Making Money Internet

Social games are the rage these days, but making money from them isn’t easy. Gamers play these titles for free, but Adknowledge is figuring out how game publishers can wind up making money from 100 percent of the players.

Adknowledge’s Burlingame, Calif.-based Super Rewards subsidiary is launching a three-part system for making money from virtual currency in games. That could help boost the engagement of players in social games and help raise the revenue generated from each user, said Adknowledge chief executive Scott Lynn. Adknowledge can offer this money-making system as a one-stop shop for publishers and game advertisers.

The three elements include an in-game overlay, offer banners, and a new offer wall for online game publishers. Adknowledge claims the new platform improves the experience for users and increases the number of paying users in a game. Adknowledge is one of a number of companies that give users the option of accepting special offers in lieu of payment for an online game. You can accept an offer such as signing up for a Netflix subscription in return for virtual currency in a game.

But results show that roughly 75 percent of players do not use offers. Super Rewards can target those missing the offers with an in-game overlay, which brings a single, high-value offer to users within a game. The overlay shows up at strategic moments in a game, such as after the initial load. The offers can include promotional language such as “Get More Coins.”

The offer banner uses the space around the main game landscape, presenting a mini version of an offer wall during game play. Users can pay for virtual items at the moment with direct payment methods.

Publishers using the three-part system include The Broth, whose Facebook game Barn Buddy saw its revenue increase 25 percent after using the new system for just five days, said Broth chief executive Markus Weichselbaum. Other publishers have seen a 45 percent increase in the number of new paying users. Adknowledge said developers have seen a 40-percent increase in the number of first-time payers. Super Rewards’ rivals include TrialPay and Offerpal.

Adknowledge has more than 300 employees and $300 million in revenue, making it the largest privately owned internet advertising network. It was founded in 2004 and has grown through acquisitions. The company has raised $48 million in funding from Technology Crossover Ventures.

Next Story: Game media firm IGN Entertainment to give free office space to indie game startups Previous Story: DEMO: VentureBeat’s Matt Marshall touts tech and farming trends (video)

Frank Barry, professional services manager at Blackbaud and blogger at NetWits ThinkTank, helps non-profits use the Internet for digital communication, social media, and fundraising so they can focus on making an impact and achieving their missions. Find Frank on Twitter @franswaa.

Non-profit organizations are leading the way when it comes to creatively harnessing the power of social media. A report by The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth shows that the largest U.S. non-profit organizations continue to outpace Inc. 500 businesses and higher education institutions in their familiarity, use and monitoring of social media.

In fact, 93% of the top U.S. charities have a class='blippr-nobr'>Facebookclass="blippr-nobr">Facebook page, 87% have a Twitter profile, and 65% have a blog. Why does this matter? Because the rapid growth and adoption of social media is helping non-profits in their quest for change — they truly are using social media for social good.

But what about the little guys? The social web can give smaller players a big voice if they know how to leverage it. Here are three inspiring success stories of small non-profits who met or exceeded their goals with the help of social media.

1. Create a Video, Start a Movement

Darius Weems and the Darius Goes West project will inspire you. Suffering from Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), Darius and 11 of his best friends decided to head out on a cross country road trip from Atlanta to Los Angeles, where Darius hoped to have his wheelchair spiffed up by MTV’s Pimp my Ride. Though his wheelchair did not get pimped by MTV on that trip, there was a far better outcome that even Darius couldn’t have imagined.

The 25-day trip resulted in memories, experiences and 300 hours of video which were turned into a documentary that has impacted thousands of people around the world. That very same documentary has now raised over $2 million for DMD research.

According to the Darius Goes West team, “We had offers from distributors, but, in the end, we decided to self-distribute our film. By opting to self-distribute, we bear the responsibility for marketing, but we also have the power to devote $8 of every DVD sale to promising DMD research.”

It’s apparent that social media has played and continues to play a significant roll in helping to raise both awareness and money for DMD research through Darius and his friends. Here’s a snap shot of their social media footprint:

They’ve accrued close to 700,000 views on YouTubeclass="blippr-nobr">YouTube, collected more than 14,000 Facebook fans, obtained roughly 2,000 Twitter followers, and raised almost $45,000 through Facebook Causes and FirstGiving.

2. Empower Your Supporters to be Free Agent Fundraisers

Well known cycling blogger Elden Nelson did something incredible a few months ago — he raise more than $135,000 in less than 10 days for LIVESTRONG and World Bicycle Relief using his blog, Twitterclass="blippr-nobr">Twitter and Friends Asking Friends.

It all started when Nelson sent Lance Armstrong’s racing team manager, Johan Bruyneel, an open cover letter as if he were applying for a job.

Nelson, who dreamed of becoming a pro cyclist, reached out to Bruyneel, with low expectations on its return. But through the power of social media, Bruyneel did see it, and he challenged Nelson via Twitter and his blogclass="blippr-nobr">blog to raise $50,000 for LIVESTRONG and $50,000 for World Bicycle Relief. Nelson took on that challenge and completed it in less than two days.

Without the ability to quickly connect and mobilize his network using social media, this wouldn’t have been possible in such a shot amount of time. Nelson tweeted numerous times as the story unfolded, as did Bruyneel, @livestrong, @livestrongceo and @lancearmstrong. Those three accounts combined have over 3.5 million Twitter followers. Add to that the numerous blog posts, Facebook status updates and YouTube videos, and you get a social media-fueled fundraising phenomenon like we’ve never seen.

3. Raise Funds by Creating a “Heartspace”

Mothers Day 2010 brought about quite a few online fundraising initiatives, but none were more impressive than the To Mama with Love campaign created by the passionate folks at Epic Change and a host of great volunteers. The goal was simple — raise money to support Mama Lucy in her efforts to educate children in Tanzania.

Mama Lucy is a change agent who saved her own income and used it to start a primary school in Tanzania, believing that education is the key to transforming a country gripped by poverty. Over the last six years, Mama Lucy has grown the school from one classroom with fewer than 10 students, to a school that now serves more than 300 children at eight grade levels.

The initiative was simple but powerful. Supporters were encouraged honor their own mothers by making a donation and then creating a virtual scrapbook or “heartspace” on the site, including photos, videos, notes, and artwork. They could then share their “heartspace” with their mother, friends and family via Twitter and Facebook, or via a customized e-card.

Using social media as the primary communication and engagement mechanism, Epic Change was able to raise close to $17,000 and provide a safe home for 17 children in Tanzania, while also encouraging more than 300 mothers along the way. They did all of this in about a week’s time with a staff of two.

So you see, social media has truly enabled non-profits both large and small to reach out and make some real change. Tell us about the social cause campaigns you’ve donated to in the past in the comments below.

More Social Good Resources from Mashable:

- 5 Easy Ways to Support a Cause Through Your Social Network/> - 5 Trends Shaping the Future of Social Good/> - 10 Ways to Start a Fund for Social Good Online/> - How Social Good Has Revolutionized Philanthropy/> - 5 iPhone Apps to Help Fight Poverty

Image courtesy of iStockphotoclass="blippr-nobr">iStockphoto, AndrewJohnson

For more Social Good coverage:

class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Social Goodclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Social Good channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

Should Facebook Buy Skype?: Tech <b>News</b> «

Facebook wants to mesh communications and community together, which explains why Facebook Phone is in the cards. If Skype wants to become the communication console of tomorrow, it needs to embrace newer forms of communication.

From Poll, a Snapshot of Fox <b>News</b> Viewers - NYTimes.com

Voters who watch Fox News are more enthusiastic about the election and angrier with Washington, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

Fox <b>News</b> - Obama | Greg Gutfeld | Why He Needs Fox <b>News</b> | Mediaite

Pres. Barack Obama fired a shot at Fox News earlier this week when Rolling Stone published an interview with the President that included a less-than-flattering appraisal of the network (It's a point of view that I think is ultimately ...

benchcraft company scam
benchcraft company scam

Should Facebook Buy Skype?: Tech <b>News</b> «

Facebook wants to mesh communications and community together, which explains why Facebook Phone is in the cards. If Skype wants to become the communication console of tomorrow, it needs to embrace newer forms of communication.

From Poll, a Snapshot of Fox <b>News</b> Viewers - NYTimes.com

Voters who watch Fox News are more enthusiastic about the election and angrier with Washington, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

Fox <b>News</b> - Obama | Greg Gutfeld | Why He Needs Fox <b>News</b> | Mediaite

Pres. Barack Obama fired a shot at Fox News earlier this week when Rolling Stone published an interview with the President that included a less-than-flattering appraisal of the network (It's a point of view that I think is ultimately ...

benchcraft company scam benchcraft company scam

Social games are the rage these days, but making money from them isn’t easy. Gamers play these titles for free, but Adknowledge is figuring out how game publishers can wind up making money from 100 percent of the players.

Adknowledge’s Burlingame, Calif.-based Super Rewards subsidiary is launching a three-part system for making money from virtual currency in games. That could help boost the engagement of players in social games and help raise the revenue generated from each user, said Adknowledge chief executive Scott Lynn. Adknowledge can offer this money-making system as a one-stop shop for publishers and game advertisers.

The three elements include an in-game overlay, offer banners, and a new offer wall for online game publishers. Adknowledge claims the new platform improves the experience for users and increases the number of paying users in a game. Adknowledge is one of a number of companies that give users the option of accepting special offers in lieu of payment for an online game. You can accept an offer such as signing up for a Netflix subscription in return for virtual currency in a game.

But results show that roughly 75 percent of players do not use offers. Super Rewards can target those missing the offers with an in-game overlay, which brings a single, high-value offer to users within a game. The overlay shows up at strategic moments in a game, such as after the initial load. The offers can include promotional language such as “Get More Coins.”

The offer banner uses the space around the main game landscape, presenting a mini version of an offer wall during game play. Users can pay for virtual items at the moment with direct payment methods.

Publishers using the three-part system include The Broth, whose Facebook game Barn Buddy saw its revenue increase 25 percent after using the new system for just five days, said Broth chief executive Markus Weichselbaum. Other publishers have seen a 45 percent increase in the number of new paying users. Adknowledge said developers have seen a 40-percent increase in the number of first-time payers. Super Rewards’ rivals include TrialPay and Offerpal.

Adknowledge has more than 300 employees and $300 million in revenue, making it the largest privately owned internet advertising network. It was founded in 2004 and has grown through acquisitions. The company has raised $48 million in funding from Technology Crossover Ventures.

Next Story: Game media firm IGN Entertainment to give free office space to indie game startups Previous Story: DEMO: VentureBeat’s Matt Marshall touts tech and farming trends (video)

Frank Barry, professional services manager at Blackbaud and blogger at NetWits ThinkTank, helps non-profits use the Internet for digital communication, social media, and fundraising so they can focus on making an impact and achieving their missions. Find Frank on Twitter @franswaa.

Non-profit organizations are leading the way when it comes to creatively harnessing the power of social media. A report by The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth shows that the largest U.S. non-profit organizations continue to outpace Inc. 500 businesses and higher education institutions in their familiarity, use and monitoring of social media.

In fact, 93% of the top U.S. charities have a class='blippr-nobr'>Facebookclass="blippr-nobr">Facebook page, 87% have a Twitter profile, and 65% have a blog. Why does this matter? Because the rapid growth and adoption of social media is helping non-profits in their quest for change — they truly are using social media for social good.

But what about the little guys? The social web can give smaller players a big voice if they know how to leverage it. Here are three inspiring success stories of small non-profits who met or exceeded their goals with the help of social media.

1. Create a Video, Start a Movement

Darius Weems and the Darius Goes West project will inspire you. Suffering from Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), Darius and 11 of his best friends decided to head out on a cross country road trip from Atlanta to Los Angeles, where Darius hoped to have his wheelchair spiffed up by MTV’s Pimp my Ride. Though his wheelchair did not get pimped by MTV on that trip, there was a far better outcome that even Darius couldn’t have imagined.

The 25-day trip resulted in memories, experiences and 300 hours of video which were turned into a documentary that has impacted thousands of people around the world. That very same documentary has now raised over $2 million for DMD research.

According to the Darius Goes West team, “We had offers from distributors, but, in the end, we decided to self-distribute our film. By opting to self-distribute, we bear the responsibility for marketing, but we also have the power to devote $8 of every DVD sale to promising DMD research.”

It’s apparent that social media has played and continues to play a significant roll in helping to raise both awareness and money for DMD research through Darius and his friends. Here’s a snap shot of their social media footprint:

They’ve accrued close to 700,000 views on YouTubeclass="blippr-nobr">YouTube, collected more than 14,000 Facebook fans, obtained roughly 2,000 Twitter followers, and raised almost $45,000 through Facebook Causes and FirstGiving.

2. Empower Your Supporters to be Free Agent Fundraisers

Well known cycling blogger Elden Nelson did something incredible a few months ago — he raise more than $135,000 in less than 10 days for LIVESTRONG and World Bicycle Relief using his blog, Twitterclass="blippr-nobr">Twitter and Friends Asking Friends.

It all started when Nelson sent Lance Armstrong’s racing team manager, Johan Bruyneel, an open cover letter as if he were applying for a job.

Nelson, who dreamed of becoming a pro cyclist, reached out to Bruyneel, with low expectations on its return. But through the power of social media, Bruyneel did see it, and he challenged Nelson via Twitter and his blogclass="blippr-nobr">blog to raise $50,000 for LIVESTRONG and $50,000 for World Bicycle Relief. Nelson took on that challenge and completed it in less than two days.

Without the ability to quickly connect and mobilize his network using social media, this wouldn’t have been possible in such a shot amount of time. Nelson tweeted numerous times as the story unfolded, as did Bruyneel, @livestrong, @livestrongceo and @lancearmstrong. Those three accounts combined have over 3.5 million Twitter followers. Add to that the numerous blog posts, Facebook status updates and YouTube videos, and you get a social media-fueled fundraising phenomenon like we’ve never seen.

3. Raise Funds by Creating a “Heartspace”

Mothers Day 2010 brought about quite a few online fundraising initiatives, but none were more impressive than the To Mama with Love campaign created by the passionate folks at Epic Change and a host of great volunteers. The goal was simple — raise money to support Mama Lucy in her efforts to educate children in Tanzania.

Mama Lucy is a change agent who saved her own income and used it to start a primary school in Tanzania, believing that education is the key to transforming a country gripped by poverty. Over the last six years, Mama Lucy has grown the school from one classroom with fewer than 10 students, to a school that now serves more than 300 children at eight grade levels.

The initiative was simple but powerful. Supporters were encouraged honor their own mothers by making a donation and then creating a virtual scrapbook or “heartspace” on the site, including photos, videos, notes, and artwork. They could then share their “heartspace” with their mother, friends and family via Twitter and Facebook, or via a customized e-card.

Using social media as the primary communication and engagement mechanism, Epic Change was able to raise close to $17,000 and provide a safe home for 17 children in Tanzania, while also encouraging more than 300 mothers along the way. They did all of this in about a week’s time with a staff of two.

So you see, social media has truly enabled non-profits both large and small to reach out and make some real change. Tell us about the social cause campaigns you’ve donated to in the past in the comments below.

More Social Good Resources from Mashable:

- 5 Easy Ways to Support a Cause Through Your Social Network/> - 5 Trends Shaping the Future of Social Good/> - 10 Ways to Start a Fund for Social Good Online/> - How Social Good Has Revolutionized Philanthropy/> - 5 iPhone Apps to Help Fight Poverty

Image courtesy of iStockphotoclass="blippr-nobr">iStockphoto, AndrewJohnson

For more Social Good coverage:

class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Social Goodclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Social Good channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

bench craft company rip off

Should Facebook Buy Skype?: Tech <b>News</b> «

Facebook wants to mesh communications and community together, which explains why Facebook Phone is in the cards. If Skype wants to become the communication console of tomorrow, it needs to embrace newer forms of communication.

From Poll, a Snapshot of Fox <b>News</b> Viewers - NYTimes.com

Voters who watch Fox News are more enthusiastic about the election and angrier with Washington, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

Fox <b>News</b> - Obama | Greg Gutfeld | Why He Needs Fox <b>News</b> | Mediaite

Pres. Barack Obama fired a shot at Fox News earlier this week when Rolling Stone published an interview with the President that included a less-than-flattering appraisal of the network (It's a point of view that I think is ultimately ...

bench craft company rip off benchcraft company scam

Should Facebook Buy Skype?: Tech <b>News</b> «

Facebook wants to mesh communications and community together, which explains why Facebook Phone is in the cards. If Skype wants to become the communication console of tomorrow, it needs to embrace newer forms of communication.

From Poll, a Snapshot of Fox <b>News</b> Viewers - NYTimes.com

Voters who watch Fox News are more enthusiastic about the election and angrier with Washington, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

Fox <b>News</b> - Obama | Greg Gutfeld | Why He Needs Fox <b>News</b> | Mediaite

Pres. Barack Obama fired a shot at Fox News earlier this week when Rolling Stone published an interview with the President that included a less-than-flattering appraisal of the network (It's a point of view that I think is ultimately ...

benchcraft company scam bench craft company rip off

Should Facebook Buy Skype?: Tech <b>News</b> «

Facebook wants to mesh communications and community together, which explains why Facebook Phone is in the cards. If Skype wants to become the communication console of tomorrow, it needs to embrace newer forms of communication.

From Poll, a Snapshot of Fox <b>News</b> Viewers - NYTimes.com

Voters who watch Fox News are more enthusiastic about the election and angrier with Washington, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

Fox <b>News</b> - Obama | Greg Gutfeld | Why He Needs Fox <b>News</b> | Mediaite

Pres. Barack Obama fired a shot at Fox News earlier this week when Rolling Stone published an interview with the President that included a less-than-flattering appraisal of the network (It's a point of view that I think is ultimately ...

benchcraft company scam

Being Right or Making Money

CEOs of large, high profile companies like Intel tend to be averse to making strong political stands, especially during election season.  They understand that their companies can quickly become targets for regulation that can end up costing shareholders millions (or billions of dollars).  Most CEOs tend to throw some money at candidates who are expected to win and keep their heads down. Which is why Intel CEO Paul Otellini’s total evisceration of Obama’s understanding of the economy in the middle of an election season was such a shocking breath of fresh air today.

“The decisions so far have not resulted in either job growth or increased confidence. When what you’re doing isn’t working you rethink it and I think we need to rethink some plans,” he said at the Intel Developers Forum in San Francisco.

Otellini credited the White House for listening to him and other business leaders. “I really think they’re trying,” he said, adding that he doesn’t think there is anti-business sentiment from the administration.

But Otellini said the $787 billion economic stimulus package passed last year has not done enough to solve problems in the job market. He argued that money not yet spent from that program might be better off allocated elsewhere and took the administration to task for focusing on short-term projects.

“It doesn’t seem to be working the way it is. Swimming pools in Mississippi are not going to create lasting jobs.”

** snip **

Otellini is also one of the first Fortune 500 CEOs to speak publicly about President Obama’s newly proposed $350 billion economic recovery plan. He said that proposal, which includes tax breaks for businesses and research and development incentives, is not the right plan either.

The way Otellini sees it, Washington must decide what the industries of the future are. “We still subsidize trains and agriculture — industries of the 19th century. We should decide what’s important to us going forward and make sure we’ve got the education system in place and the capital incentive system in place to do the investment here.”

Otellini also said that a major problem for companies is that they are being held back by high corporate tax rates.

Otellini says it costs Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) $1 billion more to build a factory in the U.S. than abroad because of a lack of U.S. tax incentives. The company has a multi-billion dollar factory slated to open in China this October.

“You have to weigh the advantages of working here, the security of working here in this country…against that billion dollars.”

Otellini questioned why global business leaders would want to do business in the U.S. due to the cost, saying it is critical to incentivize foreign countries to invest in America. “Our corporate taxes are twice what they are in the rest of the world. You want corporations to invest here.”

Gee. It seems that one party was talking about the corporate tax rate being too high all the way through the 2008 election. The other was busy talking about penalizing ExxonMobil for making too much profit. The end result is that when the financial sector tanked, the party in power did nothing to change the corporate tax rate and instead spent billions of dollars on “shovel ready” projects; i.e., completely unnecessary construction projects. These provided some level of short-term boon to construction companies, who built the projects in question and then were promptly left standing around twiddling their thumbs again. Meanwhile, companies with sustainable business practices and profitability like Intel move more and more American jobs overseas because of the hostile business climate that Barack Obama and his cronies don’t even understand, much less know how to fix.

Until America elects an administration and a Congress that has a better plan for fixing the economy than confiscating money from profit (read: job) producers like Intel and throwing it at farm subsidies and construction make-work, you can count on Austan Gooslbee being right: double-digit employment will be a more-or-less permanent feature.

so, yea, what's the big deal?

This is not a simple matter of temporary inconvenience. If you agree to pay interest on a loan from them you are enslaving yourself. It is very simple, and they don't want you to know that.

The loan money you agree to pay back did not exist until you signed the dotted line. In fact, it will never 'exist'. When you purchase a home or a car you agree to make payments until the loan is completely paid off, paying an 'agreed' interest rate, a premium, for the convenience of taking control of the home or car without paying in full. But no money is ever exchanged. The loan document is essentially an agreement that if you stop making payments the bank will have to take over, potentially at a loss. Either way the third party, such as the original owner of the home, or Toyota, in the case of a car, is paid in full by the bank - the third party is no longer involved. They have received full payment. But you, my dear consumer, are now a slave.

Why use such a term as slave? Because you are working for someone that never worked for the money in the first place. They 'printed' it. They increased the number of zeros on their ledger because you have agreed to make payments on that money, but it never existed in the first place. That is, the Federal Reserve has the ability to increase the money supply and then pass it on to their 'member' banks: Wells Fargo, Citi, Bank of America, etc. These banks will only take a loss if you stop making payments - and they threaten you with a lower FICO score, which is always fluctuating and at risk of identity fraud anyway, if you decide not to play anymore. So how is this slavery? You are paying interest on money they did not work for. But you had to sweat to get the money to pay that interest. Your sweat goes to these bankers without them doing a thing. If enough of your fellow consumers stop making payments the house of cards falls and the big bank gets a bailout. The small banks just get their assets gobbled up by the big banks; no bailout.

If you, my dear consumer, attempt to create money out of thin air you are put in jail. You are a cheat. But not them. They can create all the money they need, raising this so-called debt ceiling, creating programs like TARP, and other 'bailouts' for risk-taking banksters. That's right. They get your sweat in the form of interest payments, you slave, and they get to take risks because Glass-Steagall has been repealed, and if they fail, you, the taxpaying consumer, get to become the primary investor in their failure: the bailout. They threaten collapse, chaos, and even war if the don't get their bailout from the taxpayer. And then they turn around and lend you, the consumer, money at 10, 20, 30%.

So what is pragmatic? How about a system that cannot be manipulated? How about a system in which losers actually lose and are not allowed to play anymore instead of given huge bonuses? 

That system, is a gold-backed system. Keynes is popular in the current time because he speaks the language of bankers and politicians - not the People. There should be no such thing as inflation. Inflation is at best a hidden tax (increase the money supply to fund inefficient programs, sweetheart deals, and risky investments waiting for a bailout) because the value of the money under your mattress is devalued - you can't buy as much anymore. Why should anyone ever! be content to have less money the next day. You can buy X for $10 today, after inflation it will be $11. Why would you ever want that? How is that ever good? This is no mere inconvenience - it really is theft. So these financial scientists (bankers) and politician friends have devised a near perfect system of control. And because you can't inflate gold (it can't be copied, duplicated, or printed) it's 'value' stays constant. A gold coin will always have a specific weight and purity according to the standards of the mint it came from. That's what's in the Constitution - not an extra-governmental (private) instiution that can create as much money as it needs to maintain control!

Banking should be boring. They should accept deposits and charge money for keeping it safe in their vaults. But don't they pay depositors interest, you ask? Why would they pay you to keep your money safe when you can come in and get it back anytime you like? You can't run a business like that! The point of paying interest on a deposit is because the depositor agrees to allow the banker to loan the money to someone else. But that's not how it works, you say? Exactly. Because everybody knows that if enough depositors come to get their money the house of cards collapses and the FDIC has to step in. This should never happen. There should be no such thing, generally speaking, as a bankrun. A bank will fail if they make too many risky loans. That is, if a banker fails to properly evaluate the 'creditworthiness' of the individuals applying for loans. If too many loans go sour the banker fails and all of his assets are purchased by those making loans that are less risky. No need to ask Keynes what he thinks. Banking should not involve economics, which is really about the effects of human choice. Banking is math. If you deposit money, and you want to be able to get it the next day, you must pay the banker a fee for safekeeping. If you agree that your money can be lent to another, trusting the judgment of your banker, then you should receive part of the profit - and you cannot get it the next day, because it has already been lent! How can you possibly retrieve something that is not there? You banker would think you are an idiot to request money you agreed to lend! But that's what an honest system would work. Instead, we have an 'unlimited' system. It stops working properly if you apply gravity. Ron Paul's 26 year attempt to audit the Federal Reserve is almost more of an inside joke. He already knows that the Federal Reserve is evil - but he has a hard enough time deflecting attempts from the media to portray him as a lunatic as it is - he wants the public to perceive what a mudfight will ensue if they actually knew how the system works.

So growth would be slower. But it is inherently stable. Individuals are likely to take less risk, and they are less likely to get a loan that they probably won't be able to pay back. People sharpen their pencils. People look for other ways to finance their plans by seeking out friends, family, neighbors, etc instead of bankers. The free market is the market in which there is no restriction. But we do not have a free market. We have banksters hiding behind green curtains telling us what is best. The more stable the system the less money the banksters make. They make more money gaming the system: booms and busts - and we start to hear these pompous, paid economists (bankster apologists) tell us they couldn't see this was going to happen, and we all nod our heads, "Nobody saw this coming." So because the banksters never work for any of this money it is in their best interest that you, the simple-minded, ever-trusting consumer is in a perpetual state of paying interest. They are less interested in being paid in full than they are having you pay with your sweat.

Bankers control. Consumers always pay. Maybe you already explained all this to your girlie, my fellow FR-hater, and there is much more, but ask her what has always happened when enough people become apathetic to evil. The reason the founding fathers didn't get around to explaining the free market in the Constitution is because it is the lack of restriction. Real liberty. Let coined precious metals be the pinnacle of our economic system - everything else can be bartered. It keeps the bankers at bay.

I leave you with two quotes, from men of opposite character, that say the same thing using different words:

Obama: Fox <b>News</b> Has A Point Of View That Is &#39;Ultimately <b>...</b>

President Obama has given a lengthy interview to Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner for the upcoming issue of the magazine. The cover story is titled Obama Fights Back and boy does he ever. At least where Fox News is concerned.

LinkedIn Beefs Up Company Profiles With <b>News</b> Feeds, Career Data <b>...</b>

We recently wrote about the fast growing number of company profiles on professional social network LinkedIn (the network has over one million to be exact). Launched in April, the company profile gives organizations a centralized profile ...

Michelle Malkin » New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox <b>News</b> is <b>...</b>

New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox News is Hogging All the Success.

halloween costumes

Obama: Fox <b>News</b> Has A Point Of View That Is &#39;Ultimately <b>...</b>

President Obama has given a lengthy interview to Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner for the upcoming issue of the magazine. The cover story is titled Obama Fights Back and boy does he ever. At least where Fox News is concerned.

LinkedIn Beefs Up Company Profiles With <b>News</b> Feeds, Career Data <b>...</b>

We recently wrote about the fast growing number of company profiles on professional social network LinkedIn (the network has over one million to be exact). Launched in April, the company profile gives organizations a centralized profile ...

Michelle Malkin » New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox <b>News</b> is <b>...</b>

New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox News is Hogging All the Success.

CEOs of large, high profile companies like Intel tend to be averse to making strong political stands, especially during election season.  They understand that their companies can quickly become targets for regulation that can end up costing shareholders millions (or billions of dollars).  Most CEOs tend to throw some money at candidates who are expected to win and keep their heads down. Which is why Intel CEO Paul Otellini’s total evisceration of Obama’s understanding of the economy in the middle of an election season was such a shocking breath of fresh air today.

“The decisions so far have not resulted in either job growth or increased confidence. When what you’re doing isn’t working you rethink it and I think we need to rethink some plans,” he said at the Intel Developers Forum in San Francisco.

Otellini credited the White House for listening to him and other business leaders. “I really think they’re trying,” he said, adding that he doesn’t think there is anti-business sentiment from the administration.

But Otellini said the $787 billion economic stimulus package passed last year has not done enough to solve problems in the job market. He argued that money not yet spent from that program might be better off allocated elsewhere and took the administration to task for focusing on short-term projects.

“It doesn’t seem to be working the way it is. Swimming pools in Mississippi are not going to create lasting jobs.”

** snip **

Otellini is also one of the first Fortune 500 CEOs to speak publicly about President Obama’s newly proposed $350 billion economic recovery plan. He said that proposal, which includes tax breaks for businesses and research and development incentives, is not the right plan either.

The way Otellini sees it, Washington must decide what the industries of the future are. “We still subsidize trains and agriculture — industries of the 19th century. We should decide what’s important to us going forward and make sure we’ve got the education system in place and the capital incentive system in place to do the investment here.”

Otellini also said that a major problem for companies is that they are being held back by high corporate tax rates.

Otellini says it costs Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) $1 billion more to build a factory in the U.S. than abroad because of a lack of U.S. tax incentives. The company has a multi-billion dollar factory slated to open in China this October.

“You have to weigh the advantages of working here, the security of working here in this country…against that billion dollars.”

Otellini questioned why global business leaders would want to do business in the U.S. due to the cost, saying it is critical to incentivize foreign countries to invest in America. “Our corporate taxes are twice what they are in the rest of the world. You want corporations to invest here.”

Gee. It seems that one party was talking about the corporate tax rate being too high all the way through the 2008 election. The other was busy talking about penalizing ExxonMobil for making too much profit. The end result is that when the financial sector tanked, the party in power did nothing to change the corporate tax rate and instead spent billions of dollars on “shovel ready” projects; i.e., completely unnecessary construction projects. These provided some level of short-term boon to construction companies, who built the projects in question and then were promptly left standing around twiddling their thumbs again. Meanwhile, companies with sustainable business practices and profitability like Intel move more and more American jobs overseas because of the hostile business climate that Barack Obama and his cronies don’t even understand, much less know how to fix.

Until America elects an administration and a Congress that has a better plan for fixing the economy than confiscating money from profit (read: job) producers like Intel and throwing it at farm subsidies and construction make-work, you can count on Austan Gooslbee being right: double-digit employment will be a more-or-less permanent feature.

so, yea, what's the big deal?

This is not a simple matter of temporary inconvenience. If you agree to pay interest on a loan from them you are enslaving yourself. It is very simple, and they don't want you to know that.

The loan money you agree to pay back did not exist until you signed the dotted line. In fact, it will never 'exist'. When you purchase a home or a car you agree to make payments until the loan is completely paid off, paying an 'agreed' interest rate, a premium, for the convenience of taking control of the home or car without paying in full. But no money is ever exchanged. The loan document is essentially an agreement that if you stop making payments the bank will have to take over, potentially at a loss. Either way the third party, such as the original owner of the home, or Toyota, in the case of a car, is paid in full by the bank - the third party is no longer involved. They have received full payment. But you, my dear consumer, are now a slave.

Why use such a term as slave? Because you are working for someone that never worked for the money in the first place. They 'printed' it. They increased the number of zeros on their ledger because you have agreed to make payments on that money, but it never existed in the first place. That is, the Federal Reserve has the ability to increase the money supply and then pass it on to their 'member' banks: Wells Fargo, Citi, Bank of America, etc. These banks will only take a loss if you stop making payments - and they threaten you with a lower FICO score, which is always fluctuating and at risk of identity fraud anyway, if you decide not to play anymore. So how is this slavery? You are paying interest on money they did not work for. But you had to sweat to get the money to pay that interest. Your sweat goes to these bankers without them doing a thing. If enough of your fellow consumers stop making payments the house of cards falls and the big bank gets a bailout. The small banks just get their assets gobbled up by the big banks; no bailout.

If you, my dear consumer, attempt to create money out of thin air you are put in jail. You are a cheat. But not them. They can create all the money they need, raising this so-called debt ceiling, creating programs like TARP, and other 'bailouts' for risk-taking banksters. That's right. They get your sweat in the form of interest payments, you slave, and they get to take risks because Glass-Steagall has been repealed, and if they fail, you, the taxpaying consumer, get to become the primary investor in their failure: the bailout. They threaten collapse, chaos, and even war if the don't get their bailout from the taxpayer. And then they turn around and lend you, the consumer, money at 10, 20, 30%.

So what is pragmatic? How about a system that cannot be manipulated? How about a system in which losers actually lose and are not allowed to play anymore instead of given huge bonuses? 

That system, is a gold-backed system. Keynes is popular in the current time because he speaks the language of bankers and politicians - not the People. There should be no such thing as inflation. Inflation is at best a hidden tax (increase the money supply to fund inefficient programs, sweetheart deals, and risky investments waiting for a bailout) because the value of the money under your mattress is devalued - you can't buy as much anymore. Why should anyone ever! be content to have less money the next day. You can buy X for $10 today, after inflation it will be $11. Why would you ever want that? How is that ever good? This is no mere inconvenience - it really is theft. So these financial scientists (bankers) and politician friends have devised a near perfect system of control. And because you can't inflate gold (it can't be copied, duplicated, or printed) it's 'value' stays constant. A gold coin will always have a specific weight and purity according to the standards of the mint it came from. That's what's in the Constitution - not an extra-governmental (private) instiution that can create as much money as it needs to maintain control!

Banking should be boring. They should accept deposits and charge money for keeping it safe in their vaults. But don't they pay depositors interest, you ask? Why would they pay you to keep your money safe when you can come in and get it back anytime you like? You can't run a business like that! The point of paying interest on a deposit is because the depositor agrees to allow the banker to loan the money to someone else. But that's not how it works, you say? Exactly. Because everybody knows that if enough depositors come to get their money the house of cards collapses and the FDIC has to step in. This should never happen. There should be no such thing, generally speaking, as a bankrun. A bank will fail if they make too many risky loans. That is, if a banker fails to properly evaluate the 'creditworthiness' of the individuals applying for loans. If too many loans go sour the banker fails and all of his assets are purchased by those making loans that are less risky. No need to ask Keynes what he thinks. Banking should not involve economics, which is really about the effects of human choice. Banking is math. If you deposit money, and you want to be able to get it the next day, you must pay the banker a fee for safekeeping. If you agree that your money can be lent to another, trusting the judgment of your banker, then you should receive part of the profit - and you cannot get it the next day, because it has already been lent! How can you possibly retrieve something that is not there? You banker would think you are an idiot to request money you agreed to lend! But that's what an honest system would work. Instead, we have an 'unlimited' system. It stops working properly if you apply gravity. Ron Paul's 26 year attempt to audit the Federal Reserve is almost more of an inside joke. He already knows that the Federal Reserve is evil - but he has a hard enough time deflecting attempts from the media to portray him as a lunatic as it is - he wants the public to perceive what a mudfight will ensue if they actually knew how the system works.

So growth would be slower. But it is inherently stable. Individuals are likely to take less risk, and they are less likely to get a loan that they probably won't be able to pay back. People sharpen their pencils. People look for other ways to finance their plans by seeking out friends, family, neighbors, etc instead of bankers. The free market is the market in which there is no restriction. But we do not have a free market. We have banksters hiding behind green curtains telling us what is best. The more stable the system the less money the banksters make. They make more money gaming the system: booms and busts - and we start to hear these pompous, paid economists (bankster apologists) tell us they couldn't see this was going to happen, and we all nod our heads, "Nobody saw this coming." So because the banksters never work for any of this money it is in their best interest that you, the simple-minded, ever-trusting consumer is in a perpetual state of paying interest. They are less interested in being paid in full than they are having you pay with your sweat.

Bankers control. Consumers always pay. Maybe you already explained all this to your girlie, my fellow FR-hater, and there is much more, but ask her what has always happened when enough people become apathetic to evil. The reason the founding fathers didn't get around to explaining the free market in the Constitution is because it is the lack of restriction. Real liberty. Let coined precious metals be the pinnacle of our economic system - everything else can be bartered. It keeps the bankers at bay.

I leave you with two quotes, from men of opposite character, that say the same thing using different words:

corporate reputation management

Obama: Fox <b>News</b> Has A Point Of View That Is &#39;Ultimately <b>...</b>

President Obama has given a lengthy interview to Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner for the upcoming issue of the magazine. The cover story is titled Obama Fights Back and boy does he ever. At least where Fox News is concerned.

LinkedIn Beefs Up Company Profiles With <b>News</b> Feeds, Career Data <b>...</b>

We recently wrote about the fast growing number of company profiles on professional social network LinkedIn (the network has over one million to be exact). Launched in April, the company profile gives organizations a centralized profile ...

Michelle Malkin » New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox <b>News</b> is <b>...</b>

New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox News is Hogging All the Success.

eric seiger dermatologist

Obama: Fox <b>News</b> Has A Point Of View That Is &#39;Ultimately <b>...</b>

President Obama has given a lengthy interview to Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner for the upcoming issue of the magazine. The cover story is titled Obama Fights Back and boy does he ever. At least where Fox News is concerned.

LinkedIn Beefs Up Company Profiles With <b>News</b> Feeds, Career Data <b>...</b>

We recently wrote about the fast growing number of company profiles on professional social network LinkedIn (the network has over one million to be exact). Launched in April, the company profile gives organizations a centralized profile ...

Michelle Malkin » New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox <b>News</b> is <b>...</b>

New Scapegoat for a Lousy Economy: Fox News is Hogging All the Success.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

personal finance blog

If you walked into the average bookstore, you'd think that women rule the roost when it comes to personal finance. From Suze Orman's now-classic Women and Money to the more recent (and more colorfully titled) Bitches on a Budget, there's no shortage of do-it-yourself financial advice tailored to women.



Apparently, though, when women make the momentous move from self-help to seeking professional advice about investing and retirement, things go rapidly downhill. A recent study by the Boston Consulting Group revealed that women perceived themselves as receiving wealth management services at a level of quality that is inferior to that received by their male counterparts.



According to the study, women are the key decision-makers when it comes to 27% of the wealth worldwide: that's $20 trillion! But despite the massive chunk of power they wield, 55% of the women surveyed in the study said they felt their wealth manager could do a better job of advising them. Almost a quarter of the respondents said private banks needed "significant improvement" in the services they offer to women.



"The dissatisfaction stems from the unshakable perception that men get more attention, better advice, and sometimes even better terms and deals," according to study co-author Peter Damisch. "We heard this sense of subordination time and time again in our interviews."



This perceived disparity in service arose from several key disconnects in the relationships and communications between women and their financial advisers. Manisha Thakor, Chartered Financial Analyst and women's financial literacy advocate, offers some steps savvy female investors can take to avoid being under-served by their wealth managers and investment advisers:



1. Find your adviser and get your financial education from women-run resources.



The financial services industry is dominated by males and therefore the "DNA is structured around the male experience," Thakor explains, adding that she sees many firms making an effort to change this. Most financial advisers are men, who may not inherently understand the whole-life nature of the average woman's financial plans and needs. They also may have very different communication styles than their women clients.



Thakor recommends women use women-created resources like LearnVest and DailyWorth to educate themselves in order to avoid the intimidation factor when talking about investment products with their advisers. She also encourages women to consult Garrett Planning Network, founded by Certified Financial Planner Sheryl Garrett, to locate a local certified financial planner who works on an hourly-fee-only basis. Taking these steps, Thakor explains, may alleviate the concern expressed by many women in the BCG study that they were not being taken seriously or talked to on the same level as male clients by their financial advisers.



2. Expressly state your ideal career trajectory, then ask how you should alter your investment plans accordingly.



In the BCG study, women stated that their investment advisers fundamentally misunderstood what was actually important to them, and recommended a too-narrow range of inappropriate investment vehicles as a result. Many said their advisers assumed they had a lower risk tolerance than they actually did, or that their advisers focused on short-term results and disregarded their long-term goals, which often included time out to care for a child or parent.



Thakor offers women a script of sorts to remedy this communication disconnect. "Go in and say: "I want to be a mom and I may take X amount of time out of the work force," she advises. Then ask, "How do we adjust how much I need to save and how I should invest to compensate for this?"



3. Start saving early.

Behold: the most profoundly pessimistic attack ad of 2010. Meg Whitman has delivered unto us a masterpiece of dirty politics.

What is most striking about this already-infamous ad isn't the boldness of its mendacity--though it certainly has that--but the cynicism of its timing. It's the sort of unabashedly nasty hit that one would expect just days before an election, and even then only from an outside interest group. Yet here it is, delivered to us in early September with Meg Whitman's name right there on the card. By not only producing so brazen a piece of misinformation but also airing it with more than enough time to effectively rebut, Whitman is betting the house on the politics of personal animosity.

If you live in California or happen to be a political junkie, you've no doubt seen it already and can skip the next paragraph. But for those of you who have avoided it (probably due to a weak stomach or some lingering, endangered shred of personal or political optimism) here's a recap:

Bill Clinton, in a 1992 debate, sits face-to-face with Jerry Brown. Brown looks at Clinton like a kid called to the principal's office. Clinton blasts Brown as a tax-raising liar: "CNN, not me, CNN says his assertion about his tax record was, quote, 'just plain wrong.' He raised taxes as Governor of California. He doesn't tell the people the truth." That's two levels of surrogate Whitman is hiding behind, for those of you keeping track. On its own, the ad is devastating.

There's just one little problem: That CNN report turned out to be "just plain wrong," and Whitman's campaign--like all interested parties--has been fully aware of that for some time. From what the San Jose Mercury-News has been able to piece together, the CNN report used the wrong years both in determining the base of comparison and in identifying the budgets Brown had control over. This made it seem Brown was responsible for a sizable tax increase during Reagan's last year in office and failed to give him credit for tax cuts later in his tenure. The LA Times and California Department of Finance also revisited the numbers and found them to be outright wrong, for the same reasons, in the same ways. Brown was telling the truth. He had cut taxes as Governor of California.

Whitman knew full well that the story was a lie, but she wanted to repeat it all the same. The excuse her communications director offered the Mercury-News: "Bill Clinton, not me, said Jerry Brown 'doesn't tell people the truth.'" Sound familiar?

But this ad is so much more perverse than any simple repetition of untruths. It practically baits a popular former president into entering the fray on the side of Whitman's opponent, yet rests comfortably on the belief that personal grievances and misgivings will trump ethics and ideology to prevent any serious intervention by Clinton or one of the nation's most popular fact checkers.

Yes, in case you missed it, there is yet another personality being ironically misused by this ad. Brooks Jackson, the reporter responsible for this particular "oopsie," now heads FactCheck.org. If you didn't already know that, give yourself a moment to let it sink in: The man whose erroneous report is still fueling factually-incorrect campaign advertisements nearly two decades later is also the guy we all run to when we question the veracity of claims in a political advertisement.

For his part, Jackson acknowledged the error on FactCheck.org in a manner only slightly more embarrassing than admirable. Unlike other political ads targeted by FactCheck, the correction has yet to warrant an actual article on the site. Jackson did, however, post a blog entry on the topic on one of the site's secondary pages. It fails to even mention the Clinton ad and generally reads more like a lengthy rationalization than a correction. He even works in the astonishing insinuation that Prop 13 was a reaction to Brown's high taxes. (Prop 13, patently a reaction to soaring property values and their impact on property tax rates, was not included in the figures used to correct Jackson's report.) After muddying the waters for seven paragraphs, he concludes that state taxes "increased during four of Brown's eight years, and during six of those years they were higher than before he took office. But they were lower during his final two years."

The Mercury-News, State Department of Finance and Associated Press see things a little differently. By about $16 billion in tax cuts during Brown's first seven years in office, and $4 billion in savings per year between 1978 and 1982. Not counting the savings from Prop 13. So much for a gentleman admitting he was wrong.

Not that Jackson matters much to Brown's campaign. Both Brown and Whitman know that only one man can make this ad backfire on Whitman: former president Clinton. Whitman is betting (perhaps unwisely, given Clinton's general election campaigning for Barack Obama,) that 18 years after their bitter battle for the Democratic nomination, Clinton still hates Brown so much that he will refuse defend him with any real conviction.

Exactly how acrimonious was the Clinton-Brown contest? The clip in Whitman's ad might be called one of its more friendly exchanges.

In what was widely taken as an allusion to Brown's onslaught of attacks on Clinton's character, Jesse Jackson opened one debate by chastising the candidates for getting too caught up in "attacks and counterattacks." It didn't slow Brown down. Later that evening, he accused Clinton of racial insensitivity for playing golf at a whites-only country club and using black prisoners as campaign props.

At the final debate, when Brown (not without his own, similar conflicts of interest,) accused Clinton of "funneling money to his wife's law firm," Clinton shot back, "You're not worth being on the same platform as my wife."

The highlight (or low point) of that debate was when Clinton said, "I feel sorry for Jerry Brown... He asked me to support him for President once." When a moderator asked if he did, Clinton didn't miss a beat before shooting back, "Of course not." Footage circulated from the night appears to show gathered reporters roaring with laughter. Whitman probably has that ad already in the can.

In an email blast from Brown's campaign the morning the ad came out, Brown was quick to let Clinton off the hook. The former president had "later learned" that the numbers were incorrect, according to the letter to supporters. But it's a lot easier for Jerry Brown to play nice for the sake of his own campaign than it will be for Bill Clinton, who doesn't need any favors, to come riding to Brown's rescue.

Is Clinton still unable to put the past behind him?

Pundits have pointed to his early support for Gavin Newsom over Brown as proof that he still holds a grudge. But was Clinton's support of Newsom the result of his decades-old feud with Brown, or of a more recently developed loyalty? Newsom was a very vocal, enthusiastic supporter of Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries.

Ironically, that support might have been born out of the former San Francisco Mayor's own feud with another Democratic president. In 2007, Newsom implied to Reuters that Obama, "As God is my witness, will not be photographed with me, will not be in the same room with me." At issue was Newsom's having granted marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The Obama-Newsom feud was verified in early 2008, when Willie Brown (backed by several Newsom staffers) gave a much more detailed account of the disputed incident to the San Francisco Chronicle. Obama's campaign denied the accusation, telling Politico that the incoming president was so "pissed" over the stories that the new administration "may give San Francisco to Canada."

Newsom might well have supported Hillary Clinton just as enthusiastically regardless of his personal feelings about Obama. Still, it's tempting to imagine that his feud with the current president might have, just as much as Bill Clinton's animosity toward Jerry Brown, circuitously earned him the former president's support. In politics, there is seldom a single reason for anything, and with so many personal feuds and vendettas driving the nation's politics, it's more than a little difficult to keep straight which one is motivating whom and when.

Will Clinton step in? If he wants to keep that "team player" image he so carefully rebuilt during the 2008 general election, he'll have to. But will he do so looking like an angry, misused Brown supporter or a fellow Democrat forced by party allegiance to go through the motions? I don't know.

What I can say with certainty is that Meg Whitman doesn't even take seriously the possibility that Bill Clinton would rather campaign for Jerry Brown than be seen as the man responsible for costing Democrats the California governor's mansion.

Update: Around the time that this posted, stories about Brown's remarks about Clinton at a campaign event Sunday were beginning to spread. So it seems that Whitman was probably right. "No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up." - Lily Tomlin.

And another update: Clinton issued a statement to several news outlets today. In it, he endorsed Brown, said that the CNN report had been inaccurate and specifically cited Gavin Newsom's support of Hillary Clinton as a reason for his having received Clinton's early primary endorsement.

Google New: It&#39;s Google <b>News</b> About New Google Stuff In One Place

In terms of blog networks, no one ever seems to talk about Google, but they actually have one of the biggest. The search giant has well over 100 blogs devoted to everything from general company news to niche things that only webmasters ...

ASEAN <b>News</b> Summary | Live Stock Trading <b>News</b> | Equities, Forex <b>...</b>

Get the best in ASEAN News daily at www.aseanaffairs.com ASEAN Affairs. PTT drops bid for Carrefour PTT Plc of Thailand is dropping its bid to purchase.

Alabama <b>news</b> links: Former Springville teacher ordered to prison <b>...</b>

Former Bibb County preacher convicted in rape of teen girl; woman prisoner's death in Anniston Jail under investigation.

robert shumake

Google New: It&#39;s Google <b>News</b> About New Google Stuff In One Place

In terms of blog networks, no one ever seems to talk about Google, but they actually have one of the biggest. The search giant has well over 100 blogs devoted to everything from general company news to niche things that only webmasters ...

ASEAN <b>News</b> Summary | Live Stock Trading <b>News</b> | Equities, Forex <b>...</b>

Get the best in ASEAN News daily at www.aseanaffairs.com ASEAN Affairs. PTT drops bid for Carrefour PTT Plc of Thailand is dropping its bid to purchase.

Alabama <b>news</b> links: Former Springville teacher ordered to prison <b>...</b>

Former Bibb County preacher convicted in rape of teen girl; woman prisoner's death in Anniston Jail under investigation.

If you walked into the average bookstore, you'd think that women rule the roost when it comes to personal finance. From Suze Orman's now-classic Women and Money to the more recent (and more colorfully titled) Bitches on a Budget, there's no shortage of do-it-yourself financial advice tailored to women.



Apparently, though, when women make the momentous move from self-help to seeking professional advice about investing and retirement, things go rapidly downhill. A recent study by the Boston Consulting Group revealed that women perceived themselves as receiving wealth management services at a level of quality that is inferior to that received by their male counterparts.



According to the study, women are the key decision-makers when it comes to 27% of the wealth worldwide: that's $20 trillion! But despite the massive chunk of power they wield, 55% of the women surveyed in the study said they felt their wealth manager could do a better job of advising them. Almost a quarter of the respondents said private banks needed "significant improvement" in the services they offer to women.



"The dissatisfaction stems from the unshakable perception that men get more attention, better advice, and sometimes even better terms and deals," according to study co-author Peter Damisch. "We heard this sense of subordination time and time again in our interviews."



This perceived disparity in service arose from several key disconnects in the relationships and communications between women and their financial advisers. Manisha Thakor, Chartered Financial Analyst and women's financial literacy advocate, offers some steps savvy female investors can take to avoid being under-served by their wealth managers and investment advisers:



1. Find your adviser and get your financial education from women-run resources.



The financial services industry is dominated by males and therefore the "DNA is structured around the male experience," Thakor explains, adding that she sees many firms making an effort to change this. Most financial advisers are men, who may not inherently understand the whole-life nature of the average woman's financial plans and needs. They also may have very different communication styles than their women clients.



Thakor recommends women use women-created resources like LearnVest and DailyWorth to educate themselves in order to avoid the intimidation factor when talking about investment products with their advisers. She also encourages women to consult Garrett Planning Network, founded by Certified Financial Planner Sheryl Garrett, to locate a local certified financial planner who works on an hourly-fee-only basis. Taking these steps, Thakor explains, may alleviate the concern expressed by many women in the BCG study that they were not being taken seriously or talked to on the same level as male clients by their financial advisers.



2. Expressly state your ideal career trajectory, then ask how you should alter your investment plans accordingly.



In the BCG study, women stated that their investment advisers fundamentally misunderstood what was actually important to them, and recommended a too-narrow range of inappropriate investment vehicles as a result. Many said their advisers assumed they had a lower risk tolerance than they actually did, or that their advisers focused on short-term results and disregarded their long-term goals, which often included time out to care for a child or parent.



Thakor offers women a script of sorts to remedy this communication disconnect. "Go in and say: "I want to be a mom and I may take X amount of time out of the work force," she advises. Then ask, "How do we adjust how much I need to save and how I should invest to compensate for this?"



3. Start saving early.

Behold: the most profoundly pessimistic attack ad of 2010. Meg Whitman has delivered unto us a masterpiece of dirty politics.

What is most striking about this already-infamous ad isn't the boldness of its mendacity--though it certainly has that--but the cynicism of its timing. It's the sort of unabashedly nasty hit that one would expect just days before an election, and even then only from an outside interest group. Yet here it is, delivered to us in early September with Meg Whitman's name right there on the card. By not only producing so brazen a piece of misinformation but also airing it with more than enough time to effectively rebut, Whitman is betting the house on the politics of personal animosity.

If you live in California or happen to be a political junkie, you've no doubt seen it already and can skip the next paragraph. But for those of you who have avoided it (probably due to a weak stomach or some lingering, endangered shred of personal or political optimism) here's a recap:

Bill Clinton, in a 1992 debate, sits face-to-face with Jerry Brown. Brown looks at Clinton like a kid called to the principal's office. Clinton blasts Brown as a tax-raising liar: "CNN, not me, CNN says his assertion about his tax record was, quote, 'just plain wrong.' He raised taxes as Governor of California. He doesn't tell the people the truth." That's two levels of surrogate Whitman is hiding behind, for those of you keeping track. On its own, the ad is devastating.

There's just one little problem: That CNN report turned out to be "just plain wrong," and Whitman's campaign--like all interested parties--has been fully aware of that for some time. From what the San Jose Mercury-News has been able to piece together, the CNN report used the wrong years both in determining the base of comparison and in identifying the budgets Brown had control over. This made it seem Brown was responsible for a sizable tax increase during Reagan's last year in office and failed to give him credit for tax cuts later in his tenure. The LA Times and California Department of Finance also revisited the numbers and found them to be outright wrong, for the same reasons, in the same ways. Brown was telling the truth. He had cut taxes as Governor of California.

Whitman knew full well that the story was a lie, but she wanted to repeat it all the same. The excuse her communications director offered the Mercury-News: "Bill Clinton, not me, said Jerry Brown 'doesn't tell people the truth.'" Sound familiar?

But this ad is so much more perverse than any simple repetition of untruths. It practically baits a popular former president into entering the fray on the side of Whitman's opponent, yet rests comfortably on the belief that personal grievances and misgivings will trump ethics and ideology to prevent any serious intervention by Clinton or one of the nation's most popular fact checkers.

Yes, in case you missed it, there is yet another personality being ironically misused by this ad. Brooks Jackson, the reporter responsible for this particular "oopsie," now heads FactCheck.org. If you didn't already know that, give yourself a moment to let it sink in: The man whose erroneous report is still fueling factually-incorrect campaign advertisements nearly two decades later is also the guy we all run to when we question the veracity of claims in a political advertisement.

For his part, Jackson acknowledged the error on FactCheck.org in a manner only slightly more embarrassing than admirable. Unlike other political ads targeted by FactCheck, the correction has yet to warrant an actual article on the site. Jackson did, however, post a blog entry on the topic on one of the site's secondary pages. It fails to even mention the Clinton ad and generally reads more like a lengthy rationalization than a correction. He even works in the astonishing insinuation that Prop 13 was a reaction to Brown's high taxes. (Prop 13, patently a reaction to soaring property values and their impact on property tax rates, was not included in the figures used to correct Jackson's report.) After muddying the waters for seven paragraphs, he concludes that state taxes "increased during four of Brown's eight years, and during six of those years they were higher than before he took office. But they were lower during his final two years."

The Mercury-News, State Department of Finance and Associated Press see things a little differently. By about $16 billion in tax cuts during Brown's first seven years in office, and $4 billion in savings per year between 1978 and 1982. Not counting the savings from Prop 13. So much for a gentleman admitting he was wrong.

Not that Jackson matters much to Brown's campaign. Both Brown and Whitman know that only one man can make this ad backfire on Whitman: former president Clinton. Whitman is betting (perhaps unwisely, given Clinton's general election campaigning for Barack Obama,) that 18 years after their bitter battle for the Democratic nomination, Clinton still hates Brown so much that he will refuse defend him with any real conviction.

Exactly how acrimonious was the Clinton-Brown contest? The clip in Whitman's ad might be called one of its more friendly exchanges.

In what was widely taken as an allusion to Brown's onslaught of attacks on Clinton's character, Jesse Jackson opened one debate by chastising the candidates for getting too caught up in "attacks and counterattacks." It didn't slow Brown down. Later that evening, he accused Clinton of racial insensitivity for playing golf at a whites-only country club and using black prisoners as campaign props.

At the final debate, when Brown (not without his own, similar conflicts of interest,) accused Clinton of "funneling money to his wife's law firm," Clinton shot back, "You're not worth being on the same platform as my wife."

The highlight (or low point) of that debate was when Clinton said, "I feel sorry for Jerry Brown... He asked me to support him for President once." When a moderator asked if he did, Clinton didn't miss a beat before shooting back, "Of course not." Footage circulated from the night appears to show gathered reporters roaring with laughter. Whitman probably has that ad already in the can.

In an email blast from Brown's campaign the morning the ad came out, Brown was quick to let Clinton off the hook. The former president had "later learned" that the numbers were incorrect, according to the letter to supporters. But it's a lot easier for Jerry Brown to play nice for the sake of his own campaign than it will be for Bill Clinton, who doesn't need any favors, to come riding to Brown's rescue.

Is Clinton still unable to put the past behind him?

Pundits have pointed to his early support for Gavin Newsom over Brown as proof that he still holds a grudge. But was Clinton's support of Newsom the result of his decades-old feud with Brown, or of a more recently developed loyalty? Newsom was a very vocal, enthusiastic supporter of Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries.

Ironically, that support might have been born out of the former San Francisco Mayor's own feud with another Democratic president. In 2007, Newsom implied to Reuters that Obama, "As God is my witness, will not be photographed with me, will not be in the same room with me." At issue was Newsom's having granted marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The Obama-Newsom feud was verified in early 2008, when Willie Brown (backed by several Newsom staffers) gave a much more detailed account of the disputed incident to the San Francisco Chronicle. Obama's campaign denied the accusation, telling Politico that the incoming president was so "pissed" over the stories that the new administration "may give San Francisco to Canada."

Newsom might well have supported Hillary Clinton just as enthusiastically regardless of his personal feelings about Obama. Still, it's tempting to imagine that his feud with the current president might have, just as much as Bill Clinton's animosity toward Jerry Brown, circuitously earned him the former president's support. In politics, there is seldom a single reason for anything, and with so many personal feuds and vendettas driving the nation's politics, it's more than a little difficult to keep straight which one is motivating whom and when.

Will Clinton step in? If he wants to keep that "team player" image he so carefully rebuilt during the 2008 general election, he'll have to. But will he do so looking like an angry, misused Brown supporter or a fellow Democrat forced by party allegiance to go through the motions? I don't know.

What I can say with certainty is that Meg Whitman doesn't even take seriously the possibility that Bill Clinton would rather campaign for Jerry Brown than be seen as the man responsible for costing Democrats the California governor's mansion.

Update: Around the time that this posted, stories about Brown's remarks about Clinton at a campaign event Sunday were beginning to spread. So it seems that Whitman was probably right. "No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up." - Lily Tomlin.

And another update: Clinton issued a statement to several news outlets today. In it, he endorsed Brown, said that the CNN report had been inaccurate and specifically cited Gavin Newsom's support of Hillary Clinton as a reason for his having received Clinton's early primary endorsement.

robert shumake

Google New: It&#39;s Google <b>News</b> About New Google Stuff In One Place

In terms of blog networks, no one ever seems to talk about Google, but they actually have one of the biggest. The search giant has well over 100 blogs devoted to everything from general company news to niche things that only webmasters ...

ASEAN <b>News</b> Summary | Live Stock Trading <b>News</b> | Equities, Forex <b>...</b>

Get the best in ASEAN News daily at www.aseanaffairs.com ASEAN Affairs. PTT drops bid for Carrefour PTT Plc of Thailand is dropping its bid to purchase.

Alabama <b>news</b> links: Former Springville teacher ordered to prison <b>...</b>

Former Bibb County preacher convicted in rape of teen girl; woman prisoner's death in Anniston Jail under investigation.

robert shumake

Google New: It&#39;s Google <b>News</b> About New Google Stuff In One Place

In terms of blog networks, no one ever seems to talk about Google, but they actually have one of the biggest. The search giant has well over 100 blogs devoted to everything from general company news to niche things that only webmasters ...

ASEAN <b>News</b> Summary | Live Stock Trading <b>News</b> | Equities, Forex <b>...</b>

Get the best in ASEAN News daily at www.aseanaffairs.com ASEAN Affairs. PTT drops bid for Carrefour PTT Plc of Thailand is dropping its bid to purchase.

Alabama <b>news</b> links: Former Springville teacher ordered to prison <b>...</b>

Former Bibb County preacher convicted in rape of teen girl; woman prisoner's death in Anniston Jail under investigation.

foreclosure statistics

It’s tough enough to sell a house with home sales in the Twin Cities undergoing the biggest decline in the country, down 42 percent in July year to year. Yet some local governments make it even tougher for homeowners by imposing some of the country’s most onerous before-sale residential inspection ordinances, adding to the cost and red tape of buying and selling a house at the worst possible time.

Currently, fourteen metro-area municipalities have so-called “point-of-sale” ordinances in place, requiring home sellers to pay for a city inspection prior to selling their property. (In some cases, the ordinances are referred to as “time-of-sale” and “truth in housing” inspections.) In fact, in many cases, sellers are required to pay for the inspection before being permitted to put their home up for sale. These inspections are in addition to, not in lieu of, the private inspections for which home buyers routinely pay $300 or more.

That’s because, as several cities readily admit, these ordinances are not intended to help the buyer or seller. They are intended to help the city.

On its website, the City of Richfield states “inspections are not for the benefit of buyer or seller, but are a community effort to maintain the quality of Richfield’s houses and neighborhoods.” Common code violations cited by Richfield inspectors include bare wood, peeling paint, missing or deteriorated window glazing, and clogged gutters.

The laws require sellers to undergo a comprehensive city inspection for potential code violations at an initial cost that varies from $50 to $200, often before allowing the property to go on the market.

“There are already fixed costs when you buy and sell a property and so having these extra costs piled on top of the transaction can really break up a deal,” said Christine Berger of the Minnesota Association of Realtors. “You can potentially lose your dream home. I call them transaction killers.”

Applications typically include a disclaimer like the City of Osseo’s waiver stating the inspection “does not constitute a guarantee or warranty to any person as to the condition of buildings inspected.” The City of St. Paul “does not guarantee or warranty the accuracy of the report,” according to its website.

Homeowners can get slapped with a fix-it list of repairs needed to bring the property into compliance with city codes. Though some cities issue “disclosure only” reports that do not require action, other municipalities require the property owner or the buyer in some cases to make improvements that go beyond potential safety hazards.

“Who among us in our homes doesn’t have something that would get flagged for some reason or other? The health and safety issues are obviously paramount to us,” said Eric Myers of the North Metro Realtors Association. “But we’ve had them flag a bit of mold along the trim in the bathtub where you just haven’t scrubbed it lately.”

In the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Park, inspectors find problems and order repairs in the overwhelming majority of houses being listed, according to city officials. Even if the house doesn’t sell or is taken off the market, the city requires owners to correct not just code violations but so-called “property deficiencies.”

Officials contend the inspections are more important than ever in an economic downturn to protect potential buyers who may not be able to afford a private one. With an estimated 1,000 vacant and foreclosed houses in Brooklyn Park, officials also insist the inspections are necessary to prevent neighborhood blight.

“I don’t think it’s accurate if you want to talk about too much government,” said Robert Schreier, Brooklyn Park’s community development director. “It’s providing a service to the community. We never hear complaints from people buying the houses. The people that are moving in are glad for the inspections.”

While there are no available statistics to measure the impact of point of sale ordinances on housing sales or costs, realtors say cities should offer buyers and sellers incentives, rather than roadblocks, to reduce the glut of foreclosures and attract buyers.

“Essentially what the city is saying is that you Mr. or Mrs. Seller can’t sell unless we say so, unless you have a city inspection and then make all the repairs,” Myers said. “Nowhere else in the country do we know of where they apply the entire code to delay the transaction, as opposed to focusing on a few items like water saving showerheads or energy efficiency items.”

Point of sale inspections may put the onus on sellers today, but it will be on Brooklyn Park city officials before long. The city council will review whether or not to sunset what’s viewed as the most stringent point of sale ordinance in the Twin Cities—and possibly the nation—in 2012.

“I think when the economy turns around, there’s a question of whether the program would continue,” Schreier said. “I think for this time, however, it’s a good program.”

Metro Area Cities with Point-of-Sale Requirements

Bloomington

Brooklyn Park

Crystal

Golden Valley

Hopkins

Maplewood

Minneapolis

New Hope

Osseo

Richfield

Robbinsdale

St. Louis Park

St. Paul

South St. Paul

Economists often describe unemployment as “cyclical” or “structural.” Cyclical unemployment results from broad economic slowdowns: As the economy turns, businesses lay off workers, meaning other businesses suffer, meaning more layoffs. Structural unemployment results from broad economic changes: An economy with a strong apple trade might be becoming an economy with a strong orange trade, and as that transformation happens, a lot of apple workers might be out of a job.



Economic commentators such as Mohamed El-Erian, the head of PIMCO, have described the United States’ problem as mostly structural. The housing boom created millions of jobs in construction, development and realty, and those jobs are gone. Over at Project Syndicate, economist Brad DeLong makes the argument for cyclical unemployment:

In [the case of structural unemployment] we would expect to see construction depressed: firms closed, capital goods idle, and workers unemployed. But we would also expect to see manufacturing plants running at double shifts – the money not spent on construction has to go somewhere, and, remember, the problem is not a lack of aggregate demand. We would expect to see manufacturers holding job fairs, and when not enough workers showed up, we would expect to see manufacturers offering higher wages to attract workers into their plants, and then raising prices to cover their higher costs.

That is what “mismatch” structural unemployment looks like – and it is not what we have today, at least not in Europe and North America. In the past three years, employment in construction has shrunk, but so has employment in manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and warehousing, information distribution and communications, professional and business services, educational services, leisure and hospitality, and in the public sector. Employment is up in health care, Internet-related businesses, and perhaps in logging and mining.

DeLong does not say that structural unemployment does not exist in the U.S. economy, just that the problem is primarily cyclical. In a few years, with unemployment still projected to be above 8 percent, the problem will primarily be a structural one, he notes.

Though the problem seems to me to be both: The unemployment is cyclical and structural. Most sectors have suffered from the turndown, but job losses are concentrated in some industries: In residential construction, they are down 38 percent since 2006. (Between Aug. 2007 and Dec. 2009, unemployment in construction quintupled from about 5 percent to about 25 percent.) In health care and education, however, jobs are up.

Here is a chart I made from Bureau of Labor Statistics data that shows the phenomenon. (The chart shows total jobs in major sectors since 2005.) Most sectors — retail trade, business services, wholesale trade, finance — have had moderate job losses one could reasonably chalk up to an economy-wide lack of demand. Let’s think of those as sectors characterized mostly by cyclical job loss. Then, there is manufacturing and construction. Jobs there have taken a nose dive, and the problem seems to be structural. Moreover, the job gains in education and health might thought to be structural as well. (Mining and logging isn’t an industry I know a lot about, so I’m not sure what’s going on there.)

That said, the big problem at the root of all of the employment woes remains sluggish demand.

One can also think about the unemployment geographically. Joblessness has tracked up in all states, due to lack of demand. But states with big manufacturing and construction industries — Michigan, Nevada, California and Florida — are suffering from massive structural unemployment, made worse by the foreclosure crisis. (Four years ago, you might have been working in construction in Nevada and overpaid for your house. Today, you’re likely out of a job and, worse, can’t move to a state like North Dakota because you can’t sell the property.)

The American Spectator : ABC <b>News</b>&#39; Credibility &#39;Lost in Translation&#39;

ABC News President David Westin is resigning and plans to leave the company before the end of the year, reportedly because of friction between him and executives at parent Walt Disney Company over the network's poor profits. ...

FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad <b>...</b>

iLounge news discussing the FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad. Find more iPad news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Official Google Blog: Google <b>News</b> turns eight

Today we celebrate the eighth birthday of Google News. Not long after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, we started building and testing Google News with the aim of helping you find current events from a wide variety of global and ...

robert shumake

The American Spectator : ABC <b>News</b>&#39; Credibility &#39;Lost in Translation&#39;

ABC News President David Westin is resigning and plans to leave the company before the end of the year, reportedly because of friction between him and executives at parent Walt Disney Company over the network's poor profits. ...

FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad <b>...</b>

iLounge news discussing the FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad. Find more iPad news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Official Google Blog: Google <b>News</b> turns eight

Today we celebrate the eighth birthday of Google News. Not long after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, we started building and testing Google News with the aim of helping you find current events from a wide variety of global and ...

It’s tough enough to sell a house with home sales in the Twin Cities undergoing the biggest decline in the country, down 42 percent in July year to year. Yet some local governments make it even tougher for homeowners by imposing some of the country’s most onerous before-sale residential inspection ordinances, adding to the cost and red tape of buying and selling a house at the worst possible time.

Currently, fourteen metro-area municipalities have so-called “point-of-sale” ordinances in place, requiring home sellers to pay for a city inspection prior to selling their property. (In some cases, the ordinances are referred to as “time-of-sale” and “truth in housing” inspections.) In fact, in many cases, sellers are required to pay for the inspection before being permitted to put their home up for sale. These inspections are in addition to, not in lieu of, the private inspections for which home buyers routinely pay $300 or more.

That’s because, as several cities readily admit, these ordinances are not intended to help the buyer or seller. They are intended to help the city.

On its website, the City of Richfield states “inspections are not for the benefit of buyer or seller, but are a community effort to maintain the quality of Richfield’s houses and neighborhoods.” Common code violations cited by Richfield inspectors include bare wood, peeling paint, missing or deteriorated window glazing, and clogged gutters.

The laws require sellers to undergo a comprehensive city inspection for potential code violations at an initial cost that varies from $50 to $200, often before allowing the property to go on the market.

“There are already fixed costs when you buy and sell a property and so having these extra costs piled on top of the transaction can really break up a deal,” said Christine Berger of the Minnesota Association of Realtors. “You can potentially lose your dream home. I call them transaction killers.”

Applications typically include a disclaimer like the City of Osseo’s waiver stating the inspection “does not constitute a guarantee or warranty to any person as to the condition of buildings inspected.” The City of St. Paul “does not guarantee or warranty the accuracy of the report,” according to its website.

Homeowners can get slapped with a fix-it list of repairs needed to bring the property into compliance with city codes. Though some cities issue “disclosure only” reports that do not require action, other municipalities require the property owner or the buyer in some cases to make improvements that go beyond potential safety hazards.

“Who among us in our homes doesn’t have something that would get flagged for some reason or other? The health and safety issues are obviously paramount to us,” said Eric Myers of the North Metro Realtors Association. “But we’ve had them flag a bit of mold along the trim in the bathtub where you just haven’t scrubbed it lately.”

In the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Park, inspectors find problems and order repairs in the overwhelming majority of houses being listed, according to city officials. Even if the house doesn’t sell or is taken off the market, the city requires owners to correct not just code violations but so-called “property deficiencies.”

Officials contend the inspections are more important than ever in an economic downturn to protect potential buyers who may not be able to afford a private one. With an estimated 1,000 vacant and foreclosed houses in Brooklyn Park, officials also insist the inspections are necessary to prevent neighborhood blight.

“I don’t think it’s accurate if you want to talk about too much government,” said Robert Schreier, Brooklyn Park’s community development director. “It’s providing a service to the community. We never hear complaints from people buying the houses. The people that are moving in are glad for the inspections.”

While there are no available statistics to measure the impact of point of sale ordinances on housing sales or costs, realtors say cities should offer buyers and sellers incentives, rather than roadblocks, to reduce the glut of foreclosures and attract buyers.

“Essentially what the city is saying is that you Mr. or Mrs. Seller can’t sell unless we say so, unless you have a city inspection and then make all the repairs,” Myers said. “Nowhere else in the country do we know of where they apply the entire code to delay the transaction, as opposed to focusing on a few items like water saving showerheads or energy efficiency items.”

Point of sale inspections may put the onus on sellers today, but it will be on Brooklyn Park city officials before long. The city council will review whether or not to sunset what’s viewed as the most stringent point of sale ordinance in the Twin Cities—and possibly the nation—in 2012.

“I think when the economy turns around, there’s a question of whether the program would continue,” Schreier said. “I think for this time, however, it’s a good program.”

Metro Area Cities with Point-of-Sale Requirements

Bloomington

Brooklyn Park

Crystal

Golden Valley

Hopkins

Maplewood

Minneapolis

New Hope

Osseo

Richfield

Robbinsdale

St. Louis Park

St. Paul

South St. Paul

Economists often describe unemployment as “cyclical” or “structural.” Cyclical unemployment results from broad economic slowdowns: As the economy turns, businesses lay off workers, meaning other businesses suffer, meaning more layoffs. Structural unemployment results from broad economic changes: An economy with a strong apple trade might be becoming an economy with a strong orange trade, and as that transformation happens, a lot of apple workers might be out of a job.



Economic commentators such as Mohamed El-Erian, the head of PIMCO, have described the United States’ problem as mostly structural. The housing boom created millions of jobs in construction, development and realty, and those jobs are gone. Over at Project Syndicate, economist Brad DeLong makes the argument for cyclical unemployment:

In [the case of structural unemployment] we would expect to see construction depressed: firms closed, capital goods idle, and workers unemployed. But we would also expect to see manufacturing plants running at double shifts – the money not spent on construction has to go somewhere, and, remember, the problem is not a lack of aggregate demand. We would expect to see manufacturers holding job fairs, and when not enough workers showed up, we would expect to see manufacturers offering higher wages to attract workers into their plants, and then raising prices to cover their higher costs.

That is what “mismatch” structural unemployment looks like – and it is not what we have today, at least not in Europe and North America. In the past three years, employment in construction has shrunk, but so has employment in manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and warehousing, information distribution and communications, professional and business services, educational services, leisure and hospitality, and in the public sector. Employment is up in health care, Internet-related businesses, and perhaps in logging and mining.

DeLong does not say that structural unemployment does not exist in the U.S. economy, just that the problem is primarily cyclical. In a few years, with unemployment still projected to be above 8 percent, the problem will primarily be a structural one, he notes.

Though the problem seems to me to be both: The unemployment is cyclical and structural. Most sectors have suffered from the turndown, but job losses are concentrated in some industries: In residential construction, they are down 38 percent since 2006. (Between Aug. 2007 and Dec. 2009, unemployment in construction quintupled from about 5 percent to about 25 percent.) In health care and education, however, jobs are up.

Here is a chart I made from Bureau of Labor Statistics data that shows the phenomenon. (The chart shows total jobs in major sectors since 2005.) Most sectors — retail trade, business services, wholesale trade, finance — have had moderate job losses one could reasonably chalk up to an economy-wide lack of demand. Let’s think of those as sectors characterized mostly by cyclical job loss. Then, there is manufacturing and construction. Jobs there have taken a nose dive, and the problem seems to be structural. Moreover, the job gains in education and health might thought to be structural as well. (Mining and logging isn’t an industry I know a lot about, so I’m not sure what’s going on there.)

That said, the big problem at the root of all of the employment woes remains sluggish demand.

One can also think about the unemployment geographically. Joblessness has tracked up in all states, due to lack of demand. But states with big manufacturing and construction industries — Michigan, Nevada, California and Florida — are suffering from massive structural unemployment, made worse by the foreclosure crisis. (Four years ago, you might have been working in construction in Nevada and overpaid for your house. Today, you’re likely out of a job and, worse, can’t move to a state like North Dakota because you can’t sell the property.)

robert shumake

The American Spectator : ABC <b>News</b>&#39; Credibility &#39;Lost in Translation&#39;

ABC News President David Westin is resigning and plans to leave the company before the end of the year, reportedly because of friction between him and executives at parent Walt Disney Company over the network's poor profits. ...

FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad <b>...</b>

iLounge news discussing the FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad. Find more iPad news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Official Google Blog: Google <b>News</b> turns eight

Today we celebrate the eighth birthday of Google News. Not long after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, we started building and testing Google News with the aim of helping you find current events from a wide variety of global and ...

robert shumake

The American Spectator : ABC <b>News</b>&#39; Credibility &#39;Lost in Translation&#39;

ABC News President David Westin is resigning and plans to leave the company before the end of the year, reportedly because of friction between him and executives at parent Walt Disney Company over the network's poor profits. ...

FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad <b>...</b>

iLounge news discussing the FileMaker releases FileMaker Go updates for iPhone and iPad. Find more iPad news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Official Google Blog: Google <b>News</b> turns eight

Today we celebrate the eighth birthday of Google News. Not long after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, we started building and testing Google News with the aim of helping you find current events from a wide variety of global and ...