JRBLOG.typepad.com

Historical Photos Prove ATMs Tried To Take Over The World...

 

A Rational Evaluation Of Statistics: It's About Time Wage And Gender Were Correctly Viewed...And By A Woman At That!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

• OPINION
• APRIL 12, 2011

There Is No Male-Female Wage Gap

A study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30 found that women earned 8% more than men.

By CARRIE LUKAS

Tuesday is Equal Pay Day—so dubbed by the National Committee for Pay Equity, which represents feminist groups including the National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority, the National Council of Women's Organizations and others. The day falls on April 12 because, according to feminist logic, women have to work that far into a calendar year before they earn what men already earned the year before.

In years past, feminist leaders marked the occasion by rallying outside the U.S. Capitol to decry the pernicious wage gap and call for government action to address systematic discrimination against women. This year will be relatively quiet. Perhaps feminists feel awkward protesting a liberal-dominated government—or perhaps they know that the recent economic downturn has exposed as ridiculous their claims that our economy is ruled by a sexist patriarchy.

The unemployment rate is consistently higher among men than among women. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 9.3% of men over the age of 16 are currently out of work. The figure for women is 8.3%. Unemployment fell for both sexes over the past year, but labor force participation (the percentage of working age people employed) also dropped. The participation rate fell more among men (to 70.4% today from 71.4% in March 2010) than women (to 58.3% from 58.8%). That means much of the improvement in unemployment numbers comes from discouraged workers—particularly male ones—giving up their job searches entirely.

Men have been hit harder by this recession because they tend to work in fields like construction, manufacturing and trucking, which are disproportionately affected by bad economic conditions. Women cluster in more insulated occupations, such as teaching, health care and service industries.

Yet if you can accept that the job choices of men and women lead to different unemployment rates, then you shouldn't be surprised by other differences—like differences in average pay.

View Full Image

Corbis

Feminist hand-wringing about the wage gap relies on the assumption that the differences in average earnings stem from discrimination. Thus the mantra that women make only 77% of what men earn for equal work. But even a cursory review of the data proves this assumption false.

The Department of Labor's Time Use survey shows that full-time working women spend an average of 8.01 hours per day on the job, compared to 8.75 hours for full-time working men. One would expect that someone who works 9% more would also earn more. This one fact alone accounts for more than a third of the wage gap.

Choice of occupation also plays an important role in earnings. While feminists suggest that women are coerced into lower-paying job sectors, most women know that something else is often at work. Women gravitate toward jobs with fewer risks, more comfortable conditions, regular hours, more personal fulfillment and greater flexibility. Simply put, many women—not all, but enough to have a big impact on the statistics—are willing to trade higher pay for other desirable job characteristics.

Men, by contrast, often take on jobs that involve physical labor, outdoor work, overnight shifts and dangerous conditions (which is also why men suffer the overwhelming majority of injuries and deaths at the workplace). They put up with these unpleasant factors so that they can earn more.

Recent studies have shown that the wage gap shrinks—or even reverses—when relevant factors are taken into account and comparisons are made between men and women in similar circumstances. In a 2010 study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30, the research firm Reach Advisors found that women earned an average of 8% more than their male counterparts. Given that women are outpacing men in educational attainment, and that our economy is increasingly geared toward knowledge-based jobs, it makes sense that women's earnings are going up compared to men's.

Should we celebrate the closing of the wage gap? Certainly it's good news that women are increasingly productive workers, but women whose husbands and sons are out of work or under-employed are likely to have a different perspective. After all, many American women wish they could work less, and that they weren't the primary earners for their families.

Few Americans see the economy as a battle between the sexes. They want opportunity to abound so that men and women can find satisfying work situations that meet their unique needs. That—not a day dedicated to manufactured feminist grievances—would be something to celebrate.

Ms. Lukas is executive director of the Independent Women's Forum.

MERS and SEC Violations?

Everyone is griping about foreclosures.  Others are trying to refinance at a time when even lowering a loan 2 points is a bad idea considering the fees charged by the lender (better to make bi-weekly payment of half the regular monthly payment and avoid the burden of compounding debt) but only now has the mortgage registration clearinghouse MERS come under fire as it brokers loans and essentially misrepresents that it has the right to foreclose as well as misrepresents the loans as good securities.  

Those affected and fighting the litigious fight might consider naming MERS as a codefendant in the fraud against the courts in their foreclosure fight.

SEC violations?  If I represent and sell certain instruments I must have commodity brokerage licensing.  MERS has functioned autonomous of this requirement.  

In the meantime, when responding to a foreclosure claim, state that the mortgage company (if it is different than the one you financed through is ex parte therefore having no right against you in a legal action.

MERS and the SEC?  Start writing Congress.  Unfortunately, the republican party seems to be in the pocket of banks and finance and Wall Street.  So, the fight is up to you.

How War Spending Affects Governments Other Than Our Own...

 

State Income Taxes and Roth Conversions...

State Income Taxes and Roth Conversions

By Robert L. Beane

 

Roth Conversion season is in full swing.  Tax free income can become a lifetime income stream for you and for your heirs.  Starting this year, anyone can convert their qualified retirement funds to a Roth (previously restricted to incomes of $100,000 or less).  Higher income clients with larger nest eggs are showing interest in these conversions.  Large amounts of tax dollars are at stake.

 

State and federal income taxes will need to be paid on these conversions when they are made.  Not all states have a state income tax.  Some states tax retirement income.  Most follow a format that begins with the federal income tax calculation.  Some states then allow a limited adjustment to income for a portion of the taxable retirement moneys.  Some allow a small credit against your state income tax for your taxable retirement funds.

 

For example, John Doe has $3.8 million in qualified, pretax retirement funds and lives in California.  A Roth Conversion could cost approximately $375,000 in state income taxes.  However, if John lived in Florida, he would not have the state income tax cost.

 

Maybe John could move to Florida!  This is more difficult than it may appear as establishing your domicile in a new state is not clear cut.  The domicile question is determined by a comprehensive review of all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the move.  State income tax authorities have a tremendous amount of tax revenue at stake when considering the issue of residency at the time of the Roth Conversion.  Expect the state income tax auditors to be aggressive in this area.  Therefore, an attorney must be consulted when considering a change in domicile.  The only safe way to do this is to completely commit to this move in every way.  Your attorney will show you what you need to do.

 

So, John moves to Florida and buys a house in what many consider to be a great time to buy.  John lives here for two years to take advantage of the tax free gain (hopefully) on the sale of his primary residence.  He may decide at that point that the move to Florida wasn’t what he hoped it would be and decides to move again.  If all is handled properly, John would save $375,000 in state income taxes and may have earned a tax free gain on the sale of his primary residence.

 

We can show you how to do the Roth Conversion.  We have great strategies designed to preserve principal, provide lifetime income, and promote wealth transfer.

 

We are here to help you, your friends and your business associates.  Let’s work together to maximize wealth and the good things in life that come along with it.

 

Robert L. Beane

Financial Strategist

robert@thestricklandfinancialgroup.com

For The Love Of Money...

For the Benefit Of …

 By Robert L. Beane

 

Your financial and estate plan may include “stretching” some or all of your IRA for the benefit of your heirs.  You are undoubtedly hearing about or have some knowledge of the Roth IRA Conversion opportunity offered to those who have Traditional IRA accounts (or other types of “qualified funds”).  Whether you are currently maximizing your annual gift exclusion or have decided to make all of your gifts after you are gone, consider a new idea for the strategic gifting of your retirement funds.

 

The Traditional IRA in your financial plan is an income and estate tax lightning rod.  Either you or your heirs will eventually pay the taxes at your or their highest marginal income tax rate!  If “stretched” to the heirs, I’m sure they’ll be happy for the additional money.  How much sweeter would it be if they could receive those funds income tax free!

 

Convert the Traditional IRA to a Roth now and pay the income taxes.  You are, in effect, paying the income taxes for your heirs as the Roth can be stretched to the heirs income tax free!   It has no gift tax effect on your current gift giving strategy.  In 2010, your income tax liability on the conversion can be paid in tax years 2011 and 2012 if that works better in your income tax strategy. 

 

Consider using a fixed indexed annuity or a life insurance contract.  The fixed indexed annuity comes with no downside risk guarantees, options for interest accumulation reviewable on an annual basis, and some offer bonuses along with other benefits that you may find useful and interesting.  If you are reasonably healthy, a life insurance contract can be an efficient method of wealth transfer that can increase the benefit provided.  These insurance contracts are often protected from the claims of creditors as are retirement funds but the amount may vary from state to state so make sure you review this with your financial advisor (an important concept that should not be overlooked).

 

Your ACTION PLAN:

 

1.      Review your plan for post-death transfers of your qualified money.

2.      Involve your financial advisor in determining the income tax impact of a Roth Conversion.

3.      Discuss the use of a variety of financial products for the investment including fixed indexed annuities and life insurance.

4.      Involve your financial advisor and legal representative regarding the effect of the stretch on intended and unintended heirs while reviewing your entire estate plan (an annual review is not too often as “life happens”, right?).

 

We can show you how to do the Roth Conversion.  We have great strategies designed to preserve principal, provide lifetime income, and promote wealth transfer.

We are here to help you, your friends and your business associates.  Let’s work together to maximize wealth and the good things in life that come along with it.

  

Robert L. Beane

Financial Strategist

robert@thestricklandfinancialgroup.com

The Strickland Financial Group, Inc.

CIT Bankruptcy Last Fall Included $2.33 Billion In TARP Funds. No Public Outcry As Yet...

After going through a 30 day bankruptcy, CIT went back on the market at $30 a share (up from $1 a share pre bankruptcy.)

Change In The Way Stocks Are Priced Allow Big Boys To Elbow The Average Trader

There was a blurb on the news about a movement to change the way stocks are priced.  More to the point, (no pun intended) stocks will be valued in even smaller increments such as a tenth of a point.  

This minimal DATUM along with microsecond ETF software will allow those with billions to invest the ability to jump in and out before the average trader (Joe Scottrade as the Wall Street Journal and others have referred to them as) will be two days late and two dollars short all the time.  Such a move will give more control to brokerage houses thus commanding more fees should small investors want a more competitive edge at a price and the next time another dump occurs, the big boys will be out way ahead of anyone else. The only problem, similar to what we saw in 1987 is that computer sale parameters will mindless trigger sales and actually create more stock market crunches.

Financial Advice? or "How I Made Some Quick Money With Little Down..."

Circa August '09 I caught an article in the Wall Street Journal on Lehman Brothers and a lawsuit against Barclays in London that allegedly got a sweet deal by promising Lehman execs jobs.  So, I dropped $500 into the stock and six weeks later just before it went to trial, the stock went from 5 cents a share to about 28 cents.  So I sold half of the 10,000 shares and pocketed a little money.  The bankruptcy judge at the hearing in October would not go with depositions and rescheduled the hearing for March, 2010.  So at 8 cents, perhaps I can pick up a few extra dollars.  Here is a recent legal blog and a link to the fraud attorneys site for more reading...

DECEMBER 14, 2009 BY SHEPHERD SMITH & EDWARDS

Lehman Brothers Sues Barclays for Billions Over Windfall Profit From Asset Sale Transaction

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. has filed an adversary complaint against Barclays Capital Inc. requesting the return of billions of dollars in extra profit that it says the latter made when buying Lehman’s North American brokerage business last year. Lehman says that Barclays failed to disclose that it received an illegal payment of at least $5 billion as part of the asset sale transaction. Barclays says that the asset sale terms were delineated in documents that Lehman executives signed.

Lehman is alleging breach of contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and several violations of the US bankruptcy code. Lehman is seeking punitive damages, compensatory damages, post-judgment interest, return of excess assets, avoidance of excess asset transfers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and, pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 502(d), disallowance of Barclays claims against Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

According to the adversary complaint, Lehman and Barclays executives made an agreement that Barclays would buy Lehman’s US brokerage business, key real estate pieces, and related support systems. A bankruptcy court approved the deal.

Now, however, Lehman claims that the Sale Transaction were secretly put together in a manner that gave Barclays a huge, immediate windfall profit: Specifically, an undisclosed $5 billion off the book value of assets that were moved to Barclays and later, the undisclosed transfers of billions of dollars in ‘additional value.’

Barclays, however, says that the $5 billion “discount” is in fact the difference between the $45 billion it paid and the $49.7 billion nominal value of Lehman collateral that Barclays assumed and paid for the Lehman assets.

Related Web Resource:
Read the Lehman Brothers Lawsuit

Wow, dirty deals still being done dirt cheap... No wonder the financial world is in such a mess.

Unless You Buy Now...

Instant purchase or Instant Finance:  How Saving To Buy With Cash Kills The Electronics Industry.

In days past, a household had a phone.  Yes, one phone, and one TV.  As time went on, perhaps a spare TV and yes, yet another phone (free of charge when the phone company no longer had its monopoly.)

Now, everyone owns a piece of your.   And since the advent of the VHS VCR we have been swept up as a culture in the tidal pool of electronic control.  From VHS to DVD.  Oh, now its Blue Ray, your old player is no longer compatible.  Then from CRT to Flat Panel.  Oh, now its going to be LCD TV.  

If you have ever bought electronics, you may have learned a lesson by buying that extended service contract.  I witnessed a man at the now defunct Circuit City returning an eMachine for the third time.  Per their service, three times and they exchange the product.  However, the eMachine that was purchased four months earlier was no longer carried, so the current low end model was carried to the cash register.  With the massive amount of depreciation that electronics carry, the price of the newer unit with more capability was less than the purchase price of the older less functional device.  End result? He got a cash refund in addition to a newer computer.  

The electronics industry will struggle as credit remains crunched.  Waiting to save will result in the unit becoming new junk long before you show up to purchase it.  

The Paradox of Thrift rules.