Chris


can you claim a tax deduction as you’ll have to provide food for her? I think this could be a good investment as you can pay for her business classes so she can be an accountant and help your business at lower wage and you could also invest in a second one for cookery. Is it legal somewhere? Also, what if she doesn’t like you and runs away?

mike j


30 cents(estimated tax savings) is really nothing when you take it off from 3.80(expected average in the beginning of june, currently 3.65). It saves you about $30 the whole summer($18 if your is 28+ mpg).

Wow a whole $30, that really will help the economy and be a huge relief for my pockets(being sarcastic). Anyway, the gov’t will lose about 5+ billion dollars and will need to recuperate that from else where. Soooo… the gov’t will raise taxes in other places/take funds from other projects(road/bridge/highway fixing) or tax oil companies(which oil companies will lay off more workers or influence the commodities on the stock market to recuperate the $5 bil). Anyway that $30 dollars of savings will more than likely come back around to me anyway. So why are politicians trying to force it into action? I think we need to focus MORE on getting rid of the subsidies/tax breaks for the oil company and invest in finding alternate fuels.

Dmitriy G


gas oil as we have come to know is a precious natural commodity. Like all precious commodities (gold,rubidium,iodine,zinc,chromium and platinum) a petrochemical plant can withstand market surges even when the market plummets. I like PANTERA PETROLEUM (Ticker:PTPE) because you can purchase shares in a rich and growing oil and natural gas company with a high forecast. If you are looking to invest money I recommend buying it now. Just recently the 47 c stock was seen at a whopping 71 c. With every intent on going all the way up past the 8 s mark. I am not against those analytical predictions but I have already ordered an investors package and spoke to a few people on the inside who are confident about the price per share. Still in its early stages PTPE is a rare buy with a strong growth potential, because they also own some oil rich half of paraguay. so tell me what you think

flyerd1


Even though I’ve already prepared for no social security benefit I definitely do NOT see it going belly up. Any required changes “WILL” be made because the baby boom generation is way too big of a voting segment. Here are three things I think either will or “should” be changed. I’m sure there will be some disagreements but here we go (it’s a little long):

1) One of the things I definitely expect to see soon is a change in the SS tax so that there is NO cap on income subject to the tax (currently 97.5K).

2) A .5% increase ($50 extra per $10K of annual earnings) in the tax itself to 6.7%. This, combined with #1 above, would add quite a bit to the fund. Ex: a person earning 197.5K would pay an extra $7,187.50. A hedge fund manager (wall Street exec, etc) making 100,097,500.00 would pay an additional 6,700,487.50 in SS tax. The tax could be reduced to .5% lower than the “current” level as the system gained its footing. That would mean a 5.7% SS tax. The .5% reduction (from 6.2 to 5.7) could then be added to the Medicare tax to fix it. The net effect would be no change in the total SS/Medicare tax (it would still be a total of 7.65%)

3) Unfortunately, I think most people (i.e. 70%+) would do even worse than the governments historically bad rate of return; therefore I’m against giving some of the money to individuals who, for the most part, can’t even manage what they have now. However, I do believe the money should be invested for higher returns in a diversified ETF portfolio something like this: 50% domestic/international stocks (ex’s: S&P, NASDAQ, IOO, ADRA), 20% commodities related (GLD, DBA, VAW, IGE,), 20% High Quality Bonds (Gov’t & Corporate), 10% Cash equivalents like CD ylding > 6%.

4) Protect SS funds from “other” uses.

5) Additionally, in the interest of saving the system, and because I believe social security should be more of a safety net for “if” you need it, I submit the following thought. I think SS benefits should be “eliminated” for people with retirement sources of income (cap gains, div’s, pensions, etc) “or” assets (minus primary house & active farmland) totaling greater than a set limit that adjusts for inflation. Purely as a starting point for debate: I would support a current income threshold limit of 2.5X the average income of the city you reside in “and/or” a 3M asset limit. For example: if your city’s avg income was 40K, and your total retired income exceeded 100K (or assets > 2M), you would not get any of the SS money that you would otherwise collect (your full benefit would simply be “reduced” between 1.5-2.5X that city’s avg income). Adjusting for salary increases, the avg income in my example would be around 100K in 30 yrs and therefore you total retired income would have to be more than 250K (or assets >5M) to lose the entire benefit. My money’s where my mouth is because I’m 30yrs from SS eligibility and I will have ZERO problem giving up my benefits when I’m spending >250K/yr and/or have assets >5M. BTW, the hedge fund mngr mentioned in #2 would get a nice fat $2100/month (6K/month in 30 yrs) “if” he somehow went bankrupt between making 100M and retirement so he “would” be able to take advantage of the “safety net” that he had paid into. Actually, the max benefit would have to be increase when the 97.5K cap was abolished. I could see the hedge fund guy getting the new max benefit of 10K/month (28K/month in 30 yrs) because he put more into it. The 10K/month amount would apply to anyone who had paid SS tax on an average income > 500K/yr every yr from age 21 (per current rules for the 2100 max payment). The 500K as of 07’ would be adjusted backward and fwd for inflation.

Unlike some, who think SS should be phased out, I still like the idea of SS (even if I never benefit from mine). I see it as an encouragement for people to take chances in their lives such as entrepreneurial risks. I think that knowing there is “something” to fall back on would provide at least a little bit of encouragement to try high risks/high reward endeavors. If, however, the business risk pays off and you create the next MSFT, APPL, GOOG, CAT, etc, etc. then there’s no reason to “access” that safety net.

Any opinions, thoughts, or new ideas that aren’t smartass in nature?

Susiepolls2008


central banks can cause inflation by permitting excessive growth of the money supply,[8] and the government can cause stagnation by excessive regulation of goods markets and labor markets;[9] together, these factors can cause stagflation. Both types of explanations are offered in analyses of the global stagflation of the 1970s: it began with a huge rise in oil prices, but then continued as central banks used excessively stimulative monetary policy to counteract the resulting recession, causing a runaway wage-price spiral.

Stagflation has generally proven to be difficult and costly to eradicate once it gets started.

Unfortunately, higher inflation is coming from every direction you care to look. Normally, the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank would move to stomp out inflation by raising interest rates. Now, thanks to a weakening U.S. economy and turmoil in the debt markets, the Fed is lowering interest rates instead, and both banks are flooding the financial markets with short-term cash.

China, Russia and other emerging-market economies determined to keep their currencies from gaining against the dollar are creating money to buy dollars, inflating their own currencies, and that money is fueling booms in stock and real-estate markets. Inflation hit 6.9% in China in November, for example. And these countries are exporting some of their inflation in the form of higher prices for developed-world customers such as Wal-Mart Stores (WMT, news, msgs). Demand from these fast-growing economies for raw materials is driving up the price of coal, iron ore, corn, wheat, oil — just about every commodity you can name. A falling U.S. dollar is driving up the cost of everything the country imports, from oil to children’s toys.

Normally, the Federal Reserve could count on a slowing economy to take a bit of wind out of inflation’s sails. But many of the current causes of inflation aren’t linked to the U.S. economy. We could get inflation and slower growth — the definition of stagflation.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/Is70sStyleStagflationComing.aspx

Marc Trimble


Financial markets are undergoing a renaissance, thanks to the tough economic conditions prevailing at the global level. Resultantly, more and more people are looking to diversify their portfolios in order to secure their long-term investments. Commodities afford a good alternative investment option for astute investors. Any one looking for a more secure trading option, commodities are the one they should seriously think over. Here’s a primer to help you start with commodities trading on a confident note.

First things first! The commodities market was initially designed as a platform for the manufacturers of agricultural commodities and metals to sell their products. However, gradually, the market conditions relaxed to accommodate even those desirous of commodity trading who are not even producers or owners of such commodities. Thus, anyone can have a share of control over the pricing of consumer durables, like coffee, sugar, tea, wheat, corn, cotton, etc.

You may be inclined to think about the difference between normal stock trading and commodities trading. As one of the best alternative investments option, commodities trading differ from stock trading in that while the latter relies on some speculation and gut feeling of the investor, the former is more driven by the law of demand and supply. The influencing factors include rate of infiltration, weather patterns, rainfall, accumulated stock, availability of labor and transportation, global demand, supply orders, and other general economic national and international conditions.

Another aspect about commodities trading that a novice should be informed about is its performance as a vital cog in the wheel of your portfolio. If you are planning to adopt an alternative investment that delivers long term without fail, then nothing beats commodities trading. This is because of least dependence on speculation. It’s far easy to predict where commodity is heading than the stock market. Educating yourself about the short-term and long-term factors impacting the flow of commodities market is a much easier task than trying to learn how the stock markets will pan out in the next week. Thus, commodities markets are less volatile than the stock market.

Not many of us who are eager to learn more about alternative investments in general and commodities trading in particular know about the strategies that can be adopted in order to maximize our returns on investment in commodities trading. It’s always advisable to educate yourself fully before chartering into unexplored territories. This also holds true in case of commodities trading. The most important strategy you can adopt for profitable commodities trading is awareness about the current issues that affect or can affect commodity prices.

You can have a dry run before entering into this exciting alternative investment opportunity. Just observe the commodities prices for a week along with the influencing factors. Take a paper and based on the observations and recent trends, try to predict the prices-trend for the next week. You’ll be amazed by the accuracy with which you can easily predict the trend. In conclusion, when it comes to alternative investments, commodities trading hold great promise.

Visit www.CBOT.com for additional investor education on commodities.

flyerd1


Even though I’ve already prepared for no social security benefit I definitely do NOT see it going belly up. Any required changes “WILL” be made because the baby boom generation is way too big of a voting segment. Here are three things I think either will or “should” be changed. I’m sure there will be some disagreements but here we go (it’s a little long):

1) One of the things I definitely expect to see soon is a change in the SS tax so that there is NO cap on income subject to the tax (currently 97.5K).

2) A .5% increase ($50 extra per $10K of annual earnings) in the tax itself to 6.7%. This, combined with #1 above, would add quite a bit to the fund. Ex: a person earning 197.5K would pay an extra $7,187.50. A hedge fund manager (wall Street exec, etc) making 100,097,500.00 would pay an additional 6,700,487.50 in SS tax. The tax could be reduced to .5% lower than the “current” level as the system gained its footing. That would mean a 5.7% SS tax. The .5% reduction (from 6.2 to 5.7) could then be added to the Medicare tax to fix it. The net effect would be no change in the total SS/Medicare tax (it would still be a total of 7.65%)

3) Unfortunately, I think most people (i.e. 70%+) would do even worse than the governments historically bad rate of return; therefore I’m against giving some of the money to individuals who, for the most part, can’t even manage what they have now. However, I do believe the money should be invested for higher returns in a diversified ETF portfolio something like this: 50% domestic/international stocks (ex’s: S&P, NASDAQ, IOO, ADRA), 20% commodities related (GLD, DBA, VAW, IGE,), 20% High Quality Bonds (Gov’t & Corporate), 10% Cash equivalents like CD ylding > 6%.

4) Protect SS funds from “other” uses.

5) Additionally, in the interest of saving the system, and because I believe social security should be more of a safety net for “if” you need it, I submit the following thought. I think SS benefits should be “eliminated” for people with retirement sources of income (cap gains, div’s, pensions, etc) “or” assets (minus primary house & active farmland) totaling greater than a set limit that adjusts for inflation. Purely as a starting point for debate: I would support a current income threshold limit of 2.5X the average income of the city you reside in “and/or” a 3M asset limit. For example: if your city’s avg income was 40K, and your total retired income exceeded 100K (or assets > 2M), you would not get any of the SS money that you would otherwise collect (your full benefit would simply be “reduced” between 1.5-2.5X that city’s avg income). Adjusting for salary increases, the avg income in my example would be around 100K in 30 yrs and therefore you total retired income would have to be more than 250K (or assets >5M) to lose the entire benefit. My money’s where my mouth is because I’m 30yrs from SS eligibility and I will have ZERO problem giving up my benefits when I’m spending >250K/yr and/or have assets >5M. BTW, the hedge fund mngr mentioned in #2 would get a nice fat $2100/month (6K/month in 30 yrs) “if” he somehow went bankrupt between making 100M and retirement so he “would” be able to take advantage of the “safety net” that he had paid into. Actually, the max benefit would have to be increase when the 97.5K cap was abolished. I could see the hedge fund guy getting the new max benefit of 10K/month (28K/month in 30 yrs) because he put more into it. The 10K/month amount would apply to anyone who had paid SS tax on an average income > 500K/yr every yr from age 21 (per current rules for the 2100 max payment). The 500K as of 07’ would be adjusted backward and fwd for inflation.

Unlike some, who think SS should be phased out, I still like the idea of SS (even if I never benefit from mine). I see it as an encouragement for people to take chances in their lives such as entrepreneurial risks. I think that knowing there is “something” to fall back on would provide at least a little bit of encouragement to try high risks/high reward endeavors. If, however, the business risk pays off and you create the next MSFT, APPL, GOOG, CAT, etc, etc. then there’s no reason to “access” that safety net.

Any opinions, thoughts, or new ideas that aren’t smartass in nature?

nothing


socialism is more popular in america than ever. and i’m not just alluding to our new president. rather, i’ve seen a dynamic change in political thinking of the general population over the past several years. and the shift has taken many people over to the far left. how can i profit from this? should i invest in socialist countries? are there any socialist stocks? commodities? BOTTOM LINE: Are there any investments that have exposure to socialist or democratic (as defined in modern american politics) ideals? i understand that the point of socialism is not profit. however, i also understand that there is profit opportunity in any environment. i don’t like socialism. but i’m not going to try to buck it. rather, i want to profit from it.

shermans


Dear Customer,

Thank you for your recent communication expressing concern about higher
prices for gasoline and energy products.

We recognize that energy price increases have put a strain on many
household budgets. We also know that some hold the oil and gas
industry
directly responsible for these price increases and quite frankly, this
conclusion is not correct. There are several factors that are helpful
to
consider as we look at what is causing higher gasoline and energy
prices.

Crude Oil

Crude oil, the world’s foremost energy source - is a true global
commodity,
traded freely in markets worldwide. Prices for crude oil, which now
account for well over 60 percent of the price Americans pay at the
pump,
are set on competitive global markets. No single company sets the
price
for crude oil or even influences how these prices are set. Even as the
largest private energy company in the world, ExxonMobil only represents
3
percent of global oil production. We also buy nearly two times more
crude
oil than we produce, as we do not produce nearly enough crude oil to
keep
our ExxonMobil refineries and plants supplied. Also, our crude oil
supply
costs are higher partly due to the weaker value of the U.S. dollar.

Global Supply and Demand

The market forces of supply and demand are the fundamental factors that
influence crude oil prices. Growing demand for transportation fuels,
in
developing nations like China and India alone have driven demand
increases
at twice the historic average in several recent years. Americans drive
around 3 trillion miles per year, almost twice as much as we did in
1980
(1.5 trillion miles), now demanding about 400 million gallons of
gasoline a
day. On the supply side, geopolitical developments have curtailed
production and driven up prices at various points in time.

Industry Earnings in Context

In a high commodity demand/price environment, which currently exists,
industry earnings will generally rise. However, the oil and gas
industry
profits are comparable to other U.S. industries, 9.5 cents for every
dollar
of sales compared to an average of 8.2 cents for all U.S. manufacturers
in
2006. You also might find it interesting to know that 70 percent of
ExxonMobil revenues are generated outside the U.S. And, with respect
to
the price you pay at your local service station, independently owned
operators set those retail prices in competition with one another.
ExxonMobil owns and operates less than 900 of the 170,000 service
stations
in the United States; that is less than 1 percent.

Investing in Tomorrow’s Energy

In our view and probably your own as well, another important question
is
what are we doing with the money we earn? In the past twenty years, we
have invested about $280 billion worldwide on capital and exploration
expenditures to develop new energy supplies — a figure that exceeds
our
total earnings over that period.

Looking ahead, the International Energy Agency has estimated that the
oil
and gas industry will need to invest at least $20 trillion in new oil
and
gas production and infrastructure through 2030 to meet the future
growth in
global demand. Much of this projected growth in energy use is
attributable
to improving living standards for billions of people in the developing
world. Only profitable companies will be able to make the investments
needed to compete in global energy markets and to develop the energy
supplies we will need in the future.

Government Taxes

Stable and impartial tax and regulatory policies are critical to
companies
looking to invest on the scale noted above. You most likely are not
aware
that for every dollar of ExxonMobil’s revenue, on average around 25
cents
is paid to governments, while ExxonMobil earns just over a dime. In
2006,
ExxonMobil earned $39.5 billion, but paid over $100 billion in taxes
worldwide. Over the past five years (2002-2006), ExxonMobil’s U.S.
tax
bill was nearly $60 billion, exceeding our total U.S. earnings during
that
time by over $20 billion. Without question, we are one of the
world’s
biggest taxpayers and are therefore very concerned about the harmful
impacts of current proposals to impose even higher taxes on our
industry.
Our government can help meet America’s growing energy needs by
ensuring
reliable and impartial rules for all energy investments that will allow
American companies to compete internally.

Your email is important to us. We know price increases and our
company’s
earnings have raised questions and deserve explanation. While we hope
that
this response provides you with a better understanding of our company’s
challenges and of the global energy markets in which we participate, we
would encourage you to look at our web site www.exxonmobil.com as well
as
the web site of the American Petroleum Institute www.energytomorrow.org
for
more information.

At ExxonMobil, we’re committed to pricing responsibly and investing
for the
future. Please know that every day our 82,000 employees worldwide are
working extremely hard to provide energy supplies to consumers at
competitive prices.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact us.