribbons
There's very deep questions about Drone Warfare.
Here's an opinion from Major General (Ret) Latiff..........
Updated March 14, 2013, 7:15 p.m. ET
With Drone Warfare, America Approaches the Robo-Rubicon
By ROBERT H. LATIFF And PATRICK J. MCCLOSKEY
Recent reports on the Obama administration's use of military drones to fight terrorism sparked controversy about foreign policy and about international and constitutional law. Yet the development of drones is just one part of a revolution in war-fighting that deserves closer examination—and considerable soul-searching—about what it will mean for the moral and democratic foundations of Western nations.
Drones are unmanned aerial vehicles that, together with unmanned ground and underwater vehicles, constitute primitive precursors to emerging robotic armies. What now seems like the stuff of Hollywood fantasy is moving toward realization.
Over the next two to three decades, far more technologically sophisticated robots will be integrated into U.S. and European fighting forces. Given budget cuts, high-tech advances, and competition for air and technological superiority, the military will be pushed toward deploying large numbers of advanced weapons systems—as already outlined in the U.S. military's planning road map through 2036.
These machines will bring many benefits, greatly increasing battle reach and efficiency while eliminating the risk to human soldiers. If a drone gets shot down, there's no grieving family to console back home. Politicians will appreciate the waning of antiwar protests, too.
The problem is that robotic weapons eventually will make kill decisions on the battlefield with no more than a veneer of human control. Full lethal autonomy is no mere next step in military strategy: It will be the crossing of a moral Rubicon. Ceding godlike powers to robots reduces human beings to things with no more intrinsic value than any object.
When robots rule warfare, utterly without empathy or compassion, humans retain less intrinsic worth than a toaster—which at least can be used for spare parts. In civilized societies, even our enemies possess inherent worth and are considered persons, a recognition that forms the basis of the Geneva Conventions and rules of military engagement.
Lethal autonomy also has grave implications for democratic society. The rule of law and human rights depend on an institutional and cultural cherishing of every individual regardless of utilitarian benefit. The 20th century became a graveyard for nihilistic ideologies that treated citizens as human fuel and fodder.
The question now is whether the West risks, however inadvertently, going down the same path.
Unmanned weapons systems already enjoy some autonomy. Drones will soon navigate highly difficult aircraft-carrier takeoffs and landings. Meanwhile, technology is pushing the kill decision further away from human agency. Robotic systems can deliver death blows while operated by soldiers thousands of miles away. Such a system can also easily be programmed to fire "based solely on its own sensors," as stated in a 2011 U.K. defense report.
The kill decision is still subject to many layers of human command, and the U.S. Defense Department recently issued a directive stating that emerging autonomous weapons "shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force."
Yet this seems more like wishful thinking than realistic doctrine. Military budget cuts are making robotic autonomy almost fiscally inevitable. A recent study by the Reserve Forces Policy Board concluded that current military-personnel levels are unsustainable, consuming half the Defense Department budget. The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, in a study published in July, found that military-personnel costs will account for the entire defense budget by 2039, if costs continue growing at the current rate and defense spending increases only by inflation. Many robotic units cost one-tenth of what it takes to put a human soldier in the field.
In possible future military engagements with antagonists such as Iran, North Korea or China, the unfettered air superiority that the U.S. and its allies enjoyed in Iraq and Afghanistan will be challenged. It will be far more difficult for human operators to communicate reliably with remote unmanned weapons in war's chaos. The unmanned weapons will be impossible to protect unless they are made autonomous.
Recently the military verbiage has shifted from humans remaining "in the loop" regarding kill decisions, to "on the loop." The next technological steps will put soldiers "out of the loop," since the human mind cannot function rapidly enough to process the data streams that computers digest instantaneously to provide tactical recommendations and coordinate with related systems.
Fully autonomous weapons systems have already been deployed. Israel's Iron Dome antimissile system automatically shot down dozens of Hamas rockets in November. Iron Dome (and similar systems protecting U.S. Navy ships) would respond autonomously to inbound manned fighter jets and make the kill decision without human intervention.
Since these systems are defensive and must be autonomous to protect the innocent effectively, do they pose the same moral dilemma as offensive weapons? Should lethal autonomy be restricted to defensive weapons? At what point do defensive capabilities embolden offensive operations?
So far, debate about robotic autonomy has focused solely on compliance with international humanitarian law. In December, Human Rights Watch released a report calling for a pre-emptive ban on autonomous weapons, noting that "such revolutionary weapons" would "increase the risk of death or injury to civilians during armed conflict."
Michael N. Schmitt, chairman of the U.S. Naval War College's International Law Department, responded that war machines can protect civilians and property as well as humans. This assurance aside, it is far from clear whether robots can be programmed to distinguish between large children and small adults, and in general between combatants and civilians, especially in urban conflicts. Surely death by algorithm is the ultimate indignity.
Time is running out for military decision makers, politicians and the public to set parameters for research and deployment that could form the basis for national policy and international treaties. The alternative is to blindly accept as inevitable whatever technology offers. Let's not be robotic in our acquiescence.
...................................................
Maj. Gen. (Ret) Latiff, a consultant on national defense and intelligence technology, is an adjunct professor at the University of Notre Dame. Mr. McCloskey, the author of "The Street Stops Here: A Year at a Catholic High School in Harlem" (University of California, 2010), serves on the faculty at the School of Education at Loyola University Chicago.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424127887324128504578346333246145590.html
A version of this article appeared March 15, 2013, on page A13 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: With Drone Warfare, America Approaches the Robo-Rubicon.
What a great response! Thanks.
I'm getting misty over here.
Here's a guy thing for outdoor grilling:
http://www.grillery.com/khxc/index.php?app=ccp0&ns=catshow&ref=Free+Standing+Grills
We manufactured charcoal brickets from wood to stabilize temperature in outdoor grilling.
Here's a grill that moves it's grill above the flames of burning wood to facilitate temperature control.
Primitive man had to adjust the fire.....you only have to adjust the distance above the fire.
What we need to do is uphold the basic Constitutional Rights as the Supreme Court has historically described.
I can see by your typing that you are motivated! :)
Social Security and Medicare have been accepted by the population and the Republican Party.
Now the quest for power has driven the Republican Party to exploit the financial expenses.
How's 'bout that new Pope!
Forgive me for bringing religion into Politics & Money........
There has never been a Jesuit Pope.
(a simple explanation of Jesuit or The Society of Jesus):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuits
Jesuit Priests have always been the 'progressive' side of Catholicism.
Well educated, self-sacrificial in humility and dedicated to God.
(Jesus' teachings are thought to be a path)
To have a Jesuit as the pontiff is beyond the scope of the Catholic hierarchy mentality for 500 years.
To have an Argentinian Jesuit as Pope is very progressive.
There's not much 'conservative' with the Republican Party these days.
There was a day when Conservatism stood for tradition and disciplined spending.
You can put a fork in that creature.
Politics has driven us mad.
The national debt is over $16 trillion and we debate over austerity and spending.
The real culprit is war.
A war on terrorism that should be fought in courts.
We can't sustain a military with the prodigy from our schools:
http://blog.ctnews.com/kantrowitz/2009/11/05/75-of-young-americans-are-unfit-for-military-service/
We won't prioritize Education over Defense.
Words get in the way.......
'Time' is part of the equation E=MC2.
'C' is representative of the speed of light.
Many have spoken of 'time' as the 4th dimension.
Many question 'time' as a dimension.
Well, here's the confusion and the question is up to the observer!
Dimensions add to their progression:
The first dimension is just a length; a line up and down that can be observed as a distance between two points.
Let's say it's highth.
The second dimension is highth and adds length.
The third dimension is both highth and length and adds depth.
The progression of dimensions must assume all the previous dimensions and add a new quality:
As the first dimension adds length to become the second dimension and the second dimension adds depth to become the third dimension.
There is progression.
Time is present in the first dimension, second and third dimension.
Time may be a constant in a description of dimension.
This is a wild thought as 'time' is a measure of movement or change.
That is;
Change is the constant and our universe, our physical laws describing our universe, our observations in describing the fundamentals of nature, the basics of science,
Is a dynamic........
What is true today may not be true tomorrow.
It may not have been true 10 Billion years ago.
Just as you may learn the rules......they can change!
Time may not be a dimension as specifically defined in nomenclature.
Sorry for the late response.
The Government gave 'all those breaks' to GM Capitol.
General Motors assumed GM Capitol in 2006(if my memory serves me).
GM failed and GM Capitol failed.
Sorry for the late response.
The answer is 'NO'.
Catholicism is the Catholic Church.
It's Man made.
As is all religion.
The difference is power.
When females change religion then females become the power.
Sorry, Steph. You deserve a personal apology!
My response: Post 76607
http://investorshub.advfn.com/Politics-and-Money-18484/
This response was emotionally motivated.
I won't ask you to understand my motivation but please accept the apology as the motivation was miss-conceived.
I made a mistake and I am sorry.
Normal? It shouldn't be!
Please, just because States kiss ass with tax breaks doesn't make it right.
Here's the latest development in Alaskan oil:
http://www.examiner.com/article/shell-postpones-alaska-sea-drilling-until-2014
Many politicians promote their success in business as credit to their ability to lead.
Is this the same deal they would make for business?
Would they trade assets like oil and revenue for jobs?
Those jobs may bring revenue but a sharp negotiator knows the limited asset of oil.
Don't take make a deal until you can!
You're full of feces matter on that one!
All of those posters have sought a balance.
Your projection of the President as "Barry" is simply foolish.
Obama has supported you as a rich white dude.
I would have dissolved most of your net worth in Nationalizing the Major Banks.
Only surpassed by the tax breaks for big oil! Hahahahaha
http://www.adn.com/2013/03/03/2810490/tax-breaks-for-news-fields-could.html
Hahahahaha, Politics and Money!
OH, My Goodness!
Please let me respond! :)
I'm a day behind in reading the posts.
Insurance rates go up, and Social Security is an insurance.
There is a limit on wages (about $110,000) subject to total benefits.
1972 rate was $9,000.00 wages earned per year.
2013 will have a limit of $113,700.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/planners/maxtax.htm
The real problem is the rate of change for the average workers' pay.
The average or nominal pay for individuals hasn't advanced as inflation and/or devaluation of the currency they received as payment for work and products that were purchased.
In other words:
Work=energy is true in physics and monetary distribution of value.
If no energy is used to produce currency then a distribution of wealth is a false.
Social Security was built on a solid foundation.
It's the disparage of currency/wealth that skews the system.
It's a basic problem of the American economy.
I don't buy into that logic;
Social Security/Medicare benefits will bankrupt America.
Unsustainable war on terrorism and the manipulation of world currency is the biggest problem.
If there is a failure in our future, it's with the unbridled concentration of wealth and the growing poverty/famine of the masses.
The very fundamentals that push terrorism in the Mid East/Africa
and the need for repression in America.
And that's the way I see it.
Don't subject this board to stupidity!
Play your games on some other board.