The U.S. receives its highest rating from international investors in more than two years on new optimism that the world’s largest economy will weather the financial crisis in Europe and avoid a recession in 2012, according to a Bloomberg poll.
More than two in five of those surveyed -- 41 percent -- identify the U.S. as among the markets that will perform best over the next year. That’s up from less than one in three who felt that way in September and is the biggest percentage for the U.S. since the survey began in October 2009. It’s also almost double that of the next two top-rated markets, Brazil and China, according to the quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll conducted Dec. 5-6 of 1,097 investors, analysts and traders who are Bloomberg subscribers.
The U.S. “may not be in the best shape ever, but compared to others it should outperform,” Alexis Laming, a poll respondent and associate director for Arab Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. in Geneva, says in an e-mail. It has “good growth potential for next year.”
Social Justice: Current Affairs, Business, Politics, and all the reasons in the world to Thrive on Creative Discontent!
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Marijuana Facts: God gave it to us; it makes life better for some people; it is not a gateway drug; and doesn't lead to violence or increased crime = so why isn't it legal??
More than 70% of Americans support medical marijuana. Moreover, a recent Gallup poll found that marijuana legalization is supported by a majority of independent voters, a majority of people in Western states, a majority of people in Eastern states, a majority of people in the Midwest, and almost a majority of Americans in Southern states. 16 states have already legalized marijuana for medical use. 14 states have decriminalized marijuana for personal use. And two states (Washington, Colorado) could vote on legalizing and regulating marijuana like alcohol in November of 2012.
It is clear that federal law needs to be updated to allow states to go their own way on this issue and do what is best for their citizens without fear of federal intervention. Until Congress passes such legislation you should do whatever is in your power to stop wasting federal resources undermining the will of the voters in the 16 states and the District of Columbia that have legalized marijuana for medical use. Your original instinct on this issue was sound. Please end the assault on medical marijuana patients, caregivers, and dispensaries.
It is clear that federal law needs to be updated to allow states to go their own way on this issue and do what is best for their citizens without fear of federal intervention. Until Congress passes such legislation you should do whatever is in your power to stop wasting federal resources undermining the will of the voters in the 16 states and the District of Columbia that have legalized marijuana for medical use. Your original instinct on this issue was sound. Please end the assault on medical marijuana patients, caregivers, and dispensaries.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
London Police label UK citizens in Occupy London movement as Terrorists....blimey!!!
City of London Police have sparked controversy by producing a brief in which the Occupy London movement is listed under domestic terrorism/extremism threats to City businesses. The document was given to protesters at their “Bank of Ideas” base on Sun Street – a former site of financial corporation UBS. City police have stepped up an effort to quell the movement since they occupied the building on 18 November, with the document stating: “It is likely that activists aspire to identify other locations to occupy, especially those they identify with capitalism
99% get up off your sofa and take back your country....put down the 6 pack and get angry!
“This country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share and when everyone plays by the same rules,” Mr. Obama said in an address that sought to tie his economic differences with Republicans into an overarching message.
Infusing his speech with the moralistic language that has emerged in the Occupy protests around the nation, Mr. Obama warned that growing income inequality meant that the United States was undermining its middle class and, “gives lie to the promise that’s at the very heart of America: that this is the place where you can make it if you try.”
“This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class,” Mr. Obama told the crowd packed into the gym at Osawatomie High School.
“At stake,” he said, “is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement.”
Mr. Obama purposefully chose this hardscrabble town of 4,500 people, about 50 miles south of Kansas City, Kan., where Theodore Roosevelt once laid out the progressive platform he called “the New Nationalism” to put forth his case for a payroll tax cut and his broader arguments against the Republican economic agenda in what his aides hoped would be viewed as a defining speech.
Infusing his speech with the moralistic language that has emerged in the Occupy protests around the nation, Mr. Obama warned that growing income inequality meant that the United States was undermining its middle class and, “gives lie to the promise that’s at the very heart of America: that this is the place where you can make it if you try.”
“This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class,” Mr. Obama told the crowd packed into the gym at Osawatomie High School.
“At stake,” he said, “is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement.”
Mr. Obama purposefully chose this hardscrabble town of 4,500 people, about 50 miles south of Kansas City, Kan., where Theodore Roosevelt once laid out the progressive platform he called “the New Nationalism” to put forth his case for a payroll tax cut and his broader arguments against the Republican economic agenda in what his aides hoped would be viewed as a defining speech.
Congress & their staff are permitted by law to trade on insider information!!!!
"Insider trading" by members of Congress seems to cause similar reactions in most. "Isn't that already illegal?" is the common refrain. And why wouldn't it be, as insider trading lands everyone else in the U.S. -- and most industrialized countries -- in jail and slaps them with huge fines. The fact that a little-known loophole permits members of Congress and their staffs to buy and sell stocks using insider information they might obtain through their official work rightly strikes most citizens as outrageous.
The now infamous 60 Minutes documentary from earlier this month shone a bright light on the obvious opportunities members of Congress and their staffs have to use information gleaned in day-to-day business for personal gain in the stock and commodities markets. The increasing scrutiny seems to be providing the necessary energy to finally spur action on the STOCK Act, introduced in the House of Representatives by Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) and Tim Walz (D-Minn.). This legislation would increase disclosure and highlight conflicts of interests for lawmakers and ensure that they do not benefit from their insider knowledge.
The bill has languished since 2006 due to a lack of attention. However in just the few weeks since this issue was so publicly flagged, the number of co-sponsors in the House on the STOCK Act has grown from nine to 99, and both Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Kristen Gillabrand (D-N.Y.) have introduced companion legislation in the Senate that would change Senate rules to ban insider trading. "When members of Congress personally benefit from the legislation that they shape and vote on, there is a clear conflict of interest, and its effect on legislation can be corrosive," Brown wrote in a letter to his colleagues.
With Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) helding a hearing on the measure , and a Dec. 6 hearing in the House scheduled by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) (who chairs the committee and was one of the lawmakers who came under scrutiny from 60 Minutes, though he denied improper trading), the attention on the issue will likely continue to grow.
The attention is warranted, as a report released earlier this year by four universities found that on average, stock portfolios held by House members from 1985 to 2001 beat the market average by approximately 6 percent annually. In 2004, the same group of professors found that the average stock portfolios held by members of the Senate beat the market average by about 10 percent.
The now infamous 60 Minutes documentary from earlier this month shone a bright light on the obvious opportunities members of Congress and their staffs have to use information gleaned in day-to-day business for personal gain in the stock and commodities markets. The increasing scrutiny seems to be providing the necessary energy to finally spur action on the STOCK Act, introduced in the House of Representatives by Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) and Tim Walz (D-Minn.). This legislation would increase disclosure and highlight conflicts of interests for lawmakers and ensure that they do not benefit from their insider knowledge.
The bill has languished since 2006 due to a lack of attention. However in just the few weeks since this issue was so publicly flagged, the number of co-sponsors in the House on the STOCK Act has grown from nine to 99, and both Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Kristen Gillabrand (D-N.Y.) have introduced companion legislation in the Senate that would change Senate rules to ban insider trading. "When members of Congress personally benefit from the legislation that they shape and vote on, there is a clear conflict of interest, and its effect on legislation can be corrosive," Brown wrote in a letter to his colleagues.
With Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) helding a hearing on the measure , and a Dec. 6 hearing in the House scheduled by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) (who chairs the committee and was one of the lawmakers who came under scrutiny from 60 Minutes, though he denied improper trading), the attention on the issue will likely continue to grow.
The attention is warranted, as a report released earlier this year by four universities found that on average, stock portfolios held by House members from 1985 to 2001 beat the market average by approximately 6 percent annually. In 2004, the same group of professors found that the average stock portfolios held by members of the Senate beat the market average by about 10 percent.
A brief story of a man named Newt...
It would be an understatement to say that Newt Gingrich is a demagogue.
He lacks compassion for the less fortunate among us. He’s proposed cutting off aid to single mothers and sending their children to orphanages.
Last month, he called child labor laws “truly stupid” and said poor children should earn money cleaning bathrooms.
He’s downright Machiavellian. He blasted Democrats for taking money from mortgage giant Freddie Mac — while he was paid $25,000 a month by the same company.
He castigated then-President Clinton for his affair with a White House intern while he himself was having an extra marital affair with a Congressional staffer.
And his lack of ethics is no secret. His colleagues in the House of Representatives voted 395-28 to fine him $300,000 for ethics violations and for lying to them — the first time in history the House disciplined its own Speaker for ethical wrongdoing.
Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes.
Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee Gingrich was sanctioned US$300,000. Gingrich acknowledged in January 1997 that "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee". The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of House rules.
Special Counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him.
He lacks compassion for the less fortunate among us. He’s proposed cutting off aid to single mothers and sending their children to orphanages.
Last month, he called child labor laws “truly stupid” and said poor children should earn money cleaning bathrooms.
He’s downright Machiavellian. He blasted Democrats for taking money from mortgage giant Freddie Mac — while he was paid $25,000 a month by the same company.
He castigated then-President Clinton for his affair with a White House intern while he himself was having an extra marital affair with a Congressional staffer.
And his lack of ethics is no secret. His colleagues in the House of Representatives voted 395-28 to fine him $300,000 for ethics violations and for lying to them — the first time in history the House disciplined its own Speaker for ethical wrongdoing.
Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes.
Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee Gingrich was sanctioned US$300,000. Gingrich acknowledged in January 1997 that "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee". The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of House rules.
Special Counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him.
First Mortgage Corp takes home from the handicapped at Christmas......
Lesliane Bouchard, a disabled teacher in California, may lose her home because her mortgage company, First Mortgage Corporation, refuses to participate in some of the federal programs that could keep her in it.
She has been *approved* for the federal government's Hardest Hit State Fund, which would pay down enough of her principal balance enough to keep her in her home. But First Mortgage Corporation refuses to participate in the program, which is only optional for lenders.
She is completely bedridden due to a spinal injury that left her in constant excruciating pain. She had to stop teaching last year as a result, and her income dropped by 40%. Programs like the Hardest Hit States Fund exist to help people just like her, but they won't work if lenders won't participate in them.
Her current home is about the same distance from all of her adult children, enabling them to share the responsibility of caring for her. If she loses her home, it will be impossible to split duties, making her care much more difficult, and more expensive.
Her home was in foreclosure until HUD put a 90-day hold on the proceedings. Now the time is just ticking away until she is once again at risk of losing her home. Lesliane Bouchard should be able to live out her life with access to appropriate care and all her children. Please join me in demanding that First Mortgage Corporation keep her in her home.
She has been *approved* for the federal government's Hardest Hit State Fund, which would pay down enough of her principal balance enough to keep her in her home. But First Mortgage Corporation refuses to participate in the program, which is only optional for lenders.
She is completely bedridden due to a spinal injury that left her in constant excruciating pain. She had to stop teaching last year as a result, and her income dropped by 40%. Programs like the Hardest Hit States Fund exist to help people just like her, but they won't work if lenders won't participate in them.
Her current home is about the same distance from all of her adult children, enabling them to share the responsibility of caring for her. If she loses her home, it will be impossible to split duties, making her care much more difficult, and more expensive.
Her home was in foreclosure until HUD put a 90-day hold on the proceedings. Now the time is just ticking away until she is once again at risk of losing her home. Lesliane Bouchard should be able to live out her life with access to appropriate care and all her children. Please join me in demanding that First Mortgage Corporation keep her in her home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)