Tuesday, December 30, 2014

The Best Investing Tidbits of 2014

By John Woerth  |  Vanguard Blog  |  December 29, 2014


During the course of a year, I read a lot on the topic of investing and personal finance. Articles, blogs, books, tweets, white papers, journal pieces, etc.
I read some good stuff (and I read, unfortunately, too much bad stuff). Below, I highlight four of the best investing tidbits that I came across in 2014.
One of the best pieces of advice I read—and you may have read it or read about it too, as it was well publicized—was Warren Buffett’s annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders. In the letter, Mr. Buffett, considered by many to be the world’s best investor, gave the world a peek into his will and, specifically, the investment instructions to a trustee for his wife’s benefit. In short, he suggests a 10% holding in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost, broad-based U.S. stock index fund. Mr. Buffett wrote: “I believe the trust’s long-term results from this policy will be superior to those attained by most investors—whether pension funds, institutions, or individuals—who employ high-fee managers.”
I am certainly not endorsing any specific asset allocation here, but takeaways. First, have an estate plan, which may sound like a planning tool for the wealthy, but I can assure you it is not. I’m smart enough to know you need an estate plan, but not smart enough to give you additional guidance. I will defer to our resident estate planning expert, Alisa Shin.
Second, base your investment plan on low-cost vehicles. Cost is a factor you can control. The less you pay to invest, the more you keep.

25 Life Lessons Written by a 99-Year-Old Man

By Macy Williams  |  PopSugar  |  December 25, 2014

My great-grandfather is 99 years old, and living almost a century has taught him a thing or two. Andy Anderson's life story is one for the big screen — he met my great-grandmother on a Saturday, and they married on the following Saturday. They stayed together until my grandma took her last breath 67 years later. In between those 67 years, they had two children, adopted another son, and were the greatest party throwers in the county (we have the pictures to prove it).

Without going to college, Andy worked his way to the top; he became the corporate manager of the dairy department of Safeway for the entire country. He earned the nickname Mr. Cheese, which eventually turned into Grandpa Cheese among the family — a name that has admittedly gotten a few brow raises. My point is, Grandpa Cheese has taught me a lot about life. I could think of no better person to give the world a few life lessons than him. Here's what he has learned in his 99 years.

Friday, December 26, 2014

The United States of Debt

By Stephen Moore  |  National review Online  |  December 9, 2014

Sorry, but this one you can’t blame on either party. Yes, President Obama has made the problem much, much worse, but the scary truth is that the national debt keeps rising inexorably no matter who or which party is in office. That’s the new law of American politics.
When I first arrived in Washington in the early 1980s, the debt was roughly $2 trillion. This week, 30 years and five presidents later, the debt for the first time exceeded $18 trillion. We have been in the red in all but four of the last 40 years.

That’s $18,000,000,000,000. We all know that $18 million is a lot of money. This is $18 million times another million. The number is so gigantic we won’t or can’t try to fathom it.

Why worry? We owe it to ourselves, we’re told. The mighty American economy is big enough to absorb it. This country was built on debt. There is no better time to borrow than when interest rates are at a 40-year low.

There’s some truth in all these claims. Sure, we have a near–$18 trillion economy, but the problem is that the debt is outgrowing the economy. In just the last seven years — the last year of George W. Bush’s presidency and the first six of Obama’s — the debt has increased by roughly $7.4 trillion. That’s ten times the entire debt incurred in our first 200 years as a nation.

Monday, December 22, 2014

9 Money Lessons I Learned From My Parents

By Maggie Perkins  |  Credit.com  |  December 18, 2014


My parents are a couple that anyone can look up to financially — not because they drivefancy cars or have a home in Boca (spoiler: they don’t) but because they are resourceful and forward-looking with the money they earn. I’ve always known that financial responsibility is important to my parents, especially my mom. I wasn’t allowed to even borrow the car keys until I had passed the personal finance class offered at my high school. I thought it was a waste of an elective, better spent on an additional dance class, but I learned some essential truths and opened my own Roth IRA at the ripe age of 18.
The following are nine simple tips I learned from my parents, either through the back seat of the car or by being lectured, which I often returned with deeply rolled eyes. Some are specific, others broad — but all valuable.
1. It is NOT economical to buy dinner out, even at the dollar menu. To feed a family of four on the way home from soccer practice, it would cost at least $12 to feed everyone even from the dollar menu at a fast-food joint. At a grocery store you can get a rotisserie chicken ($6), green beans and carrots ($2) and potatoes for baking ($2) to bring you in at $10, plus some tax — still the same price, but more food, and better food for you.
2. A $50 Costco membership can pay for itself, especially if you need to replace your tires or update your vision prescription and order eyeglasses.

Thursday, December 18, 2014

5 Small Risks That Can Improve Your Life in Big Ways

By Brittany Lite  |  WiseBread  |  November 18, 2014

Living on the edge feels good. Even the smallest of risks is scientifically proven to increase your enjoyment of whatever activity you're engaged in. Intrigued? Read on for our roundup of some small, specific small risks we suggest everybody consider taking.
What have you really got to lose?

1. Buy a Lottery Ticket

Your chances of winning the Powerball jackpot are about one in 175 million. But some social psychologists say you should do it anyway. That's because the benefit most of us get from playing the lotto has a lot more to do with the fantasy of winning money than the actual attainment of wealth.
"The lottery lets you believe in magic: that you will be the one who spent a little and got a lot; that you will defy the extraordinary odds against winning," reads an excerpt from a Psychology Today article titled "Lottery-itis!" It's that "Oh, the things I could buy, the places I'd go!" fantasy that grants us relief — albeit fleeting — from the stresses, conflicts, and perceived financial roadblocks in our real lives. In fact, neuroscientists have found that the prospect of winning the lottery activates the same brain circuits that would be triggered if we discovered that we actually possessed the winning ticket. "Our pleasure of living is not only based on our current situation, but what could be, what we can imagine our situation could become," behavioral decision making researcher George Loewenstein says.

2. Conquer a Fear

Turns out that facing our fears really works. Research shows when we expose ourselves to the thing that unnerves us — be it a gigantic, hairy spider or a red-nosed clown — we actually help to reduce our fear of that very thing. The results can be truly liberating. So if you're afraid of spiders, go to a zoo that will let you hold one. If it's heights that make you squeamish, go cliff jumping in a safe, designated area. Life is too short to let irrational fears keep you from living vibrantly. (See also: Do You Have Any of These 4 Most Irrational Fears?)

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

10 Priceless Investing Quotes From 10 Legendary Investors

By Lance Roberts, STA Wealth Management  |  Business Insider  |  December 10, 2014

I live in Houston, which has been a huge economic beneficiary of the sustained increases in oil prices, drilling, refining and related processes. As such, the amount of wealth created in energy-related investments has been enormous and, not surprisingly, a vast majority of individuals have overweighted portfolios in energy with the expectations that"oil prices can only go up."  Of course, this sentiment is certainly understandable when you look at the performance of the energy sector versus the S&P 500 since the turn of the century. (Annualized return, capital appreciation only: S&P 500 3.24% vs Energy 17.71%)
SP500 Energy Perf 121014StreetTalk LIVE
Not surprisingly, the recent plunge in oil prices, and related energy stocks, has sent investors scurrying for cover. Previous "complacency" has turned to outright "panic" as portfolios, and retirement plans, have been crushed by plunging asset prices.
Strongly rising asset prices, and in this case commodity prices, have driven investor exuberance in the sector leading many to ignore deteriorating fundamentals, excessive leverage, and other financial diseases. However, when prices deteriorate rapidly, investment mistakes are quickly revealed.
It is important to remember that we are not investors. We are speculators placing bets on the direction of the price of an electronic share. More importantly, we are speculating, more commonly known as gambling, with our "savings." We are told by Wall Street that we "must" invest into the financial markets to keep those hard-earned savings adjusted for inflation over time. Unfortunately, due to repeated investment mistakes, the average individual has failed in achieving this goal.
With this in mind, this is an excellent time to review 10 legendary investment lessons from legendary investors. These time-tested rules about "risk" are what have repeatedly separated successful investors from everyone else. (Quote Source: 25iQ)
1) Jeffrey Gundlach, DoubleLine
"The trick is to take risks and be paid for taking those risks, but to take a diversified basket of risks in a portfolio."
This is a common theme that you will see throughout this post. Great investors focus on "risk management" because "risk" is not a function of how much money you will make, but how much you will lose when you are wrong. In investing, or gambling, you can only play as long as you have capital. If you lose too much capital but taking on excessive risk, you can no longer play the game.
Be greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy. One of the best times to invest is when uncertainty is the greatest and fear is the highest.

We Have No Liberty: Now the Government is Coming for Our Hobbies

By Amy Ridenour  |  National Center Blog  |  September 24, 2014


The state of California has fined a hobbyist winery $115,000 because some of the people working at the --- let me use this word again -- HOBBYIST winery were volunteers.
National Center Senior Fellow R.J. Smith, who knows as much about wine as he does about the benefits of liberty (and that's saying something), has this comment:
Outrageous example of out-of-control government tyranny. Just what California needs, fewer wineries and small businesses. One of the great joys of wines has been the ability to volunteer during harvest season and also grape stomping. All over the world. Widely spreads the enjoyment and love of wine. And sometimes interests young people in a career in wines.
So the government says we can't have volunteers and interns any longer. Who are they to say?
What was that that Mr. Jefferson wrote in 1776 -- about the people facing a government that is no longer protecting life, liberty and property: "...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Say a prayer for [Westover & Palomares Vineyards President and Winemaker] Bill Smyth -- his wife, family, employees and volunteers.
The state of California, which opposes liberty, has made it illegal for business to accept the help of volunteers. Across the board.
So if you love model trains and want to hang about a California-based model train shop on Saturday afternoons, answering kids' questions, don't. That's illegal.
If a California business seeks volunteers to transport food to a community event or food pantry, don't volunteer. It's illegal.
If a someone in your California church or synagogue is confused about how to do the tax forms for his small business, don't help unless you charge him. You'd be breaking the law.
Heck, by the standards of this law it is illegal to drive your own daughter to her babysitting job, unless you charge her. The law doesn't have exceptions for family members.
As R.J. (and T.J.) noted, we have a duty to throw off governments such as this.
It's difficult to imagine who the idiotic lawmakers who voted for this thought they were helping. Do they really presume hordes of Californians are going to persuaded to work for free for multitudes of businesses, unless they think it is worth their while? And if it is worth it to them, then why should government stop them?
Sadly, even if California lawmakers wise up, the story ends unhappily for this winery, which will close this year, thanks to the state of California. And lest you think, good, these people were taking advantage of their volunteers to make money, be aware: This winery did not sell its wine in stores. It served it to visitors. This was a place where people socialized, picked grapes, made wine and had fun.
Until the government we should overthrow said they couldn't.

Monday, December 8, 2014

What Makes a Democrat a Democrat and a Republican a Republican? It’s More Complicated Than You Think

By Jason Weeden and Robert Kurzban | Time | December 4, 2014

This post is in partnership with the History News Network, the website that puts the news into historical perspective. The article below was originally published at HNN.

Political scientists will often say that people’s political party affiliations are major causes of their voting behavior and of their opinions on various policy issues. Yet this line often neglects evidence that, to understand political party affiliations, one needs to focus on voters’ opinions on various policy issues.

Fifty years ago, Democrat Lyndon Johnson battled Republican Barry Goldwater for the presidency. At that time, no Republican presidential candidate had carried the Deep South since Reconstruction. Nonetheless, Goldwater carried the line of states from Louisiana to South Carolina (as well as his home state of Arizona) but no other states. The reason for his victory in these southern states had to do with Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act, which Johnson, in contrast, had championed. In the election, many southern whites voted on the basis of this issue, at the expense of their traditional party.

Further, as the pace of social change accelerated in the early 1960s, the Supreme Court issued a line of controversial decisions on school prayer, birth control, and abortion. These previously sleepy issues took on greater public prominence. As the political parties adopted their contrasting positions in the 1970s, key voting groups began shifting. White churchgoers (including many southerners and Catholics who had previously been solid supporters of Democrats) increasingly voted Republican, while the growing group of non-religious whites leaned more towards Democrats.

More recently, the Reagan years saw the opening of a new gender gap in party voting, driven not by abortion (an issue on which men and women have never, it turns out, differed much on average), but by the gender gap in support for government safety-net programs. In addition, more recently, Republicans have become increasingly associated with anti-immigrant views (a major milestone occurring in 1994, when Republican Governor Pete Wilson supported California’s Proposition 187), and, as a result, Latinos have become increasingly solid Democratic supporters.

Print documents anywhere from all of your gadgets with Google

By Kim Komando  |  komando.com

With the popularity of tablets, smartphones, netbooks and Chromebooks, you probably have a handful of gadgets around your home and office. They're great tools for sending emails, working on documents and taking care of other daily tasks. That's great, but those gadgets usually come up short when you need to print something out.

To print your stuff, you likely still have to be in your home or office and use a desktop computer or laptop. That's not the case anymore, though. Google has developed a solution to help you send documents straight from any of your gadgets to your printer from anywhere with an Internet or data connection.

With Google Cloud Print, you can print your documents from just about anywhere. All you have to do is connect your printer to your Google account using the Cloud Print homepage.

Google suggests using a newer Cloud Ready Printer, but the service will work with classic printers, too.

You can print through a variety of apps on any of your gadgets like Google Chrome, Cloud Print for Android and PrintCentral for iPhones and iPads.


GOOGLE CLOUD PRINT

To get started with Google Cloud Print, you'll need a Google account. Then, visit the Cloud Print link below and click the "Try it Now" button at the top of the page. You'll see the option to save the document as a PDF to Google Drive or print to a nearby FedEx location.

To add your printer to your account, click the "Connect your printer to Google using Google Cloud Print!" link. Google will then give you the instructions you need based on what type of printer you have. Setting up a Cloud Ready Printer is easy because they connect directly to the web.

But, you can still connect a classic printer like most people have. It'll just take a few more steps. You'll need to be at a computer that's connected to your printer to set it up. You'll also want to make sure the Google Chrome browser is installed. Then, just follow Google's directions to add your printer.

Once you're printer is added, you can send documents to it from anywhere using any gadget or computer. You can even share access to your printers with friends, family and coworkers. There's a full list of Cloud Print compatible apps for your gadgets on the site, too.

10 Tips For Achieving Financial Security

By Denise Appleby  |  Investopedia


When it's time for you to retire, will you be able to afford it? Almost all of the research conducted on the subject, over the last few years, shows that most individuals are unable to demonstrate financial readiness for their retirement years. This only serves to underline the fact that saving for retirement is a challenging process that requires careful planning and follow-through. Here we review some helpful tips that should help you on your way to a comfortable retirement.
Start as Soon as You Can
It is obvious that it is better to start saving at an early age, but it is never too late to start - even if you are already close to your retirement years - because every penny saved helps to cover your expenses.
If you save $200 every month for 40 years at a 5% interest rate, you will have saved significantly more than an individual who saves at the same rate for 10 years. However, the amount saved over the shorter period can go a long way in helping to cover expenses during retirement. Also, keep in mind that other areas of financial planning, such as asset allocation, will become increasingly important as you get closer to retirement. This is because your risk tolerance generally decreases as the number of years in which you can recuperate any losses goes down.
Treat Your Savings as an Expense
Saving on a regular basis can be a challenge, especially when you consider the many regular expenses we all face, not to mention the enticing consumer goods that tempt us to spend our disposable cash. You can guard amounts you want to add to your nest egg from this temptation by treating your retirement savings as a recurring expense, similar to paying rent, mortgage or a car loan. This is even easier if the amount is debited from your paycheck by your employer. (Note: If the amount is deducted from your paycheck on a pre-tax basis, it helps to reduce the amount of income taxes owed on your salary.)
Alternatively (or in addition), you may have your salary direct-deposited to a checking or savings account, and have the designated savings amount scheduled for automatic debit to be credited to a retirement savings account on the same day the salary is credited.
Save as Much as You Can in a Tax-Deferred Account
Contributing amounts earmarked for your retirement to a tax-deferred retirement account deters you from spending those amounts on impulse, because you are likely to face tax consequences and penalties. For instance, any amount distributed from a retirement account may be subject to income taxes the year in which the distribution occurs, and if you are under age 59 1/2 when the distribution occurs, the amount could be subject to a 10% early-distribution penalty (excise tax).
If you have enough income, consider whether you can increase the amount you save in tax-deferred accounts. For instance, in addition to saving in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, think about whether you can also afford to contribute to an individual retirement account (IRA), and whether the IRA should be a Roth IRA or a Traditional IRA.

11 Websites That Will Make You Smarter About Money

By Sarah Schmalbruch  |  Business Insider  |  December 4, 2014

Not everyone has a financial adviser, and not everyone has the time to read a personal finance book.
Luckily, there's the internet.
We've made learning about money easier for you by compiling a list of some of our go-to websites for money advice.
Happy browsing.

1. Investopedia

Why we like it: Investopedia's dictionary is great for finding easy-to-understand, comprehensive definitions of financial terms or concepts.
It also provides tutorials on everything from income taxes to becoming a landlord. The site even features study guides for nationally administered finance exams.
Best for: Looking up the definition of a QTIP Trust and figuring out if you need one.

2. Kiplinger

Why we like it: The digital component to the magazine "Kiplinger's," the site features a broad range of topics from investing to real estate. If your eyes usually glaze over a few paragraphs into an article about money, Kiplinger is a good option because its insight often comes in the form of slideshows and quizzes.
Best for: Keeping on top of the latest investing news.

Sunday, December 7, 2014

PEARL HARBOR

History.com Staff  |  History.com  |  2009

Just before 8 a.m. on December 7, 1941, hundreds of Japanese fighter planes attacked the American naval base at Pearl Harbor near Honolulu, Hawaii. The barrage lasted just two hours, but it was devastating: The Japanese managed to destroy nearly 20 American naval vessels, including eight enormous battleships, and almost 200 airplanes. More than 2,000 Americans soldiers and sailors died in the attack, and another 1,000 were wounded. The day after the assault, President Franklin D. Roosevelt asked Congress to declare war on Japan; Congress approved his declaration with just one dissenting vote. Three days later, Japanese allies Germany and Italy also declared war on the United States, and again Congress reciprocated. More than two years into the conflict, America had finally joined World War II.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was a surprise, but Japan and the United States had been edging toward war for decades. The United States was particularly unhappy with Japan’s increasingly belligerent attitude toward China. The Japanese government believed that the only way to solve its economic and demographic problems was to expand into its neighbor’s territory and take over its import market; to this end, Japan had declared war on China in 1937. American officials responded to this aggression with a battery of economic sanctions and trade embargoes. They reasoned that without access to money and goods, and especially essential supplies like oil, Japan would have to rein in its expansionism. Instead, the sanctions made the Japanese more determined to stand their ground. During months of negotiations between Tokyo and Washington, D.C., neither side would budge. It seemed that war was inevitable.
But no one believed that the Japanese would start that war with an attack on American territory. For one thing, it would be terribly inconvenient: Hawaii and Japan were about 4,000 miles apart. For another, American intelligence officials were confident that any Japanese attack would take place in one of the (relatively) nearby European colonies in the South Pacific: the Dutch East Indies, for instance, or Singapore or Indochina. Because American military leaders were not expecting an attack so close to home, the naval facilities at Pearl Harbor were relatively undefended. Almost the entire Pacific Fleet was moored around Ford Island in the harbor, and hundreds of airplanes were squeezed onto adjacent airfields. To the Japanese, Pearl Harbor was an irresistible target.
The Japanese plan was simple: Destroy the Pacific Fleet. That way, the Americans would not be able to fight back as Japan’s armed forces spread across the South Pacific. On December 7, after months of planning and practice, the Japanese launched their attack.

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Government-Backed Green Energy Goes Bust

By Ira Stoll  |  reason.com  |  December 1, 2014

The recent Chapter 7 bankruptcy and liquidation filing of the Toledo, Ohio-based solar-panel manufacturer Xunlight Corp. has attracted barely any national attention.

Maybe it’s gotten to the point—after Solyndra, Evergreen, Abound, and Satcon—that the failure of another government-backed alternative energy company is a dog-bites man story. It’d be newsworthy if any of them actually ever succeeded.

But it’s worth pausing for an autopsy and retrospective on Xunlight, because it’s a great (or terrible, depending on how you look at it) example of how government at all levels—state and federal—and in both parties—Republican and Democrat —wastes taxpayer money by subsidizing politically connected businesses.

The stereotype is of the Washington, D.C. Democrats shoveling stimulus money into solar energy firms. And indeed there were plenty of Democrats involved with Xunlight.

According to the Toledo Blade, one of the few press outlets following the story, “In 2010, the company received $34.5 million in tax credits as part of the stimulus bill. U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D., Toledo) helped secure nearly $3 million in federal earmarks for the company. The company received a $3 million grant from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a more than $4 million loan from the state, and more than $2 million in state and local tax credits.”

But it wasn’t only Democrats who wanted to use the power and dollars of government to give Xunlight a boost. Senator Portman of Ohio, the perennial vice-presidential hopeful who was director of the Office of Management and Budget in George W. Bush’s administration, issued a press release touting legislation that he said would “would boost Toledo’s growing leadership in green industries and initiatives. The opportunities that could emerge would complement the efforts of existing companies in the region’s rapidly maturing solar industry. These include Xunlight Corp., whose innovative solar panel technologies are powering the first totally solar-powered billboard in New York’s Times Square.” 


Wednesday, November 26, 2014

20 Tips From Grandma That Will Make You More Successful

By Carina Sitkus  |  Business Insider  |  November 25, 2014

Grandma is wise, and sometimes you just need to listen to her advice to feel a little bit better about yourself and your life.
For today, I will be your grandma since your real one likely isn't blogging.

Grandma says:

1. Always keep a carton of orange juice in the fridge. Nothing is better for quenching your thirst or fending off a tickle in your throat before it becomes a full-blown cold.
2. Rest. It can wait, whatever “it” is.
3. Don’t hit the snooze button. You will feel sh---- all day. Just wake up. Yes, grandmas say “sh-----.”
4. Get rid of things you don’t use. When your space is clean, your mind is clear.
5. Work out. Or at least take a walk everyday if you can. There is nothing better for your mental health.
6. Don’t stop when you have momentum. Ernest Hemingway famously stopped writing as soon as he knew what would happen next in his stories. Don’t do that. You’re not Ernest Hemingway. Get done what you can now. Take advantage of the movement. Tomorrow you may just want to sit in bed, eat Doritos, or make a cat video.

The Unifying Leader

By David Brooks  |  New York Times  |  November 24, 2014

Over the past two weeks, President Obama and Republicans in Congress have taken their conflicts to another level. I’m not here to apportion blame, but it would be nice if, in the future, we evaluated presidential candidates on the basis of whether they are skilled at the art of collaboration.

When you look at other sectors of society, you see leaders who are geniuses at this. You can spot the collaborative leader because he’s rejected the heroic, solitary model of leadership. He doesn’t try to dominate his organization as its all-seeing visionary, leading idea generator and controlling intelligence.

Instead, he sees himself as a stage setter, as a person who makes it possible for the creativity in his organization to play itself out. The collaborative leader lessens the power distance between himself and everybody else. He believes that problems are too complex for one brain, but if he can create the right context and nudge a group process along, the team will come up with solutions.

Collaborative political leaders would look very different than the ones we’re used to. In the first place, they would do what they could to create a culture of cooperation, not competition. They’d evoke our shared national consciousness more than our partisan consciousness. They’d take the political people out of the policy meetings. Except in high campaign season, they’d reduce the moronically partisan tit-for-tat, which is the pointless fare of daily press briefings.

Second, a collaborative president would draw up what Jeffrey Walker, vice chairman of the MDG Health Alliance and co-author of “The Generosity Network,” calls Key Influencer Maps. This leader would acknowledge that we live in a system in which a proliferating number of groups have veto power over legislation. He would gather influencers into informal policy-making teams as each initiative was executed.

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Dollar-Cost Averaging: The Easiest Way to Invest More Safely and Cheaply

By Matthew Frankel  |  The Motley Fool  |  November 19, 2014

Dollar-cost averaging is essentially an investment strategy that allows you to build your portfolio over time by purchasing a set dollar amount in stocks at regular intervals, rather than purchasing your holdings all at once at a single price. That way, you'll buy more when the stock is cheap and less when it is expensive.
Over the long run, dollar-cost averaging works in your favor by lowering per-share cost of your investments, which can make a big difference in your returns.
For example, let's say I have $3,000 to invest, and I want to buy a certain stock that's trading for $25 per share. Instead of buying $3,000 worth of shares immediately, I invest $1,000 per month for three months.
My first $1,000 is invested when the share price is $25, so I buy 40 shares. If the share price drops to $20 the following month, my next $1,000 buys 50 more shares. If the stock has a great month after that and rises to $30, I only buy another 33 shares for my last $1,000. At the end of the process I own 123 shares of the company.
Here is the most important point: Even though the stock traded for an average price of $25 during the three months ($20, $25, and $30), my average cost per share is just $24.33, as I bought the most shares at the lower prices.

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Obama’s flip-flop on using executive action on illegal immigration

By Glenn Kessler  |  The Washington Post  |  November 18, 2014


“Well, actually, my position hasn’t changed.”
–President Obama, news conference at conclusion of G20 summit, Brisbane, Australia, Nov. 16, 2014
Politicians generally hate to say they have changed their minds about something. With President Obama poised to take executive action to address immigration, perhaps as early as this week, he was challenged by a reporter to explain why he believed he could take this action now, after years of saying his hands were tied. The president responded with a Pinocchio-laden straw man, saying that the questions had a distinct focus: “their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress.”
But as we shall see, the questions actually specifically addressed the sorts of actions that he is contemplating now.
There is precedence for such a shift. In 2011, the president said he could not take action to help “dreamers’—immigrants aged 30 and younger whose parents had brought them to this country when they were children– from being deported. But then in 2012, he halted deportations and allowed them to apply for temporary work permits.

Univision Town Hall, March 28, 2011: ‘The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws.’

Question: Mr. President, my question will be as follows: With an executive order, could you be able to stop deportations of the students? And if that’s so, that links to another of the questions that we have received through univision.com. We have received hundreds, thousand, all related to immigration and the students. Kay Tomar  through Univision.com told us — I’m reading — “What if at least you grant temporary protective status, TPS, to undocumented students? If the answer is yes, when? And if no, why not?”

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.
Obama: Well, first of all, temporary protective status historically has been used for special circumstances where you have immigrants to this country who are fleeing persecution in their countries, or there is some emergency situation in their native land that required them to come to the United States. So it would not be appropriate to use that just for a particular group that came here primarily, for example, because they were looking for economic opportunity.
There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.

The Net Neutrality Debate Explained

By Andrew Lumby  |  The Fiscal Times  |  November 16, 2014

The term “net neutrality” has been posted, Tweeted, Facebooked, blogged, and discussed in almost every possible news outlet. Yet if you were to ask a random set of people on the street what exactly the term means, you’d likely get a cobbled-together explanation obscured by murky metaphors.
Part of the reason for this, as is the case with lots of jargon (like “Quantitative Easing”), is its technicality, which makes it difficult to describe in your average news segment without resorting to clumsy metaphor. But the main reason is just the fact that it’s so damn boring.

I mean, look, I love technology, from its glitzy consumer-focused virtual storefronts to its seedy underbelly of weirdos and hackers. And yet, somehow, whenever I read something that mentions things like “paid prioritization” and “Title II legislation,” my eyes can’t help but go all glassy. Even when some of my tech-ier friends try to discuss it with me, it’s a topic that’s always underlined with a brand of dramatic we’re-all-doomed cynicism that I find nauseating.

“These monopolistic cable companies will literally destroy the Internet,” they’ll say, their eyes brimming with fear and paranoia. Then later, erupting in anger, they’ll slam a fist on their coffee table — laden with Coca-Coca cans, their new Apple iPhone, and a bag of Doritos — and proclaim: “Everyone’s bought and sold. I can’t stand corporations being involved in everything I do!”

But I digress. Let me stick with trying to iron out the details of net neutrality, for both my edification and yours:

What Is Net Neutrality Anyway?
Net neutrality is, at its core, the concept that every piece of information on the public Internet should be as accessible as any other. More specifically, it means that the access to this information should not be in any way stifled by your Internet service provider (ISP). This includes “bandwidth throttling,” the practice of slowing down content delivery, which several broadband providers have done in the past with cloud-based providers such as Netflix.


Sunday, November 16, 2014

AT&T ends tracking of customers by "supercookie"

By Elizabeth Weiss  |  USA Today  |  November 15, 2014


AT&T has ended a controversial program that used hidden "super cookies" to track smart phone users as they surfed the web.

The program added a hidden and undeletable tracking number into all the Web traffic on a users' cell phone.

The news site ProPublic reported Friday that AT&T had ended the practice.

Verizon Wireless, the country's largest mobile firm, said Friday it still uses this type of tracking. There has been no evidence that Sprint and T-Mobile have used such codes.

Verizon, AT&T tracking their users with ‘supercookies’

By Craig Timberg  |  Washington Post  |  November 3, 2014

Verizon and AT&T have been quietly tracking the Internet activity of more than 100 million cellular customers with what critics have dubbed “supercookies” — markers so powerful that it’s difficult for even savvy users to escape them.
The technology has allowed the companies to monitor which sites their customers visit, cataloging their tastes and interests. Consumers cannot erase these supercookies or evade them by using browser settings, such as the “private” or “incognito” modes that are popular among users wary of corporate or government surveillance.
Verizon and AT&T say they have taken steps to alert their customers to the tracking and to protect customer privacy as the companies develop programs intended to help advertisers hone their pitches based on individual Internet behavior. But as word has spread about the supercookies in recent days, privacy advocates have reacted with alarm, saying the tracking could expose user Internet behavior to a wide range of outsiders — including intelligence services — and may also violate federal telecommunications and wiretapping laws.
One civil liberties group, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says it has raised its concerns with the Federal Communications Commission and is contemplating formal legal action to block Verizon. AT&T’s program is not as advanced and, according to the company, is still in testing.

Welcome Back to America, Mr. President

By Robert Charles  |  American Thinker  |  November 12, 2014

So, the Republicans win big across the United States – regaining control of the U.S. Senate, adding seats in the U.S. House, capturing new governorships, preserving old ones, and winning countless (or at least uncounted) dog-catcher posts. Why? Because the nation finally realized (as many polls confirm) that “the country is on the wrong track,” and properly blamed the first uncompromisingly liberal president from leading us down this dead-end alley.

Now comes President Obama’s November 5th press conference. Members of both parties, and even the White House Press Corps, scratch their heads. As if living in some alternate universe, the president seems to run away from the referendum on himself, rejecting the national repudiation as a misunderstanding, indicating his message never got out, blaming everyone except himself.

More than this, he remains locked on the failed track that brought him -- and us -- to this bizarre impasse in national policy -- instead of recognizing that Americans do not want higher taxes, a weak defense, more federal control over their lives, higher healthcare premiums and reduced coverage, and lack of accountability from the Department of Veterans Affairs to the Internal Revenue Service, from the State Department to the Pentagon, from the NSA to the DOJ to the EPA, he just plowed on as if no one had corrected him.

Instead of recognizing the public’s revulsion from high-handed executive orders, open borders and the cheapening of American residency and citizenship, indifference to drug crime and racial division, he doubled, then tripled down. His press conference and all utterances since have made him seem not just tone deaf, but pathologically deaf. So much so that, far from expecting compromise, many officials in and out of government, along with Americans from across the country, party lines, and professions, wonder what is going on.


ObamaCare Lies and Democracy

By Jonathan S. Tobin  |  Commentary Magazine  |  November 11, 2014

In a video that has gone viral over the last few days, one of the principal architects of ObamaCare confessed at an academic conference that the law was drafted in such a manner as to deliberately deceive both the Congressional Budget Office and the American people. MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber tried to walk back his October 2013 remarks in a softball interview with Ronan Farrow on MSNBC this afternoon yet there’s no denying that his embarrassing moment of candor in which he said the bill passed because of a “lack of transparency” and the “stupidity of the American voter” will influence the ongoing debate about the law. But while the mainstream media has spent the years since the misnamed Affordable Care Act passed mocking its conservative opponents, this ought to be a moment when Americans take stock of the corrosive impact on our democracy of the cynicism to which the president and his congressional allies sank during the campaign for his signature health-care legislation.
In a sense, Gruber’s statement doesn’t exactly break new ground. After all, if then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could say that ObamaCare had to be passed before its contents could be understood, it’s not much of a revelation if one of its designers fesses up about the deceptions involved in the project and the breathtaking cynicism of its Democratic backers. Like the president’s repeated lies about consumers being able to keep their existing health insurance and doctors if they liked them, Gruber’s confession makes it clear that deception was at the heart of the debate on a law that overturned a key sector of the American economy.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

The 12 Most Popular Free Online Courses For Professionals

By Maggie Zhang  |  Business Insider  |  July 8, 2014

Want to gain an edge in your working life? Learning new skills online doesn't cost you anything but time.
Based on data from online education platform Coursera, we compiled a list of the 12 most popular, free online classes for working professionals.
Here they are, ranked by popularity:

1. Wesleyan University's "Social Psychology"

Coursera's most popular course offers an introduction to classic and contemporary social psychology, covering topics such as decision making, persuasion, group behavior, personal attraction, and factors that promote health and well-being.
Starts July 14

2. University of Maryland's "Programming Mobile Applications for Android Handheld Systems"

This is an introduction to the design and implementation of applications for handheld systems, such as smartphones and tablets, running the Android platform. It is part of a larger sequence of specialization courses called Mobile Cloud Computing with Android.
Starts September 26

3. Duke University's "Think Again: How to Reason and Argue"

This course will teach you how to reason well. You will learn how to understand and assess arguments by other people and how to construct persuasive arguments of your own.
Starts August 25

These 3 Charts Show The Amazing Power Of Compound Interest

By Libby Kane  |  Business Insider  |  July 8, 2014

One of the biggest financial advantages out there is something anyone can access by opening a simple retirement account: compound interest.
Retirement accounts such as 401(k)s and Roth IRAs aren't just savings accounts — they're actively invested, and therefore have the potential to make the most of this benefit.
As Business Insider's Sam Ro explains, "Compound interest occurs when the interest that accrues to an amount of money in turn accrues interest itself."
So why is that so important?
The charts below will show you the incredible impact compound interest has on your savings and why starting to save in your 20s is one of the best things you can do.

25 Things You Should Do Before You Die

By Richard Feloni  |  Business Insider  |  July 11, 2014

It can be easy to get caught up in the routine of life, doing whatever it takes to get from one point to the next, without doing much that's exciting or enriching.
Some Quora users offer a few ideas to break the routine in their responses to the thread: "What is something every person should experience at least once in a lifetime?
The responses range from trying an extreme sport to discovering something life-changing about yourself.
We've summarized some of the best answers below. 

1. Live somewhere vastly different from your hometown.

Living in an unfamiliar setting among people with a different worldview from yours can help you become more self-reliant. —Deepthi Amarasuriya

2. Go out of your way to help a stranger.

Put in time and effort to help someone you have "absolutely no social, moral, or legal obligation to help," and don't expect anything in return. —Kent Fung

3. Learn how to appreciate being alone.

Avoid feeling lonely on your own by truly becoming comfortable with yourself. —Barbara Rose

4. Travel without being a tourist.

Go on a trip without feeling the need to take nonstop photos of the biggest tourist attractions. Instead of being a "tourist," be a "traveler" and try to get an idea of how the locals live. —Arya Raje

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Obamacare Architect, Jonathan Gruber, Admits To Deceiving Americans To Pass Law

By Vanessa Righeimer  |  OpposingViews.com  |  November 10, 2014

What does it take to convince a nation to pass a law such as the Affordable Care Act? According to MIT health economist and Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber, a “lack of transparency” and the “stupidity of an American voter.”

In a 2013 clip that has been recently brought into focus, Gruber speaks candidly on Obamacare and the role he played. An expert in making predictions on how new laws will play out, specifically in healthcare, Gruber was contacted by the White House in 2008 when it was in need of a consultant, according to the New York Times. It is then that Gruber was able to tell them that, based off his research, they would have to require everyone to buy insurance in order for health care reform to work.

In the recording posted by American Commitment, Gruber emphasizes the importance of a lack of transparency, commenting: “If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

Gruber's comments blatantly make it known that law makers feared that voters would not pass the bill if they knew their money would be going towards other patients and not directly and positively impacting themselves. Because of this fear, they left out key details, which might have swayed the votes.

Obamacare has statistically been shown not to be favored amongst most Americans, and this recent clip might have added an even more negative opinion of the Affordable Care Act. According to a report released in September by the Kaiser Health Tracking Poll, 47 percent of Americans viewed Obamacare unfavorably. In light of this new information, it will be interesting to see how the Democrats will react, especially leading up to the 2016 election.

Monday, November 10, 2014

10 Financial Terms Every Investor Should Know

By Geoff Williams  |  U.S. News & World Report  |  September 5, 2014

For a novice, it can be intimidating to invest money. There's the anxiety that comes with taking risks and knowing you may not get all of your money back. But arguably, what's even more intimidating is the investing jargon. There are a lot of buzzwords financial advisors and veteran investors use, like expense ratio and asset allocation, that are important for average investors to understand, yet the language can be a barrier.
So if you'd like to invest but feel like you're visiting another country where your money may not be welcome, maybe you just need to learn the language first. This isn't a comprehensive list by any means, but understanding these terms may make you feel more confident about investing.
Asset allocation. This is just a fancy phrase for your investment strategy. There are three general categories where you're going to put your money: cash, bonds and stocks, says Kemberley Washington, an accounting professor at Dillard University in New Orleans and a certified public accountant. "Cash," she says, "is the least risky and would provide the least amount of return … Bonds are generally riskier than cash but less risky than stocks."
Cash. Since Washington brought it up, let's define cash. It's money – you know that – but if a financial advisor suggests you move some of your portfolio into cash, Washington says he or she is probably referring to certificates of deposit, also known as CDs, Treasury bills or money market accounts.

90-year-old among first charged under Fort Lauderdale's strict rules against feeding homeless

By FoxNews.com  |  November 4, 2014

Fort Lauderdale police say Arnold Abbott violated a new city law, but the 90-year-old homeless advocate says his only crime was to “love thy neighbor.”
Abbott was charged Sunday along with two local pastors with violating the city’s new ordinance that effectively bans giving out food in public. He faces 60 days in jail and a $500 fine, and he intends to get cited again Wednesday night, when he sets out to feed some of the Florida city’s estimated 10,000 homeless on a public beach.
“I know that I will be arrested again, and I am prepared for that,” Abbott said by phone from his office at Love Thy Neighbor, Inc., a nonprofit he established in honor of his wife, Maureen, after her death in a car accident 23 years ago. “I am my brother’s keeper, and what they are doing is just heartless.”

Thursday, October 30, 2014

ACLU: FBI Seeks 'Green Light' to Hack Into Any Computer Worldwide

By Melanie Batley  |  NewsMax  |  October 30, 2014



The FBI is petitioning the government for new powers to hack into computers for surveillance in what is being described by civil liberties groups as "extremely invasive" and unconstitutional, The Guardian reported.

The intelligence agency is proposing a relaxation to the rules governing the scope of court warrants for searches. The regulations currently require warrants to be tied to specific locations where suspected criminal activity is occurring. The proposed change to the rules would enable the FBI to obtain warrants that would apply at any location in the world, giving the agency remote access to tap into computers whose location is being concealed by technology.

"This is a giant step forward for the FBI's operational capabilities, without any consideration of the policy implications. To be seeking these powers at a time of heightened international concern about U.S. surveillance is an especially brazen and potentially dangerous move," Ahmed Ghappour, an expert in computer law at the University of California Hastings College of Law, told the Guardian.

A federal judicial committee will meet on Nov. 5 to consider the issue. Technology experts and privacy campaigners are expected to raise concerns at the hearing. Some argue that the proposed changes would violate First Amendment rights to privacy and Fourth Amendment rights related to searches and seizures.

If the rule changes are approved, the FBI would have the power to employ a new range of investigative techniques on computers in America and around the world for any criminal investigation, according to the Guardian. It would also be the first time that courts would be asked to issue warrants to conduct searches outside the U.S.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

7 things the middle class can't afford anymore

By Erika Rawes  |  The Cheat Sheet  |  October 25, 2014

During debates and speeches, politicians often bring up the financial burden that's placed on the middle class. We talk about the middle class as though they are this singular entity, who used to thrive until they underwent persecution by the evil 1%. But, realistically speaking, the middle class and the 99% are not really synonymous. So, who are the middle class?

In its discussion of historical middle class societies, The Economist reports, "Their members are neither rich nor poor but somewhere in-between. . . . 'Middle-class' describes an income category but also a set of attitudes . . . An essential characteristic is the possession of a reasonable amount of discretionary income. Middle-class people do not live from hand to mouth, job to job, season to season, as the poor do."

Some argue that the most sensible income amount to attach to the middle class would be the median household income, of around $54,000. Perhaps, anyone who earns between the 25th percentile and 75th percentile is a member of the middle class.

Diana Farrell, once Deputy Director of America's National Economic Council, told The Economist she thinks a middle class income begins at the point where a person (or family) has one-third of their income left over for discretionary purposes after they've provided themselves with food and shelter. In other words, someone who earns $3,000 per month would have $1,000 left after they've paid their mortgage or rent, utilities, and grocery bills.

Though there is some debate over the exact income a middle class household brings in, we do have an idea of who the middle class are — most working class people. Today's bourgeoisie is composed of laborers and skilled workers, white collar and blue collar workers, many of whom face financial challenges. Bill Maher reminded us a few months back that 50 years ago, the largest employer was General Motors, where workers earned an equivalent of $50 per hour (in today's money). Today, the largest employer — Wal-Mart — pays around $8 per hour.

The middle class has certainly changed. We've ranked a list of things the middle class can no longer really afford. We're not talking about lavish luxuries, like private jets and yachts. The items on this list are a bit more basic, and some of them are even necessities. The ranking of this list is based on affordability and necessity. Therefore, items that are necessity ranked higher, as did items that a larger percentage of people have trouble paying for.

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Cook County ballot box tries to cast GOP votes for Democrats

By Paul Miller  |  IllinoisWatchdog.org  |  October 22, 2014

CHICAGO — Early Voting in Illinois got off to its typical start Monday, as votes being cast for Republican candidates were transformed into votes for Democrats.
Republican state representative candidate Jim Moynihan went to vote Monday at the Schaumburg Public Library.
“I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” Moynihan said. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”
The conservative website Illinois Review reported that “While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race.
Moynihan offered this gracious lesson to his followers on Twitter: “Be careful when you vote in Illinois. Make sure you take the time to check your votes before submitting.”
Cook County Clerk’s Office Deputy Communications Director Jim Scalzitti, told Illinois Watchdog, the machine was taken out of service and tested.
“This was a calibration error of the touch-screen on the machine,” Scalzitti said. “When Mr. Moynihan used the touch-screen, it improperly assigned his votes due to improper calibration.”
Scalzitti stressed that at no time were Moynihan’s votes actually registered, and that voters are always asked to make sure the votes they cast are correct before they are counted. Scalzitti praised Moynihan for checking his ballot and alerting the election judge of the machine’s failure.