AMEX Twitter: Wholefoods 10 off 75, McD $5/$5, Dell 100/600, Bestbuy $10/100, VirginUS 10%, H&M 10/50, Gulf Oil 5/25 etc:
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, March 07, 2012
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Is Solar Power Too Risky a Bet for the Federal Government? - The Bay Citizen
Why does the government keeping trying to pick winners and always seem to waste my tax dollars on losers ? Seems they subsidize projects that would not make economic sense and be funded by investors using their own money.
Monday, September 05, 2011
San Diego Chargers Luxury Homes, San Diego Pro Athlete Home Pro Athlete Real Estate | Antigen Realty
Nice house - I guess I should have played football !
Saturday, September 03, 2011
Friday, September 02, 2011
PRECIOUS METALS: Gold Jumps Near Record On US Jobs Report - WSJ.com
The U.S. economy didn't add jobs for the first time in almost a year in August, according to a closely watched report from the Labor Department, the latest sign that growth in the world's largest economy is stumbling. Nonfarm payrolls were unchanged last month, as a decline in government sector employment cancelled out a modest gain in private-sector jobs. Economists had expected an increase of 80,000 jobs on the month.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Obama Spent $535 Million on Solyndra Solar Energy Firm in 2010; Firm Went Bankrupt Today; Pricetag $486,363 Per Job Saved for 18 Months
I AGREE: "if companies cannot survive without government subsidies then they should not survive at all."
The federal government should get out of the business of picking technology and "green" winners. Government backing of alternate energy companies has been nothing short of disastrous.
A solar energy firm touted by the administration in 2010 as a as a "gleaming example of green technology" today announced bankruptcy. 11,000+ employees will be fired.
Please consider Solyndra Filing a Disaster for Obama
The "seen" math is simple enough. $535 million divided by 11,000 is roughly $486,363 per job saved, now job lost.
That is just the "seen" consequence. The "unseen" consequences are not directly calculable but by giving Solyndra money, other companies that the free market would have preferred have been harmed, perhaps permanently harmed.
Although Obama clearly rushed this pathetic company for a nice photo-op, this is not a simple case of the president failing to do his homework as the GAO implies. The government has no business promoting this kind of crap in the first place.
In this case, it is rather amazing how fast Solyndra wasted over half a billion US taxpayer dollars, so fast I suspect fraud.
In general, if companies cannot survive without government subsidies then they should not survive at all.
Solyndra could not survive even with massive government subsidies. The same happened to many ethanol companies as well. Speaking of which, taxpayers pay though the nose for ethanol subsidies and tariffs both at the pump and in the price of corn, in turn, the price of beef as well.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
A solar energy firm touted by the administration in 2010 as a as a "gleaming example of green technology" today announced bankruptcy. 11,000+ employees will be fired.
Please consider Solyndra Filing a Disaster for Obama
President Obama faces political catastrophe in the form of Solyndra -- a San Francisco Bay area solar company that he touted as a gleaming example of green technology. It has announced it will declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy. More than 1,100 people will lose their jobs.Seen and Unseen
During a visit to the Fremont facility in spring of 2010, the President said the factory "is just a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world. "
It's not his statements the administration will regret; it's the loan guarantees. The President was celebrating $535 million in federal promises from the Department of Energy to the solar startup. The administration didn't do its due diligence, says the Government Accountability Office. "There's a consequence if you don't follow a rigorous process that's transparent," Franklin Rusco of GAO told the website iWatch News.
The "seen" math is simple enough. $535 million divided by 11,000 is roughly $486,363 per job saved, now job lost.
That is just the "seen" consequence. The "unseen" consequences are not directly calculable but by giving Solyndra money, other companies that the free market would have preferred have been harmed, perhaps permanently harmed.
Although Obama clearly rushed this pathetic company for a nice photo-op, this is not a simple case of the president failing to do his homework as the GAO implies. The government has no business promoting this kind of crap in the first place.
In this case, it is rather amazing how fast Solyndra wasted over half a billion US taxpayer dollars, so fast I suspect fraud.
In general, if companies cannot survive without government subsidies then they should not survive at all.
Solyndra could not survive even with massive government subsidies. The same happened to many ethanol companies as well. Speaking of which, taxpayers pay though the nose for ethanol subsidies and tariffs both at the pump and in the price of corn, in turn, the price of beef as well.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction.
Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.
Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Monday, August 22, 2011
Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?
Decision fatigue helps explain why ordinarily sensible people get angry at colleagues and families, splurge on clothes, buy junk food at the supermarket and can’t resist the dealer’s offer to rustproof their new car. No matter how rational and high-minded you try to be, you can’t make decision after decision without paying a biological price. It’s different from ordinary physical fatigue — you’re not consciously aware of being tired — but you’re low on mental energy. The more choices you make throughout the day, the harder each one becomes for your brain, and eventually it looks for shortcuts, usually in either of two very different ways. One shortcut is to become reckless: to act impulsively instead of expending the energy to first think through the consequences. (Sure, tweet that photo! What could go wrong?) The other shortcut is the ultimate energy saver: do nothing. Instead of agonizing over decisions, avoid any choice. Ducking a decision often creates bigger problems in the long run, but for the moment, it eases the mental strain.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
So. Calif. grocery workers reject contract deal - BusinessWeek
Here we go again !
Makes no sense in current economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)