McDuck's Account Talk

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

Got fleas? Get the vacuum

Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:13pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vacuum cleaners kill fleas just as well as any poison, surprised researchers said on Tuesday.

They said a standard vacuum cleaner abuses the fleas so much it kills 96 percent of adult fleas and 100 percent of younger fleas.

So no need to worry that a vacuum cleaner bag may turn into a fleabag breeding ground for the pesky, biting creatures, said Glen Needham, associate professor of entomology at Ohio State University.

Needham studied the cat flea, or Ctenocephalides felis, the most common type of flea found in households.

"No matter what vacuum a flea gets sucked into, it's probably a one-way trip," Needham said in a statement.

Writing in the journal Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, Needham suggested that the vacuum brushes wear away a waxy outer layer on insects called the cuticle. Without it, the fleas, larvae and pupae probably dry up and die, he said.

The findings were so surprising that the researchers ran their experiment several times.

"We didn't do a post-mortem, so we don't know for sure. But it appears that the physical abuse they took caused them to perish," Needham said.

Fleas spread diseases such as plague and can transmit worms.

"There are all kinds of ways to manage the problem, but how people feel about insecticides and how much money they want to spend factors into what they're going to do for flea control. Vacuuming is a great strategy because it involves no chemicals and physically removes the problem," Needham said.

© Reuters 2007.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

New York Post

HILL'S BROTHER A DEADBEAT

By DAREH GREGORIAN

December 20, 2007 -- Owe, brother!

Hillary Rodham Clinton's youngest sibling is a deadbeat dad who owes tens of thousands of dollars in child support to his politically connected ex, The Post has learned.

In a disclosure that could prove embarrassing for his sister, Anthony Rodham has stiffed his former wife, Nicole Boxer, out of $75,000 in child support, as well as $55,000 in alimony, a source close to the case said.

Including interest and various fees and expenses, the presidential candidate's brother now owes Boxer - the daughter of Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) - more than $158,000, the source said.

The revelation that Rodham is delinquent with his payments won't be a welcome development for Hillary Clinton, coming as the too-close-to-call battle for the Democratic presidential nomination reaches a fevered pitch and with the first votes to be cast in Iowa in exactly two weeks.

Barbara Boxer has not endorsed a candidate in the race.

Nicole Boxer received judgments from a Washington judge ordering Rodham to pay up earlier this year, but the cash-strapped business consultant has yet to fork over the hefty sums.

"He has consistently been a deadbeat dad when it comes to paying child support and spousal support, despite the courts telling him over and over again that he must meet his obligations," a source close to Nicole Boxer said.

Rodham's lawyer, Gwendolyn Jo Carlberg, said she would "not comment on the veracity of any figures that are the subject of private and confidential settlement negotiations, as this is a personal, family matter and is under seal." She did say her client "fully intends to honor the judgment."

Nicole Boxer's lawyer could not be reached for comment.

Rodham, 53, married Boxer in the White House Rose Garden in 1994, when his brother-in-law, Bill Clinton, was president.

The couple had a son, Zachary, two years later, but the political union came to an end in 2000.

Fights over child support soon followed - at one point in 2002, Nicole charged that her ex hadn't paid anything in six months.

The latest support strife has been going on most of this past year, and Carlberg said her client has been trying to settle their differences in and out of court.

She said a Superior Court judge ruled against Rodham earlier this year.

"He strongly disagreed with the ruling, and so did I," she said. "We appealed the decision, and Mr. Rodham did not prevail."

That final ruling was in October.

Carlberg said she "sent a settlement letter to Ms. Boxer's attorney a few weeks ago for structured payment. As of today, we have not received a reply."

The Nicole Boxer source blasted Rodham's settlement offers as "just another dodge from meeting his obligations to his former wife and son while he lives in his fancy Washington town house" with his new wife, whom he married in 2005.

A former insurance salesman, prison guard and private eye, Rodham has been a headache for the former and possibly future first family before.

He and his brother Hugh embarrassed the Clintons in 1999 with a politically perilous plan to import hazelnuts from the former Soviet republic of Georgia.

He also became a figure in the "Pardongate" scandal, when it was revealed that he lobbied Bill Clinton to pardon two embezzlers.

Rodham made headlines again shortly after his split from Nicole, when he was attacked at his family cottage in the Berkshires by a man who claimed he saw Rodham having sex with his girlfriend.

Rodham later testified that he "might have" smoked pot with the woman.

Copyright 2007 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

Chrysler CEO: We're 'operationally' bankrupt
Automaker scrambling to sell assets just months after private equity buyout as credit crunch deepens - report
December 21 2007: 7:26 AM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Chrysler Corp., the troubled automaker bought by private equity just four months ago, is scrambling to sell assets amid indications of huge losses, as access to cash becomes increasingly scarce, according to a published report Friday.

"Someone asked me, 'Are we bankrupt?'" the Wall Street Journal quoted Chrysler boss Robert Nardelli telling employees at a meeting earlier this month. "Technically, no. Operationally, yes. The only thing that keeps us from going into bankruptcy is the $10 billion investors entrusted us with."

To raise money, Chrysler is looking to sell over $1 billion in land, old factories, and other holdings, even if it has to let those properties go for under book value, the Journal said.

In an interview with the Journal, Nardelli confirmed the comments and declined to give a financial forecast for 2008, saying only that Chrysler "will make a pretty significant improvement" over the $1.6 billion the company is set to lose this year. The Journal said Nardelli originally hoped to turn a profit in 2008.

The rush to raise capital comes amid constricting access to money as more banks and other lenders face heavy losses related to subprime mortgages.

Chrysler's owner, Cerberus Capital Management, is now facing serious subprime-related losses from GMAC Financial Services, which it bought from General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) for $12 billion, and is also trying to walk away from a now pricey deal to buy United Rentals Inc., (URI) the Journal said.

Cerberus bought Chrysler from German automaker Daimler in a deal that closed in August.

In the arrangement, Daimler (DAI) essentially paid Cerberus to take the automaker, which fell to No. 4 in U.S. sales behind Toyota Motor (TM) in 2006, in an effort to get out from under a $1.5 billion loss from last year, along with continued obligations to union members and retirees. To top of page

© 2007 Cable News Network

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

US braces for baby boom retirement wave

Dec 24 11:40 PM US/Eastern

The first of the vast US baby boom generation goes into retirement in January, setting off a demographic tidal wave with wide-ranging economic, political and social implications.

Kathleen Casey-Kirschling, born on January 1, 1946, is acknowledged as the nation's first baby boomer and the first to apply for social security benefits, for which she will be eligible in 2008.

The New Jersey grandmother is the first of an estimated 80 million Americans born between 1946 and 1964, a generation that led a social revolution in the 1960s and changed the fabric of most facets of society.

The cost for government-funded social security and medical care for the boomers leaves a funding gap of between 40 and 76 trillion dollars for next 75 years, according to various estimates.

"America is facing a demographic juggernaut," says Brent Green, a marketing consultant and author, in his "Boomers" blog.

"An unprecedented number will soon be entering the retirement stage of life. One-third of the population will be over 50 by 2010. One in five will be over 65 by 2010."
...

"Once younger voters begin to replace them, the socially conservative vote will dwindle," he said. :notrust:

The generation is a ripe target for marketing of everything from travel to real estate to computer games for keeping minds fit.

"In the whole way we think about aging and the way companies develop products, we have traditionally been a country of the young," said David Baxter, senior vice president at Age Wave, a California-based research and consulting company focused on the over-50 population.

"If you look at the hottest products, companies think the youth market is the most important."

Baxter said marketers are still using "the myth that older consumers are stuck in their brands and not very interesting consumers. But it's the mature consumer who has all the money."

Americans aged 50 and over have a collective one trillion dollars in disposable income and control 67 percent of the US wealth, according to the over-50 social networking website Eons.

Members of the baby boom generation are big users of technology and the Internet. A Pew Internet Life Project report showed two-thirds of those between 50 and 58 had Internet access as of 2004, similar to the number of 28- to 39-year-olds.

Many are gravitating to social networking sites, especially those geared to their generation with names like TeeBeeDee and BoomerCafe.

About half of Americans will buy new homes after retirement, and many will continue to work in some capacity or become involved in social activism.

Michael Falcon, head of the retirement group at Merrill Lynch, says the nation must prepare for a "new model" for retirement.

"Multiple generations report cycling in and out of work and pursuing a new career in later life as the retirement ideal," he said in a 2006 report. "Companies need to be aware of this new concept of retirement."

A Merrill Lynch survey found 71 percent of adults surveyed plan to work in some capacity after their formal "retirement."

Carol Orsborn, a public relations executive who writes a "Boomer Blog," said the generation appears to be pursuing its dreams rather than dropping out to a quiet retirement.

"If we were hippies in the 1960s and 1970s and yuppies in the 1980s and 1990s, what are we now?" she wrote.

"At an age where expectations that our generation pull back, instead of 're-tiring' we are 're-upping' for another tour of duty in life. We are changing careers, finally getting around to taking risks with our dreams, advancing into new psychological and spiritual terrain, not only new to us as individuals, but for society as a whole. We are, in fact, Re-uppies."

On the economic side, some fear the "silver tsunami" will drain the country of its wealth, but Baxter says the United States has some advantages.

"It's true that everything in our society is built on the idea of continued growth, it's kind of a giant Ponzi scheme with every generation prior to this one having given birth to a larger generation," he said.

The problems are even more acute in some European countries and Japan which face a similar demographic time bomb. But Baxter said "the US is cushioned to some extent by a more liberal immigration policy" and because "there is more flexibility in our workforce. It's illegal to have mandatory reitirement and that's not the case in most countries."

Copyright AFP 2007

 

[ayla]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

Hi Greg -

Wanted to let you know that I appreciate very much that you are tracking the FV and UV for the I fund. Was wondering if you save your data in an excel format (or comma delimited text).

I'm thinking of trying to expand on your data with info about the mid-day and closing returns for the S&P 500 and Dollar and Dow or whatever returns it is thought affect whether an FV is applied. (any other criteria that impact this decision?) Or whether you included such info in your tracking somewhere already, that would be great. Don't want to duplicate.

Reason for doing this is related to what 350Z posted Monday - it would be nice if such data might make it more obvious whether or not Barclays might be manipulating the FV to their advantage.

Below is 350's post from the I fund December thread:

Yes and no.

MSCI EAFE = .27% or 7 cents.

Today's 7 cents, plus -14(+FVC from Friday), plus Today's 19 cents +FV,

equals 12 cents.

I funders are 19 cents in the hole right now.

The markets didn't change enough to cause a +FV. Barclays must have noticed a surge of transfers into the I fund. I'm totally serious about this. The I fund play was way too obvious.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

On 24-Dec-07, a $ 2.00 Dividend was paid on the iShares MSCI EAFE Index (EFA). This caused that index to drop from 80.4 to 78.4 from the close on the 21st and the open on the 24th.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

never mind

 

[Birchtree]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

Come on now - I know you have something positive to say so let's hear it. I'm drowning in gloom and doom and being devalued in the process.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://metrospirit.com/index.php?cat=1990310070813675&ShowArticle_ID=11021103083026492

Thin gray line

The 25-year police officers’ retirement has gone the way of the golden watch in the corporate world. Deputies now stay on the force up to age 65.

by : Murfee Faulk

Investigator Eddie Seals says he couldn't count on much help from his pension.​

AUGUSTA, GA - When Richmond County Sheriff’s Department Investigator Eddie Seals learned a decade ago that his retirement would come from the 1998 pension fund, a creation of the then-fledgling consolidated government, he realized that he was behind the curve.
​

“I did most of it myself,” Seals says about his savings plan. “I knew what they were offering wasn’t going to be enough to live on, even with Social Security.”

Eighty employees have been in the department more than 25 years. Forty have more than 30 years on the force, and 14 have been around 35 years or more. A few have already logged more than 40 years.

Ask any one of Richmond County’s silver-haired finest about their 25-year retirement — formerly de rigueur for police departments across the country — and they laugh so hard one fears for their bladder control. They have no choice but to work until age 65 because of what some say was chronic under-funding of the sheriff’s department pension plan during the 1980s and 1990s.

In January, Augusta commissioners approved a more lucrative pension formula for the Sheriff’s Department, changing the retirement multiple from 1 to 1.64 percent.

That number is multiplied by the average salary, and then multiplied by the number of years in the department.

But it will be years before any of the current crop of deputies benefits from January’s commission vote.

Senior officers who transferred from the city police department during the 1996 consolidation still have access to the more generous 1947 fund, employees say.

But that leaves a large group of senior sergeants, lieutenants, captains and majors, who are too old to chase down and tackle criminals but too young to retire.

Exempted from physical-fitness standards, some take jobs in the civil division, jokingly referred to as the “retirement division.”

They do the necessary, but unsexy desk jobs that keep the department functioning.

And they are constantly looking over their shoulders.

Behind the scenes there has been grumbling about a bottleneck at the top of the pecking order that is making it difficult for mid-level people to move up in the department.

The facts seem to bear out the complaints: Six captains, 12 lieutenants and seven sergeants have been in the department more than 30 years.

Deputies have recently left the department for better pay in other police departments, but also for investigative jobs out of uniform.

Chief Deputy Sid Hatfield said the situation is not as bad as it seems.

“I really don’t agree that the young people don’t have a chance for promotion,” said Hatfield.

“Maybe some of the more senior people like me and others have been in for a while, but these are experienced and knowledgeable people. If we lost them, we would really be in a difficult position. As long as they perform and are professional, we need them.”

Hatfield said the 47 unfilled positions in the police force are a combination of uniformed officers and jail personnel.

“We just promoted a sergeant today,” Hatfield said. “It’s quite routine that we promote people. I think the opportunities are available.”

But Hatfield confirmed that many older officers would face mandatory retirement in the next five to seven years, opening up opportunities for younger deputies.

Captain William “Gene” Johnson is one of those soon-to-be retirees. He started out in the records bureau in April of 1965. He’s worked road patrol, investigations, homicides and jail duty. In August he will turn 65.

“I’ve been to so many schools I can no longer count them,” Johnson said, before talking about the most memorable of his training with the FBI and the Secret Service.

He has an idea where some of the grumbling comes from.

“Some of them [younger deputies] want to be captain or major the next day,” he said. “I say, ‘Listen to the older guys who have the experience and you will learn a lot.’ If they start out in the jail, they will make an excellent deputy. You learn all kinds of things when you work jail duty.”

While Hatfield challenges the assertion that deputies leave the department for better promotion opportunities, much of what he says backs up that claim.

The Richmond County Sheriff’s Department recently lost two experienced deputies to Miami Gardens Police Department, Hatfield says. That department, which is being formed from scratch, has hired at least 16 young deputies as investigators. Those are positions they likely would have waited many years for in their old departments.

“Young men and women look forward to that [investigative positions],” Hatfield said. “Here are a bunch of young people who went into investigative positions there.”

Richmond County Sheriff Ron Strength was more straightforward about the problem. “I guess there is a bottleneck, but that could be anywhere, not just in law enforcement.”

He added, “We’ve got a lot of great law-enforcement officers who are right in that 28 to 35 age group who have all the potential in the world. They are probably held back by money issues and lack of opportunities. But that makes us feel good knowing that in the next three to five years... we’ll have a lot of people who are going to be able to move up, if we can retain them.”

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0308/030708rp.htm

Government Executive

Retirement Planning
Getting Social
By Tammy Flanagan National Institute of Transition Planning March 7, 2008

Social Security is insurance against loss of income due to death, disability or retirement. Not everyone will collect Social Security benefits equally, but unlike most forms of insurance, most of us actually want to collect them at some point. I don't know about you, but I really don't want to get my money's worth out of my homeowners insurance if that means that my house has to burn down, or my auto insurance if that involves enduring a car accident.

Some Scenarios

How do people benefit from Social Security? Here are a few examples:

* A young widowed mother with three young children can receive benefits for them until they are 18 (or 19 if still in high school) and for herself while caring for the children -- unless she remarries or earns more than the annual earnings limit.
* Suppose a worker waiting to retire at 66 is diagnosed with terminal cancer and dies before receiving his first check. The taxes that he paid for the past 40 years will be used to pay benefits to his family or to other workers and their families.
* A federal worker who retires under the Civil Service Retirement System and hasn't paid Social Security taxes during her government career still will receive a benefit from Social Security if she paid into the system at jobs before or after her federal service. Suppose she had 12 years of Social Security-covered wages. Her benefit might be enough to pay for Medicare Part B insurance with a little left over.

Fast Facts

According to the Social Security Administration:

* SSA paid benefits to about 54 million people in 2006.
* About 16 percent of the total U.S. population and 90 percent of the population 65 or older received Social Security benefits in 2005.
* For 65 percent of the aged in 2005, Social Security provided at least half of their income.
* Women accounted for 56 percent of adult Social Security beneficiaries in 2006.

Paying for It

Workers who are covered by Social Security in 2008 will pay a 6.2 percent Federal Insurance Contribution Act tax on their wages up to $102,000. Workers fortunate to earn more than $102,000 will not have FICA withheld for the remainder of the year after they've hit the limit.

Why isn't the tax withheld from all wages? Because the limit on withholding also limits the wages that are used to compute the highest 35 years of earnings that are the basis of the Social Security benefit. The higher the taxable wage, the higher the future potential benefit that will be paid.

Average Benefits

The maximum Social Security benefit for a worker retiring at full retirement age (65 years and 10 months) in 2007 was $2,116 per month. That would apply to someone who earned the maximum taxable wage for at least 35 years. The average benefit awarded to a retired worker in 2006 was $1,054 per month. It's a good thing that those in the Federal Employees Retirement System also have a basic benefit and, presumably, money in a Thrift Savings Plan account, because they provide a supplement to Social Security.

Women and Men

According to SSA, 28 percent of all adult women who receive Social Security benefits, are widows, mothers or recipients of spousal benefits from retired, deceased or disabled workers. But less than 1 percent of adult men who receive Social Security benefits get widower, father or spousal benefits from retired, deceased or disabled workers.

Apply Yourself

It's best to apply for Social Security retirement benefits about three months before you want to receive the first payment. You can do most of the application online. (Click here for instructions.) If you choose to apply in person, be sure to schedule your appointment at an SSA office before you go. You will receive an appointment time and will be told what documents you should bring with you.

And, yes, you actually have to apply for benefits. Unless you wait until you turn 70, the checks -- I mean the direct deposits -- won't show up until you let SSA know you're ready to receive them.

Medicare First

You can apply for Medicare at 65 even if you are not ready to begin receiving (or aren't eligible for) Social Security benefits. Contact Social Security three months on either side of your 65th birthday to apply for Medicare Part A. You also can enroll in Medicare Part B at the same time, but if you are still working and covered by the health plan of your own or your spouse's current employer, you can postpone enrolling in Part B until you or your spouse retire. Here's some basic information about Medicare.

Reduced Benefits

Many young workers are not even counting on Social Security for their retirement. Unless changes are made, by 2040 benefits for all retirees could be cut by 26 percent and could continue to be reduced every year thereafter. If you lived to be 100 years old in 2080 (which will be more common by then), your scheduled benefits could be reduced by 30 percent from today's scheduled levels. Many reform plans, including those put forth by the President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security in 2001, would preserve scheduled benefits, including cost- of-living increases, for "near-retirees" (those 55 and older). SSA has answers to frequently asked questions about the system's future.

CSRS and Social Security

It's commonly assumed that federal employees in the Civil Service Retirement System are not covered by Social Security. But CSRS retirees who have earned 40 credits of Social Security coverage through work outside government will be eligible to receive benefits from the system starting at 62. CSRS employees should know:

* Receiving a Social Security retirement benefit will not have any impact on your CSRS retirement (unless you didn't pay your post-'56 military service deposit or you're covered under the CSRS Offset system).
* Receiving a CSRS retirement benefit may have an impact on your Social Security benefit due to the Windfall Elimination Provision and the Government Pension Offset.
* If a CSRS retiree leaves a survivor benefit for their spouse (or former spouse), this will not reduce that spouse's own earned Social Security benefit.
* A CSRS employee who works past his or her full Social Security retirement age will be able to receive Social Security benefits and continue working.

(C) 2007 BY NATIONAL JOURNAL GROUP, INC.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://www.fwbusinesspress.com/display.php?id=7108

Tax rebate tempts Americans to indulge bad habits

BY J. SCOTT SPIKER
February 25, 2008

With a tax rebate on the forefront of many consumers' minds, it is critical that individuals and families take this opportunity to review their financial status, and ignore what many American leaders are urging, Buy something – anything – and buy it now!

When it comes to spending, we hardly need encouragement. Just consider these sobering statistics from the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants:

• Americans spend $1.22 for every $1 they earn, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis;

• More than one-third of Americans report they do not use a budget to manage their family’s expenses.

• Fifty-five percent of American workers have no idea how much they will need to save to make their retirement dreams a reality.

We need to ask ourselves some difficult questions as a county such as: How can we expect the economy to be healthy when the financial affairs of the average American are in such disarray? And is it possible that the supposed short-term needs of the economy are in conflict with the long-term needs of American families?

Clearly, the answer to the second question is “Absolutely.” In the short term, the economy might or might not benefit from a transfusion of consumer cash, but in the long term there can be no doubt that most consumers will be better off keeping that money in their pockets to start a real savings plan. Don’t wait – do it now.

Might a government that mounts programs aimed at getting people to stop smoking someday consider a similar drive to encourage American families to pause in their spending to construct a financial plan? Might a letter have accompanied the rebate checks noting the multiplier effect of investing the $600 for 10 years with interest compounding annually?

The arrival of rebate checks provides Americans with the opportunity to rethink their spending habits and ideally to take steps to avoid the following seven mistakes that affect their personal well-being and arguably, that of the nation’s long-term economic health:

1) Assuming one’s financial future is set, thanks to corporate and federal benefits – With convenient payroll deductions to retirement funds, it’s easy to become complacent about retirement and your financial preparedness. Rarely is the amount being set aside enough to address all future needs.

2) Not knowing how much one needs for retirement – Too often, workers fail to address this question until they’re nearing retirement – then discover that they must adjust their expectations for the reality of their financial situation. Today, people live longer and have more active retirement lifestyle, which means you may need to save more than you thought.

3) Failing to take full advantage of matching retirement contributions – The federal government and many companies offer matching programs for employee contributions to retirement funds. But if one contributes less than the maximum, money is left on the table.

4) Not having an insurance strategy – Many Americans have insurance options through their employer but there are good reasons to consider supplementing this insurance. As part of a financial plan, an insurance strategy that includes life, home, auto, liability, disability insurance and more can help protect against financial misfortune due to a loss of life, property or income.

5) Failing to consider financial goals and events other than retirement – Investing only for retirement can leave one unprepared for other financial needs, such as funding college education, paying for a child’s wedding, starting a business or building a weekend retreat. Most Americans are likely to experience the occasional unexpected event that can put a dent in their finances if they haven’t prepared for it.

6) Underestimating your spouse’s or other survivors’ income needs – Determining the amount necessary to address survivor’s needs requires careful thought, and consideration of other investments or insurance that can support those needs.

7) Worrying about things you can’t control – Most people focus far more attention on their investments’ rate of return than on ways to increase their saving and investing. But one has little control over the former and significant control over the latter. Americans should take the long view, contributing regularly to their 401K, IRA or Thrift Savings Plan. Focusing on the things one can control – the length of time and the amount invested – can remove the emotion from investing and help the individual pursue his/her goals more consistently.

Millions of Americans are making these mistakes and we need to bring it to a halt, for our betterment as a country. Tens of millions will obey their government’s urgings to run out and spend their rebates. And many will debate the notion that it is government’s job to counsel them otherwise. But if providing good financial advice is perceived as being beyond the scope of government, might we all agree that there at least be limits established on how much bad advice is allowed? My advice is – ignore the urgings and start building a sound financial future for you and your family, today. You will be better off in the long run.

J. Scott Spiker is the CEO of First Command Financial Services, Fort Worth.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/16/AR2008021600137.html?sid=ST2008021601110

Low on Emergency Funds And Baby No. 2 on the Way

Tarek and Evibeth Bathiche look over their credit reports at their home in Fort Meade. They spent the past year trying to pay down $22,000 in credit card debt.

Profiles by Michelle Singletary with contributions by research assistant Charity Brown
Sunday, February 17, 2008; Page F07

Age: Both Tarek and Evibeth are 24.

Background: The Bathiches are both Army sergeants and are stationed at Fort Meade. Both have served about six years. They have a 2-year-old son, Anthony, and Evibeth is expecting their second child, a girl, in June.

Financial situation: Together the couple earn about $65,000 a year. They are doing well with saving for retirement. They invest a good percentage of their income in the federal Thrift Savings Plan. Evibeth contributes 10 percent of her annual salary; Tarek, 9 percent.

Here's my concern for this couple: They have only $1,500 in emergency savings and owe about $27,600 on six credit cards.

The Bathiches admit that they spend too much, in part because much of their housing expense is covered by the military's basic housing allowance, which, by the way, is tax-free. Like other military personnel, the couple also receive a basic allowance for food, also tax-free. Because the military helps greatly with their largest expense -- rent -- they've been lulled into thinking they have more to spend than they do.

"A lot of people mistake 'military' for 'millionaire,' " Tarek said.

They spent the past year trying to pay down $22,000 in credit card debt. Tarek's father generously offered to allow them to consolidate all of that debt onto his credit card with a low interest rate. The couple then began paying about $1,100 a month on the debt. They have gotten the balance down to $14,900.

However, with their own credit cards cleared of charges, the Bathiches got right back into trouble. They charged $12,700 on top of the $14,900 they already owed. The couple's credit card debt payments almost equal the monthly rent for their military-provided apartment.

New Year's resolutions: The Bathiches want to get rid of all their credit card debt and begin saving more of their income. They also want to start a college fund for their children.

The plan: With a fair amount of job security, I'm not so worried about the Bathiches having an emergency fund right now or even saving for their children's college education.

Instead, I want them to concentrate on getting rid of their stifling credit card debt. Fortunately, with their housing allowance, they have more than enough cash every month to tackle the debt. With some other budget cuts, such as reducing their $180 monthly cellphone bill, they could free up at least $2,000 a month to pay down the debt.

However, to get rid of the debt by year's end, they will have to faithfully stick to their budget.

I asked Tarek to do the honors.

"I can't do it," he said as I passed him the scissors.

But he had to do it.

And he did, as his wife watched.

"I think it's a good start for a big change," Tarek said. "It's not that we're not disciplined. We're used to discipline. We just need more personal [finance] discipline."

The couple now spends only cash. They even traveled recently to Miami to see family -- with no credit cards.

Had I gotten to them sooner, I would have nixed the trip. They promised this will be the last trip they take until all the credit card debt is paid off.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...2/16/AR2008021600135.html?sid=ST2008021601110

After Their Wedding, The Spending Hit Home

Kim and George Colon racked up a lot of debt after their marriage in August. (By Giuliana Nakashima -- The Washington Post)

Profiles by Michelle Singletary with contributions by research assistant Charity Brown
Sunday, February 17, 2008; Page F07

Age: George is 52; Kim is 43.

Background: The newlyweds live in Dumfries and have been married for about six months. They share their home with Kim's 19-year-old daughter. George served in the Army for 22 years before retiring as sergeant first class. He now works as a contract manager for a security company in the District. Kim is a senior master sergeant in the Air Force. She's been in the military for almost 20 years.

Financial situation: Together the couple earn $191,000. Despite their high income, they only have about $1,000 in emergency savings.

They do, however, have three homes, including their primary residence in Virginia. George receives a pension of about $19,000 a year from his service in the Army. He has no other retirement savings. Kim has about $40,000 invested in the federal Thrift Savings Plan and $10,000 in an individual retirement account. She will be eligible for a pension once she retires.

My concern about this couple is their debt load. They owe a little more than $30,000 on eight credit accounts, including a line of credit. Kim has accumulated $40,000 in student loan debt while working on a doctorate.

The Col¿ns acquired a lot of the consumer debt after their wedding.

"My husband and I have bought a massive amount of material items since we got together, mainly for our townhome," Kim said.

The purchases started with $2,700 for blinds, then $2,800 for a washer and dryer, then $4,000 on an entertainment center. The spending got so high that Kim siphoned $8,000 from her student loan money to pay down their American Express bill.

"I am in a constant state of stress," Kim said.

Haunting George is an outstanding federal tax bill of $11,770 and a state tax debt of $3,368. The longer he has that debt, the more interest and penalties will accrue.

Their New Year's resolutions: The couple desperately want to stop living paycheck to paycheck, especially since they earn so much.

They've resolved to pay off the tax and consumer debts and build up an emergency fund. George wants to supplement his Army pension with more retirement savings. They also want to honeymoon in Puerto Rico as well as buy a home with a garage.

The plan: To say the least, there will be no honeymoon in Puerto Rico. And moving into another home, especially in the current housing market, is a very long-term goal. Most important, they need to reassess their budget. The basic housing allowance Kim gets from the Air Force nearly covers her mortgage, so I asked why the couple are in so much debt.

"We have been flying on a high-speed spending roller coaster ever since we wed," she said.

To dig themselves out of this hole, I've asked the Col¿ns to do a new budget and follow it strictly. They've tried to budget in the past but just didn't have the discipline.

I believe they are ready now.

"I'm just tired of owing money," George said, looking rather weary as we reviewed their finances.

They will start paying off the debt with the lowest balances. But with the interest ticking up on the tax debt, they also need to aggressively pay that down.

I also recommended that George sell his 2002 BMW Z3, which costs him $702 a month. The purchase price was a little more than $42,000. He already has a 2007 Ford Explorer Sport Trac, and Kim has her own car (which is paid for). The monthly payment for the sport-utility vehicle is $893. That payment is so high because George rolled into the $49,256 purchase price the $10,000 loan balance from a 2005 Mustang he traded in for the Explorer. That has put him upside down on that vehicle -- meaning he owes more than it's worth. It would be difficult to sell because he would have to come up with thousands of dollars in cash, which they don't have.

He could sell the BMW for enough to pay off the loan. At the very least, selling it would free them from that large payment, which could then be applied to their massive debt load.

He agreed to list the car for sale but is now wavering. He said he just felt in his heart that he couldn't do it.

As I tell all challengers, it's your life, but which do you want more, freedom or financial bondage?

Tough love: The Col¿ns can no longer use any credit at all.

This news was particularly tough for Kim, who likes to pay with plastic for the reward points.

"At what price are you earning those points?" I asked.

Sure, she may get some free airline tickets, but she has taken on more debt than she can handle. Again and again I tell people that studies show you spend more when you use credit, even if you pay off your balance every month. So those so-called reward points aren't really free at all.

I had Kim cut up the cards, including the American Express charge card. She hesitated at first.

"It's just hard," she said. "What am I going to do if an emergency happens? What if I need it for a car repair?"

I reached into my purse and pulled out a $20 bill. I handed it to Kim. I asked her to look at it, feel it. Far too many people have forgotten what's it's like to pay for what they want or need with cash. As I have told many people in the same predicament as the Col¿ns, a credit card shouldn't be your financial lifeline.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

Printed from


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...er_be_safe_than_sorry/articleshow/2872693.cms

Better be safe than sorry

17 Mar, 2008, 0554 hrs IST,Shakti Shankar Patra ,
In the year 1976, the British government announced that it will not allow the pound to trade above $1.72. The concern was that the pound’s strength will lead to increased imports. At the time of the announcement, the pound was trading in the mid-1 .60s. Surprisingly, the market responded to the announcement by immediately going to $1.72 and then falling back to $1.68.

In the next few days, it rebounded many times to $1.72. However, each time it reached $1.72, it fell back, but by smaller and smaller amounts each time. The price range steadily converged until the pound was trading narrowly just below the $1.72 level. The general understanding in the market was, “They’re not going to let it go above $1.72. So, let us short it.”

But many smart traders like the veteran currency trader Randy McKay saw it differently . He felt that with the British government’s public announcement about not letting the price go above a certain level, the pound should have collapsed. But instead, it almost tried to break the level of $1.72.

This indicated that there was tremendous underlying demand for the pound and all the British government was doing was trying to fight free market forces. Randy saw this as once in a lifetime opportunity and went long on the pound lock, stock and barrel.

The pound traded around the $1.72 mark for the next few days and suddenly one morning, Randy found it quoting at $1.725. He at once knew this was it. Once the market had pushed past the $1.72 level, it was like water breaking through a dam. So, all efforts of the British government went up in smoke, as once past $1.72, the pound just shot up through the roof as traders like Randy laughed all the way to the bank.

Subprime can’t be sublime

The reason behind recalling this incidence is that it has several parallels with current times. By now, it is almost common knowledge that the US financial sector is in an absolute jam, probably in its worst crisis in the past few decades. And its reverberations are being felt across the economy, which is probably pushing the world’s largest economy into a recession. The jitters are also being felt across the world, as global stocks are in an absolute free fall.

But the way the US Federal Reserve is trying to undo the sins of the past several years by bringing about a forced end to the crisis through monetary measures are reminiscent of the British government’s interventions in 1976.

The subprime crisis that reared its head in July-August ’07 was initially hushed up by central banks worldwide, which injected massive amounts of liquidity into the system earlier. It didn’t really help. All it did was to buy some time and delay the inevitable. If just monetary interventions could ward off recessions, then no economy in the world would have ever entered one.

But it’s not that forceful interventions have not worked in the past. In the early ’80s, the Canadian government rarely intervened to support its currency. But worried by its steady decline, the then Prime Minister Brian Mulroney declared categorically, “We will not allow Chicago speculators to determine the value of our currency.

Our currency is solid and we will not permit it to fall apart because of a bunch of gamblers.” And the result was immediate, as the Canadian dollar got a tremendous respite from its free fall. Even in terms of monetary intervention, Alan Greenspan’s efforts bore fruit, as the US economy revived dramatically after the scares of ’00-01 .

I couldn’t care less for uncle Sam

You will obviously question what does all this have to do with you? Nothing. But the point that we are trying to make is that this seems to be a point of inflexion. In the Fed meet on Tuesday, the US will probably throw in its last dice to ward off a recession.

Whether it succeeds or not, will be seen over a period of time. But what is certain is that equity markets worldwide will react, and react violently. They may shoot up through the roof or collapse like ninepins, but react they will.

And the consequence of being trapped on the wrong side of such a fierce move can be immense. So, take it light. Don’t load up ahead of the Fed meet. If the intervention boosts sentiment and wards off a recession in the US, then our stock market, too, will bounce back, giving you ample opportunity to buy stocks in future.

On the other hand, if they fail and the US indeed enters a recession, then all short-term rallies after that should be used to short the market. And we think such opportunities will be abundant in the future.

The evidence

If you think, by staying away from the market ahead of the Fed meet, you will miss out on a big money-making opportunity, then, as the data suggests, most market participants are doing exactly that. Since the beginning of March, the near-month Nifty futures contacts that will expire in March had a plethora of short positions.

This was reflected in its open interest, which had consistently seen a build-up of more than four crore shares, which on a historical basis, was a rarity. That a majority of these were short positions was reflected in the hefty discount that it consistently traded at, compared to the Nifty spot.

But last week changed it all. With expectations of violent moves ahead of the Fed meet, bears were seen getting out at lower levels, as the Nifty futures contracts expiring in March shed more than 50 lakh shares within the week. This pushed it into a slight premium over the spot for the first time in March and the total build-up to below the four-crore mark.

The fear was also reflected in the mad rush for writing options as investors tried to hedge their positions. This was reflected in the open interest swelling by close to 50 lakh shares in the March series of options contracts.

For the compulsive trader

If the urge to take up a position ahead of the Fed meet is just too great for you to ignore, then the ideal course is to buy call options, so that your downside is capped. At close on Friday , the Nifty March put-call ratio is quoting at around the 0.86 mark, oversold even by current standards.

What is important is the fact that even after so much turmoil and the Nifty testing the 4600 levels on more than one occasion, the 5100 put continues to see a build-up of close to 19 lakh shares — the second highest among puts. This suggests that the level of 5100 is still on and bulls betting on that should buy the 4900 or the 5000 call, which at close on Friday were relatively cheap, quoting IVs of around 37%.

But what about bears who are betting on a further crack? Well, if and when the 4600 levels on the Nifty fails to hold on a closing basis, you can very well short the market and go on a holiday because below 4600 lies hell.

Copyright © 2008 Times Internet Limited.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

America was conned - who will pay?

The South Sea Bubble ended in riots as trust was lost. Wall Street also duped the public

* Larry Elliott, economics editor
* The Guardian,
* Monday March 17 2008

Bear Stearns marks the moment when the global financial crisis went critical. Up until last Friday, it had been possible - just about - to believe that the worst was over and that things were about to get better. That pretence was stripped away when JP Morgan, at the behest of the Federal Reserve, stepped in when the hedge funds pulled the plug on the fifth-biggest US investment bank.

It is now clear that no end is in sight to the turmoil, and the reason for that is that the Fed and the US treasury are no closer to solving the underlying problem than they were eight months ago. The crisis will only end when house prices stop falling and banks stop racking up huge losses on their loans. Doing that, however, will require the US government to intervene directly in the real estate market to end the wave of foreclosures. Ideologically, it is ill-equipped to take that step and, as a result, property prices will fall and the financial meltdown will go on and on.

Ultimately, though, action will be taken because there will be political pressure for it. Indeed, it is somewhat surprising that there is not already rioting in the streets, given the gigantic fraud perpetrated by the financial elite at the expense of ordinary Americans.

The US has just had its weakest period of expansion since the 1950s. Consumption growth has been poor. Investment growth has been modest. Exports have been sluggish. But if you are at the top of the tree, the years since the last recession in 2001 has been a veritable golden age. Salaries for executives have rocketed and profits have soared, because the productivity gains from a growing economy have been disproportionately skewed towards capital.

Patriotic

For ordinary Americans, though, it has been a different story. Real wages have been growing slowly; at just 1.6% a year on average over the latest upswing, well down on the experience of earlier decades. Business, of course, needs consumers to carry on spending in order to make money, so a way had to be found to persuade households to do their patriotic duty. The method chosen was simple. Whip up a colossal housing bubble, convince consumers that it makes sense to borrow money against the rising value of their homes to supplement their meagre real wage growth and watch the profits roll in.

As they did - for a while. Now it's payback time and the mood could get very ugly. Americans, to put it bluntly, have been conned. They have been duped by a bunch of serpent-tongued hucksters who packed up the wagon and made it across the county line before a lynch mob could be formed.

The debate now is not about whether the US is in recession but how deep and long that recession will be. Super-bears have started to say that this is perhaps "The Big One", by which they mean the onset of a new Great Depression. The need to rescue Bear Stearns has done little to still those voices.

As the economics team at HSBC recently pointed out, there has been a "catastrophic breakdown" of trust, and when that has happened in the past - the US in the 1930s, Japan in the 1990s - chucking extra money at the banks in the hope that they will start lending again proves ineffective.

It's not hard to see why trust has become such a rare commodity: Wall Street at the height of the securitisation mania had, in effect, become London at the time of the South Sea Bubble crisis in 1720. Vast quantities of funny paper were changing hands even though those involved in the deals had no idea of their true worth. Nor did they care. Inevitably, now the bubble has burst and the huge Ponzi securitisation scam has been exposed, there has been a reaction. The securitisation market is dead, there is less money sloshing round the system, banks are hoarding their cash.

Having allowed the housing boom to rage out of control for too long and then delaying cuts in interest rates until the housing market was gripped by recessionary forces, the Fed is now trying to make up for lost time with a burst of hyperactivity. It will cut interest rates on Wednesday and keep cutting them: financial markets expect the Fed funds rate to be 1% by the summer, and they are probably right. In most downturns, easier monetary policy does the trick. Lower interest rates make it cheaper to borrow and also change the trade-off between saving and spending. This may not be the usual sort of downturn, however, with consumers going through a period of debt revulsion after the excesses of recent years, even so the consensus is that after two or three quarters of falling output, a slow and sluggish recovery will be under way.

Deflation

These hopes are likely to be dashed, unless there is intervention at home and internationally to tackle the crisis. Domestically, the priority should be to stop homes that have been foreclosed being auctioned on the open market, since by selling them at a 50% discount property prices are driven down. The US does not seem to have learned the lessons from Japan, which encouraged a fire sale of property in the 1990s and was sucked into a classic debt deflation trap as a result. Those who argue, with some force, that it would be counter-productive to intervene in the market because the US needs to work the rottenness out of its system must recognise that the cold turkey option will be very long and painful.

The second form of intervention should be to shore up the dollar, the collapse of which is worrying countries that rely heavily on exports and is the main reason for the surge in commodity prices. Co-ordinated intervention by the major central banks needs to be at the top of the agenda at next month's G7 meeting in Washington, and there could be action even sooner if the dollar continues to tank.

In the longer term, lessons must be learnt from the turmoil. One is that you don't solve the problems of a collapsing bubble by blowing up another, which is what Alan Greenspan did after the dotcom fiasco in 2001 - the most irresponsible behaviour of any central banker in living memory.

The second lesson is that there has to be far stricter regulation not just of the US real estate market but of Wall Street, to prevent the return of irresponsible lending as soon as the recovery is firmly under way. If this is, heaven help us, The Big One, one of the only consolations will be that the repugnance at the orgy of speculation that has sapped the strength of the US economy will put a new New Deal on the political agenda.

But for this to happen there has to be a political response and even though this year's presidential election will be held in the shadow of recession, there appears not to be a potential FDR among the contenders for the White House. Yet if this crisis really does get as bad as some are forecasting, the public will rightly demand more than a slap on the wrist for Wall Street.

guardian.co.uk

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aIGeO4anyk.c&refer=worldwide#

Wall Street May Face $460 Bln in Losses, Goldman Says (Update1)

By Zhao Yidi
Last Updated: March 25, 2008 16:10 EDT

March 25 (Bloomberg) -- Wall Street banks, brokerages and hedge funds may report $460 billion in credit losses from the collapse of the subprime mortgage market, or almost four times the amount already disclosed, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Profits will continue to wane, other analysts said.

``There is light at the end of the tunnel, but it is still rather dim,'' Goldman analysts including New York-based Andrew Tilton said in a note to investors today. They estimated that residential mortgage losses will account for half the total, and commercial mortgages as much as 20 percent.

Earnings and share prices at U.S. financial institutions tumbled in the past year as fallout from the mortgage crisis spread to other markets. Demand for mortgage-backed securities evaporated, leading to the collapse of Bear Stearns Cos., once that market's largest underwriter, and a Federal Reserve-led bailout by JPMorgan Chase & Co. earlier this month.

Goldman's own share-price estimate was cut 3.7 percent to $210 at Fox-Pitt Kelton Cochran Caronia Waller. The research firm also reduced its profit estimates for the world's biggest securities firm for the rest of this year and all of 2009.

Merrill Lynch & Co. had its 2008 profit estimates cut by 45 percent at JPMorgan on concern the third-largest U.S. securities firm by market value may disclose further writedowns on subprime mortgages. Merrill may report a total of $5 billion in additional losses on collateralized debt obligations, so-called Alt-A mortgages and commercial mortgages, New York-based analyst Kenneth Worthington said.

Bank of America

Bank of America Corp., the second-biggest U.S. bank by assets, was downgraded to ``sell'' from ``neutral'' at Merrill Lynch. The company, based in Charlotte, North Carolina, also had its earnings-per-share estimate lowered to $3.30 from $3.50 in 2008 and to $4.00 from $4.40 in 2009, analysts including New York-based Edward Najarian wrote in a note to clients today.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., the fourth-largest U.S. securities firm, had its share-price forecast cut 16 percent to $70 at Fox-Pitt. The brokerage's 2008 and 2009 profit estimates were also reduced.

Goldman said the $460 billion in credit losses it foresees may ``result in a substantial tightening in credit conditions as these institutions pull back on lending to preserve their reduced capital and to maintain statutory capital adequacy ratios.''

Credit-card loans, auto loans, commercial and industrial lending and non-financial corporate bonds make up the rest of the $460 billion in credit losses.

Goldman, which has lost 16 percent this year on the New York Stock Exchange, rose 75 cents to $179.63 in composite trading at 4:07 p.m. Merrill fell 53 cents to $47.85, Lehman declined $1.43 to $45.21 and Bank of America dropped $1.48 to $40.97.

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

03/25/2008
Dealerships seeing increase in SUV trade-ins
By: Mary Ellen Godin, staff 7:45 pm

John Gogliettino, the general manager of Executive Kia in Wallingford, first started noticing them coming back a year ago.

Those gas-guzzling SUVs were suddenly not as cool to drive when gas started soaring above $3 per gallon and customers began asking for trade-ins on something that got more than eight to 15 miles per gallon.

"We're seeing a little bit everywhere," Gogliettino said. "But people still have a need for them."

Drivers with families who need to pack the toys, the iPods, the sports equipment still want the storage room and some have settled with a used minivan, which can get 15 to 20 mpg.

Jim Sperazza, general manager of Roberts Dodge Chrysler, has also seen some drivers switch to minivans, while other former SUV owners opt for midsize cars, and other go straight for gas sipping four-cylinder models that can get 35 miles per gallon on the highway.

"Most people that have multiple kids, it becomes difficult for them to grin and bear it," Sperazza said.

As the SUVs pile up on the lots, the law of supply and demand have dropped their prices, based on condition and mileage. Consider that a Ford Expedition bought in 2004 cost $31,000. Today, its Kelley Blue Book value is $13,000 and if gas prices continue to climb, that number is likely to further drop.

©www.MyRecordJournal.com 2008

 

[McDuck]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

'You're working for gas now'

The people of Camden, Ala., pay a bigger chunk of their income for fuel than anyone else in the country - meaning tough choices for the ever thinner family budget.

By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: March 24, 2008: 9:24 PM EDT

CAMDEN, Ala. (CNNMoney.com) -- Corey Carter spends a quarter of his paycheck on gas.

The 30-year old Carter, who earns $7 an hour making car parts for a Hyundai factory near Montgomery, Ala., spends $65 a week on gas, double what it cost just a few years ago.

Paying $30 more for gas out of a $240 paycheck makes a big difference.

"Going out to eat, going to the movies, you can't do stuff like that," says Carter, filling up his Firebird at a BP station in Camden, a quiet southern town 80 miles southwest of Montgomery. "You're working for gas now."

Carter, and other residents that live around Camden, are having a particularly hard time - they devote more of their budget for gas than anyone else in the United States.

So, like Americans everywhere, people here are cutting back on spending, and that's threatening to send - or may have already sent - a shaky economy into recession.

For people like Carrie Frye, 33, a mother who commutes 70 miles each day, the choice is about much more than simply cutting back on entertainment.

Frye works at a factory in Selma, Ala., making lawn chair cushions. If she makes her production quota, she might bring in $329 a week. If not, it's $220. Either way, she says the $60 a week she now spends in gas comes out of money for food, the doctor, and buying clothes for her kids.

"I just hope they don't grow that fast," she says, filling her tank of her Jeep Cherokee at the Camden BP.

Camden is a classic rural southern town - men sit on porches, shopping gets done at the general store. The county bills itself as the "hunting and fishing capital of Alabama." The main industries here are logging, farming, and, more recently, business related to the Hyundai plant which opened in 2005.

But the county is poor - household income of $26,000 is nearly half the national average. And people have to travel a long way to work.

The combination of low wages and long travel times means the people of Camden, for the second year in a row, spent a higher portion of their income on gas than anyone else in the country, according to a study from the Oil Price Information Service, a research firm that tracks data for AAA.

In Camden, drivers put 13% of every paycheck right into the gas tank. In wealthy towns around New York City, people spend less than 2% of their income on gas.

For local businesses, an extra dollar spent in the tank means one not spent at the restaurant or hardware store.

[Customer's] budgets are tightening," says William Malone, head of the local Chamber of Commerce. "They're cutting back any way they can."

Malone, who also runs a local insurance company, said he's seen people cut back on their insurance plans, purchasing them with less coverage or higher deductibles.

He's also seen a growing interest in smaller cars, a claim backed up by the local Chevy dealer.

Not every business is struggling. A worker behind the counter at the local bait and tackle shop says they've had a bumper year. Evidently, folks will hunt and fish no matter what the economy's doing - maybe even more so if they're out of work.

But at Uncle Redd's, a barbeque joint on the way out of town, owner Andrea Finklea says over 100 people a day would come in for the chicken, ribs, and mac n' cheese. Now, they're lucky to get 65.

"We're planning on cutting back on employees hours, that's a bad thing," says Finklea.

Jimmy Pugh runs the Coast to Coast Tru Value in the center of town, although the shop's hardware store moniker belies the merchandise on hand - the wood floor, tin ceiling general store sells everything from toys and tools to electronics, guitars and furniture.

Pugh says his business is off 10 to 15% for the last few months, and he too may have to cut back on hours.

"It's the overall economy, but gas prices are having a big effect on it," he says. "I just don't know where it's headed."

The dip in business is hitting the town's coffers.

Camden's seen its revenue from sales receipts drop 5% in December, the first decline in seven years, according to Mayor Henrietta Blackmon. In February revenue fell another 2.5%.

Despite these figures, a tax hike isn't in the cards yet. But for the people of Camden, and other communities across the nation struggling with declining home values, tightening credit and rising unemployment, high gas prices are just another burden as the economy teeters on the brink of recession.

First Published: March 24, 2008: 1:31 PM EDT

Find this article at:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/24/news/economy/camden_alabama/index.htm?postversion=2008032421

 

[Guest2]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

'You're working for gas now'

It's enough to consider buying a Moped for goodness sakes !

 

[Asylum]

Re: Greg's Account Talk

It's enough to consider buying a Moped for goodness sakes !

go classic!!!