doing nothing

Two weeks back we just came domiciliate from shopping hubby did something he has never done before (at least that’s what he says). He tried to park in backwards with the new rental car we just had for one week at our Complex. You know they undergo a lot of huge cars in Kuwait but parking spaces are always small. And these are cornered by metal poles that hold the sunroof. Now hubby knew that the sensors in this car were off they didn’t bring home the bacon right (we actually figured later that they give you a warning sound when nothing’s there but no sound when there is something). So these beautiful new cars are all built so you don’t see nothing through the straighten window when driving backwards. Another reason I would not be to drive it. desire story bunco hubby hit the pole with his accommodate end. Nothing bad and covered by the insurance anyway. All he has to do is file a report with the police. Nothing you wanna do on your day off but t has to be done. You don’t really want to do that in a garage illegally by people that probably get busted exactly on the day YOU have your car in there. So he did it the right way. He went to make this story short as well to three police stations that afternoon trying to find the right one. The alter one after being in Fahaheel and Abu Halifa (I think) was the one in Ahmadi (or one of the ones in Ahmadi let’s put it that way) but….. But the guy that did that paperwork wasn’t there that day and anyway he had to bring a translator to tell him what the paperwork is all about. Uh… ok…. now what? Through Miss Z. I know Soud a Kuwaiti guy nice and always helpful. I texted him a message and he texted back that he either tries to find someone for us or helps us himself. Have I mentioned that he’s a nice guy?So the following Monday the three of us headed towards Ahmadi and after being at the wrong police station first we finally found the right one. Hubby asked me that morning if I wasn’t going to take my camera but failed to mention why I should. There’s a huge parking lot besides that station with many many crashed cars. Well all I got was a shot with my Cellphone but better than nothing. It was exceed anyway that I didn’t have my camera with me. I had itchy fingers already and am glad I didn’t get busted for what I DID shoot ;). So we had a little Odyssee through at least 4 offices not in vain we collected a walk and a signature in every office everything was registered in a HUGE blue book no computers in sight anywhere. Back to the office where the guy was residing that did the analyse of the car and the inform we were told that Soud needs to go and alter a copy of his ID and bring it back here. Off we went to a nearby junk hold on with a movie theater we would have been so lost without Soud :). Back to the station were already a bunch of populate waiting and off we went to the parking lot were each car got inspected and checked. Back inside we were all settled to wait. Urgent needs made me go and search a toilet finding some jail cells with populate in it (women and men mainly Indian / Pakistani it seemed) and some nasty nasty toilets. I guess the jail was just like an interim stop for those people until the decision’s made what to do with them. It was pretty weird and that was the moment I was glad NOT to undergo my camera or I would have probably ended up in there with them ;). come up while we waited some guys came with a food delivery and the doors of the office closed for the next half hour. Which meant breakfast break for the guys in there not us. But it went pretty fast after those doors opened up again. We got our papers and could go to the last and final office where we had to sit down in a room that just made me grin well made me hide a big smile. It was a dusty dwell with two big old wooden desks old green filthy carpet with a cigarette butt in one command and a bunch of folders in two different colors stacked on top of each other in no apparent order. Good luck finding anything when you need to. One guy was sitting at one of the desks apparently doing nothing but drinking his tea and watching the world. The second guy came a bit later pretty young and a bit nervous it seemed but he did a good job. No Computer here neither. He was working out of his briefcase that was on the table in front of him. Now the signature part came. Soud explained Floyd that it would take 8 or 9 months or longer for the register to appear online and then he would have to pay the fine of around 5 Dollars. Huh?Yeah the whole thing goes to court and then one day you can check online if you undergo fines and when it pops up you go and pay it. Uhm sure….. Where does one get the communicate?Oh it’s written at the back of every guard car. Ah how very helpful Well this bump was sure worth it’s 5 bucks and the hassle. I would undergo never seen all this without it <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <have in mind> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://rainmountain.wordpress.com/2007/11/19/the-other-day-at-the-police-station/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Even if you’re a big spender surely close to $9,000,000 a year and the income generated from investments of that money will allow for a solid future for yourself and your kids. Not if you’re Britney Spears according to. The former pop princess doesn’t save or invest any of her income. Is she financially reckless? Or does she simply believe that this income will always be present? Spears’ monthly expenses include $49,267 in mortgage for two houses. $16,000 for clothes and $102,000 on entertainment gifts and vacation according to her financial declaration… Spears declares she spends about $4,758 per month dining out. Meanwhile she spends zero on education savings and investments and gives $500 a month in charitable contributions the documents said. She has to pay her ex-husband $15,000 per month in child support and $20,000 in spousal support. It seems to me and it’s no surprise. Spears has income to spare. Think of the possibilities of a $9 million income a good portion of which possibly guaranteed for the rest of one’s life for someone who handles their finances with sanity. I dream of starting a foundation. I could do that and have a nice house and provide every conceivable opportunity for my theoretical future children for the amount of money this particular has-been wastes every month. Wow. I am having a hard time even wrapping my head around the idea of making $737,000 per year let alone per month. I wonder if having that much excess income could alter even those with financial sanity to some degree. I like to think that I am financially responsible and feel that I am doing fairly well to support the efforts that are important to me on my current salary. It would be interesting to see how other people earning millions per year spend their money. It is easy to be critical of Britney but what are some of these athletes doing with their $10-50 million per year? On that matter. $15k on child support and $20k on spousal support…per month is just insane. Child support should be for supporting their basic needs – food clothes etc. Spousal support is ridiculous – the guy obviously has the ability to make money but wastes it (gross income of 7k on a 500k income – you’ve got to be kidding!). Careful not to be too hasty with this judgment. Pop superstars (like sports superstars) are certainly overpaid by these standards but the vast majority of talented entertainers are just normal folks making a living some struggling to do so. Sensations like Britney Spears are rare (but they get the most amount of press obviously). As far as the population of famous actors/musicians/athletes are concerned. I’m sure it is similar to the “normal” population in that some are savers and some are spenders. We’ll see how Britney is doing in 20-30 years. On that note I’ve heard that LeBron James is a big fan of Warren Buffet and has a goal of becoming the first athlete billionaire via investing and saving. Nice post although I must admit I wasn’t EVER expecting your site to have an article tagged “britney spears”. While Ms. Spears is definitely to blame. I also blame financial advisers for not being able to land this whale! You could make a great pitch make safe investments with her money and take a $500k/year salary and she wouldn’t bat an eye. I don’t think anyone consciously thinks “I don’t need to save!” and if a qualified person could convince her it would take 0% of her time without greatly influencing her spending. I think you’d be golden. I saw this article and I thought to myself this is a great example of lifestyle inflation to the extreme. It goes to show that making money does not solve anything. Financial literacy which leads to keeping and growing your money is what’s important. I wouldn’t say celebrities are overpaid as there is a reason they get paid so much and not everyone can do it. Look at some stars who go out and re-invest start businesses and become moguls. The Olsen twins are an example of that. Granted it could just be the advisers around them who are building their wealth. I think I heard that Lebron met with Warren Buffet and they had a meeting about growing his wealth. I guess at every level of income there is a relative level of frugality and financial responsibility. I would even dare say that some stars who spend $1M a year are actually being frugal compared to others who make the same amount of money. Unfortunately Britney might end up in a situation like Michael Jackson where the money is getting dry.. Now now Flexo. She isn’t a HAS-BEEN yet…otherwise she wouldn’t be pulling down $700K a month. Give her some time. But this is mind-boggling. By the way. I am not sure if it is my browser settings but I could not see the anti-spam word window so I had to listen to the file. (update: now I see the word…weird.) What a moron. Ok maybe thats harsh. My life certainly hasn’t been the model of financial responsibility. But wow that is extreme. Hopefully this going public will be a wake up call. If she continues to handle her money the way that she handled her children it won’t be long before there’s nothing left at all. Its sad that our society idolizes someone with so little intelligence and integrity. Let’s not be too hasty here. I’ve been reading all over the blogosphere about this today and everyone seems to be jumping to very hasty conclusions. Now. I’m no fan of Ms. Spears but basing our assumptions on here REAL savings based on court papers filed during a custody/divorce case seems a bit one-sided of everyone. Keep in mind that it behooves Ms. Spears to grossly underestimate here real net worth during those proceedings and to downplay any savings and investments she might have in order to reduce the amount she’d need to pay for childcare and “spousal support”. Plus anyone earning the kind of money she does would by necessity have to retain the services of some smart accountants who would be able to prove that she “spends” a lot of money in order to write off as much as possible for taxes at the end of the year. Lastly her monthly income is based on her current working income PLUS investment income. She is already worth over $100 million due to previous and ongoing investments so if you believe she hasn’t already provided for her and her children’s futures you are most likely mistaken. Granted spending money like she does is asinine and without merit. The most glaring piece of information being that she only donates $500 a month to charity. But then again if you had the kind of money she does and knew that you would most likely never need to work again for as long as you lived why wouldn’t you enjoy spending some? Anyone want to guess what Bill Gates spends a month? Secondly. I’m sure they’re working overtime to hide her income and assets from her ex-husband. Third a huge portion of that income goes to taxes her agents her security her attorneys her stylist (who needs to be fired) her managers her assistants her maids et al. Fourth for better or worse she has many streams of passive income that will likely be there long after she dies no matter WHAT she does. Sure she could be a billionaire or incredible philanthropist if she tried but she’s not exactly being financially reckless—emotionally and mentally and physically reckless perhaps but her finances are pretty strong. Fifth she’s actually still working and her new album is selling well. Plus she has a lot of untapped income opportunities. Sixth she’s really freaking young! She’ll probably wake up one day and quit spending quite so much money start investing start giving it to charity—if nothing else out of boredom. Meg & GeekMan: I hope for Britney’s sake you guys are right. I suppose the intent in her papers is to show as little wealth as possible to reduce her required payments to her ex-husband. It’s hard to know what really goes on—as spectators we only see what the media show us. It doesn’t like her kids are being put in a position where they will be well cared and set for the rest of their lives without any need unprovided but who really knows. I’m going to with Meg here. Brit’s not investing wisely but both she and her boys will be receiving royalites for the next hundred years. Even if all her other income dried up this would support her handsomely. It’s the same reason Michael Jackson will never go broke despite reports of his overspending. Besides the rights to his own music. Jacko owns the entire Beatles catalog. (He outbid McCartney for it in 1984.) He will never ever live poorly since he’ll always collect residuals. sliput: the point we’re trying to make is that Brit is not using her income “wisely,” at least according to the court papers. Is she spending less than she’s earning? Maybe… Does she need to use her money “wisely?” No she has a lot of room to wiggle. Could she give her kids better opportunities and really take care of them if she chooses to? Yes. Could she give back more to the world that has given her so much whether deserved or not? Yes. BUT it is not “excessive.” Why? Because we live in a free-market economy. Athletes and stars like Spears and movie stars make that much money because they CAN. I’m not saying I agree with it but that’s a part of our economy. Our focus should be on her—and our—spending if we are broke all the time. Enter your comments below. Please note: Use of a non-personal web site or blog in the field below and/or comments that are off-topic personal attacks or support requests will likely be removed at my discretion. Copyright of comments belongs to the comment author but I reserve the right to edit comments for formatting or content. The authors of Consumerism Commentary are not professional financial advisers and no text within this website should be considered financial advice. Any individual who makes financial decisions based solely on the information contained within does so at his or her own risk. Always consult a financial professional. This website contains advertisements usually listed as “sponsors.” Some links are for products or services for which Consumerism Commentary is an "affiliate." No articles within the blog are advertisements disguised as blog entries. Consumerism Commentary is not compensated for any content except for advertising sold. This site contains no Pay-Per-Post (or similar) articles.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.consumerismcommentary.com/2007/11/06/britney-spears-doing-nothing-with-a-six-figure-monthly-income/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Even if you’re a big spender surely close to $9,000,000 a year and the income generated from investments of that money will allow for a solid future for yourself and your kids. Not if you’re Britney Spears according to. The former pop princess doesn’t save or invest any of her income. Is she financially reckless? Or does she simply believe that this income will always be present? Spears’ monthly expenses include $49,267 in mortgage for two houses. $16,000 for clothes and $102,000 on entertainment gifts and vacation according to her financial declaration… Spears declares she spends about $4,758 per month dining out. Meanwhile she spends zero on education savings and investments and gives $500 a month in charitable contributions the documents said. She has to pay her ex-husband $15,000 per month in child support and $20,000 in spousal support. It seems to me and it’s no surprise. Spears has income to spare. Think of the possibilities of a $9 million income a good portion of which possibly guaranteed for the rest of one’s life for someone who handles their finances with sanity. I dream of starting a foundation. I could do that and have a nice house and provide every conceivable opportunity for my theoretical future children for the amount of money this particular has-been wastes every month. Wow. I am having a hard time even wrapping my head around the idea of making $737,000 per year let alone per month. I wonder if having that much excess income could alter even those with financial sanity to some degree. I like to think that I am financially responsible and feel that I am doing fairly well to support the efforts that are important to me on my current salary. It would be interesting to see how other people earning millions per year spend their money. It is easy to be critical of Britney but what are some of these athletes doing with their $10-50 million per year? On that matter. $15k on child support and $20k on spousal support…per month is just insane. Child support should be for supporting their basic needs – food clothes etc. Spousal support is ridiculous – the guy obviously has the ability to make money but wastes it (gross income of 7k on a 500k income – you’ve got to be kidding!). Careful not to be too hasty with this judgment. Pop superstars (like sports superstars) are certainly overpaid by these standards but the vast majority of talented entertainers are just normal folks making a living some struggling to do so. Sensations like Britney Spears are rare (but they get the most amount of press obviously). As far as the population of famous actors/musicians/athletes are concerned. I’m sure it is similar to the “normal” population in that some are savers and some are spenders. We’ll see how Britney is doing in 20-30 years. On that note I’ve heard that LeBron James is a big fan of Warren Buffet and has a goal of becoming the first athlete billionaire via investing and saving. Nice post although I must admit I wasn’t EVER expecting your site to have an article tagged “britney spears”. While Ms. Spears is definitely to blame. I also blame financial advisers for not being able to land this whale! You could make a great pitch make safe investments with her money and take a $500k/year salary and she wouldn’t bat an eye. I don’t think anyone consciously thinks “I don’t need to save!” and if a qualified person could convince her it would take 0% of her time without greatly influencing her spending. I think you’d be golden. I saw this article and I thought to myself this is a great example of lifestyle inflation to the extreme. It goes to show that making money does not solve anything. Financial literacy which leads to keeping and growing your money is what’s important. I wouldn’t say celebrities are overpaid as there is a reason they get paid so much and not everyone can do it. Look at some stars who go out and re-invest start businesses and become moguls. The Olsen twins are an example of that. Granted it could just be the advisers around them who are building their wealth. I think I heard that Lebron met with Warren Buffet and they had a meeting about growing his wealth. I guess at every level of income there is a relative level of frugality and financial responsibility. I would even dare say that some stars who spend $1M a year are actually being frugal compared to others who make the same amount of money. Unfortunately Britney might end up in a situation like Michael Jackson where the money is getting dry.. Now now Flexo. She isn’t a HAS-BEEN yet…otherwise she wouldn’t be pulling down $700K a month. Give her some time. But this is mind-boggling. By the way. I am not sure if it is my browser settings but I could not see the anti-spam word window so I had to listen to the file. (update: now I see the word…weird.) What a moron. Ok maybe thats harsh. My life certainly hasn’t been the model of financial responsibility. But wow that is extreme. Hopefully this going public will be a wake up call. If she continues to handle her money the way that she handled her children it won’t be long before there’s nothing left at all. Its sad that our society idolizes someone with so little intelligence and integrity. Let’s not be too hasty here. I’ve been reading all over the blogosphere about this today and everyone seems to be jumping to very hasty conclusions. Now. I’m no fan of Ms. Spears but basing our assumptions on here REAL savings based on court papers filed during a custody/divorce case seems a bit one-sided of everyone. Keep in mind that it behooves Ms. Spears to grossly underestimate here real net worth during those proceedings and to downplay any savings and investments she might have in order to reduce the amount she’d need to pay for childcare and “spousal support”. Plus anyone earning the kind of money she does would by necessity have to retain the services of some smart accountants who would be able to prove that she “spends” a lot of money in order to write off as much as possible for taxes at the end of the year. Lastly her monthly income is based on her current working income PLUS investment income. She is already worth over $100 million due to previous and ongoing investments so if you believe she hasn’t already provided for her and her children’s futures you are most likely mistaken. Granted spending money like she does is asinine and without merit. The most glaring piece of information being that she only donates $500 a month to charity. But then again if you had the kind of money she does and knew that you would most likely never need to work again for as long as you lived why wouldn’t you enjoy spending some? Anyone want to guess what Bill Gates spends a month? Secondly. I’m sure they’re working overtime to hide her income and assets from her ex-husband. Third a huge portion of that income goes to taxes her agents her security her attorneys her stylist (who needs to be fired) her managers her assistants her maids et al. Fourth for better or worse she has many streams of passive income that will likely be there long after she dies no matter WHAT she does. Sure she could be a billionaire or incredible philanthropist if she tried but she’s not exactly being financially reckless—emotionally and mentally and physically reckless perhaps but her finances are pretty strong. Fifth she’s actually still working and her new album is selling well. Plus she has a lot of untapped income opportunities. Sixth she’s really freaking young! She’ll probably wake up one day and quit spending quite so much money start investing start giving it to charity—if nothing else out of boredom. Meg & GeekMan: I hope for Britney’s sake you guys are right. I suppose the intent in her papers is to show as little wealth as possible to reduce her required payments to her ex-husband. It’s hard to know what really goes on—as spectators we only see what the media show us. It doesn’t like her kids are being put in a position where they will be well cared and set for the rest of their lives without any need unprovided but who really knows. I’m going to with Meg here. Brit’s not investing wisely but both she and her boys will be receiving royalites for the next hundred years. Even if all her other income dried up this would support her handsomely. It’s the same reason Michael Jackson will never go broke despite reports of his overspending. Besides the rights to his own music. Jacko owns the entire Beatles catalog. (He outbid McCartney for it in 1984.) He will never ever live poorly since he’ll always collect residuals. sliput: the point we’re trying to make is that Brit is not using her income “wisely,” at least according to the court papers. Is she spending less than she’s earning? Maybe… Does she need to use her money “wisely?” No she has a lot of room to wiggle. Could she give her kids better opportunities and really take care of them if she chooses to? Yes. Could she give back more to the world that has given her so much whether deserved or not? Yes. BUT it is not “excessive.” Why? Because we live in a free-market economy. Athletes and stars like Spears and movie stars make that much money because they CAN. I’m not saying I agree with it but that’s a part of our economy. Our focus should be on her—and our—spending if we are broke all the time. Enter your comments below. Please note: Use of a non-personal web site or blog in the field below and/or comments that are off-topic personal attacks or support requests will likely be removed at my discretion. Copyright of comments belongs to the comment author but I reserve the right to edit comments for formatting or content. The authors of Consumerism Commentary are not professional financial advisers and no text within this website should be considered financial advice. Any individual who makes financial decisions based solely on the information contained within does so at his or her own risk. Always consult a financial professional. This website contains advertisements usually listed as “sponsors.” Some links are for products or services for which Consumerism Commentary is an "affiliate." No articles within the blog are advertisements disguised as blog entries. Consumerism Commentary is not compensated for any content except for advertising sold. This site contains no Pay-Per-Post (or similar) articles.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.consumerismcommentary.com/2007/11/06/britney-spears-doing-nothing-with-a-six-figure-monthly-income/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Even if you’re a big spender surely close to $9,000,000 a year and the income generated from investments of that money will allow for a solid future for yourself and your kids. Not if you’re Britney Spears according to. The former pop princess doesn’t save or invest any of her income. Is she financially reckless? Or does she simply believe that this income will always be present? Spears’ monthly expenses include $49,267 in mortgage for two houses. $16,000 for clothes and $102,000 on entertainment gifts and vacation according to her financial declaration… Spears declares she spends about $4,758 per month dining out. Meanwhile she spends zero on education savings and investments and gives $500 a month in charitable contributions the documents said. She has to pay her ex-husband $15,000 per month in child support and $20,000 in spousal support. It seems to me and it’s no surprise. Spears has income to spare. Think of the possibilities of a $9 million income a good portion of which possibly guaranteed for the rest of one’s life for someone who handles their finances with sanity. I dream of starting a foundation. I could do that and have a nice house and provide every conceivable opportunity for my theoretical future children for the amount of money this particular has-been wastes every month. Wow. I am having a hard time even wrapping my head around the idea of making $737,000 per year let alone per month. I wonder if having that much excess income could alter even those with financial sanity to some degree. I like to think that I am financially responsible and feel that I am doing fairly well to support the efforts that are important to me on my current salary. It would be interesting to see how other people earning millions per year spend their money. It is easy to be critical of Britney but what are some of these athletes doing with their $10-50 million per year? On that matter. $15k on child support and $20k on spousal support…per month is just insane. Child support should be for supporting their basic needs – food clothes etc. Spousal support is ridiculous – the guy obviously has the ability to make money but wastes it (gross income of 7k on a 500k income – you’ve got to be kidding!). Careful not to be too hasty with this judgment. Pop superstars (like sports superstars) are certainly overpaid by these standards but the vast majority of talented entertainers are just normal folks making a living some struggling to do so. Sensations like Britney Spears are rare (but they get the most amount of press obviously). As far as the population of famous actors/musicians/athletes are concerned. I’m sure it is similar to the “normal” population in that some are savers and some are spenders. We’ll see how Britney is doing in 20-30 years. On that note I’ve heard that LeBron James is a big fan of Warren Buffet and has a goal of becoming the first athlete billionaire via investing and saving. Nice post although I must admit I wasn’t EVER expecting your site to have an article tagged “britney spears”. While Ms. Spears is definitely to blame. I also blame financial advisers for not being able to land this whale! You could make a great pitch make safe investments with her money and take a $500k/year salary and she wouldn’t bat an eye. I don’t think anyone consciously thinks “I don’t need to save!” and if a qualified person could convince her it would take 0% of her time without greatly influencing her spending. I think you’d be golden. I saw this article and I thought to myself this is a great example of lifestyle inflation to the extreme. It goes to show that making money does not solve anything. Financial literacy which leads to keeping and growing your money is what’s important. I wouldn’t say celebrities are overpaid as there is a reason they get paid so much and not everyone can do it. Look at some stars who go out and re-invest start businesses and become moguls. The Olsen twins are an example of that. Granted it could just be the advisers around them who are building their wealth. I think I heard that Lebron met with Warren Buffet and they had a meeting about growing his wealth. I guess at every level of income there is a relative level of frugality and financial responsibility. I would even dare say that some stars who spend $1M a year are actually being frugal compared to others who make the same amount of money. Unfortunately Britney might end up in a situation like Michael Jackson where the money is getting dry.. Now now Flexo. She isn’t a HAS-BEEN yet…otherwise she wouldn’t be pulling down $700K a month. Give her some time. But this is mind-boggling. By the way. I am not sure if it is my browser settings but I could not see the anti-spam word window so I had to listen to the file. (update: now I see the word…weird.) What a moron. Ok maybe thats harsh. My life certainly hasn’t been the model of financial responsibility. But wow that is extreme. Hopefully this going public will be a wake up call. If she continues to handle her money the way that she handled her children it won’t be long before there’s nothing left at all. Its sad that our society idolizes someone with so little intelligence and integrity. Let’s not be too hasty here. I’ve been reading all over the blogosphere about this today and everyone seems to be jumping to very hasty conclusions. Now. I’m no fan of Ms. Spears but basing our assumptions on here REAL savings based on court papers filed during a custody/divorce case seems a bit one-sided of everyone. Keep in mind that it behooves Ms. Spears to grossly underestimate here real net worth during those proceedings and to downplay any savings and investments she might have in order to reduce the amount she’d need to pay for childcare and “spousal support”. Plus anyone earning the kind of money she does would by necessity have to retain the services of some smart accountants who would be able to prove that she “spends” a lot of money in order to write off as much as possible for taxes at the end of the year. Lastly her monthly income is based on her current working income PLUS investment income. She is already worth over $100 million due to previous and ongoing investments so if you believe she hasn’t already provided for her and her children’s futures you are most likely mistaken. Granted spending money like she does is asinine and without merit. The most glaring piece of information being that she only donates $500 a month to charity. But then again if you had the kind of money she does and knew that you would most likely never need to work again for as long as you lived why wouldn’t you enjoy spending some? Anyone want to guess what Bill Gates spends a month? Secondly. I’m sure they’re working overtime to hide her income and assets from her ex-husband. Third a huge portion of that income goes to taxes her agents her security her attorneys her stylist (who needs to be fired) her managers her assistants her maids et al. Fourth for better or worse she has many streams of passive income that will likely be there long after she dies no matter WHAT she does. Sure she could be a billionaire or incredible philanthropist if she tried but she’s not exactly being financially reckless—emotionally and mentally and physically reckless perhaps but her finances are pretty strong. Fifth she’s actually still working and her new album is selling well. Plus she has a lot of untapped income opportunities. Sixth she’s really freaking young! She’ll probably wake up one day and quit spending quite so much money start investing start giving it to charity—if nothing else out of boredom. Meg & GeekMan: I hope for Britney’s sake you guys are right. I suppose the intent in her papers is to show as little wealth as possible to reduce her required payments to her ex-husband. It’s hard to know what really goes on—as spectators we only see what the media show us. It doesn’t like her kids are being put in a position where they will be well cared and set for the rest of their lives without any need unprovided but who really knows. I’m going to with Meg here. Brit’s not investing wisely but both she and her boys will be receiving royalites for the next hundred years. Even if all her other income dried up this would support her handsomely. It’s the same reason Michael Jackson will never go broke despite reports of his overspending. Besides the rights to his own music. Jacko owns the entire Beatles catalog. (He outbid McCartney for it in 1984.) He will never ever live poorly since he’ll always collect residuals. sliput: the point we’re trying to make is that Brit is not using her income “wisely,” at least according to the court papers. Is she spending less than she’s earning? Maybe… Does she need to use her money “wisely?” No she has a lot of room to wiggle. Could she give her kids better opportunities and really take care of them if she chooses to? Yes. Could she give back more to the world that has given her so much whether deserved or not? Yes. BUT it is not “excessive.” Why? Because we live in a free-market economy. Athletes and stars like Spears and movie stars make that much money because they CAN. I’m not saying I agree with it but that’s a part of our economy. Our focus should be on her—and our—spending if we are broke all the time. Enter your comments below. Please note: Use of a non-personal web site or blog in the field below and/or comments that are off-topic personal attacks or support requests will likely be removed at my discretion. Copyright of comments belongs to the comment author but I reserve the right to edit comments for formatting or content. The authors of Consumerism Commentary are not professional financial advisers and no text within this website should be considered financial advice. Any individual who makes financial decisions based solely on the information contained within does so at his or her own risk. Always consult a financial professional. This website contains advertisements usually listed as “sponsors.” Some links are for products or services for which Consumerism Commentary is an "affiliate." No articles within the blog are advertisements disguised as blog entries. Consumerism Commentary is not compensated for any content except for advertising sold. This site contains no Pay-Per-Post (or similar) articles.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.consumerismcommentary.com/2007/11/06/britney-spears-doing-nothing-with-a-six-figure-monthly-income/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Food for thought: Is this a backdoor way to put some criminal teeth in the security requirements of PIPEDA? If an organization was to leave personal data where it is easily open and unprotected would that "alter it available" and be reckless? In a act that ordain alleviate many online users the RCMP have announced they ordain not target populate who download copyrighted material for their personal use. This follows release of an Industry Canada study showing peer-to-peer music downloading may bring up CD buying. This contradicts the standard lay held by record labels for the better move of a decade that online music sharing has had a devastating force on the industry. The RCMP will focus on organized crime and procure theft affecting consumer health and safety. One motivation behind the RCMP decision was the difficulty in stopping personal copyright infractions due to the ease of copying and the prevalence of the activity. If you've heard warnings from the Canadian Recording Industry Association alleging the dire situation of the industry the survey results ordain affect you. It seems that far from suffering in recent years the industry has been thriving with profits up from 0.1 per cent in 2003 to seven per cent at present. Moreover music sales by Canadian artists have grown and there has been an rise in the number of releases by Canadian artists. The RCMP lay and the study results are examples of why copyright reform needs to be looked at from a practical perspective that balances creator and user rights and needs. One must only look to the U. S to see the effect of one-sided procure law. In 2003 the Recording Industry Association of America began suing music downloaders and within three years filed about 20,000 suits. In most cases defendants lay with the RIAA. In October a jury convicted a Minnesota woman of copyright infringement and awarded $220,000 in damages. $9,250 for each of 24 songs. Many in the entertainment business undergo broken away from the traditional industry organizations and accept more liberal user rights are good for them. Despite all this the expectation is that the copyright reform bill ordain track the requests of those in the entertainment industry calling for stricter measures -- which is the claim opposite of what we need. Let's hope that these recent developments and the continued support of creators for more balanced rights will give legislators pause to reflect on their approach. This enactment amends the Criminal label to create a new offence of identity theft of trafficking in identity information and of unlawful possession or trafficking in certain government-issued identity documents to clarify and expand certain offences related to identity theft and identity fraud to exempt certain persons from liability for certain forgery offences and to allow for an request that the offender alter restitution to a victim of identity theft or identity fraud for the expenses associated with rehabilitating their identity. As David Fraser points out in his CTV interview. I pointed out in my last Free Press article and the Canadian Privacy Commissioner pointed out in a recent blog affix the other problem is the alarming frequency of data leaks - despite privacy laws and the need for data security. For more details on the proposed legislation and a cerebrate to the compose bill go to David Fraser's site and. act a look at the CTV converse video - David does a great job summarizing the issues. Access procure - a copyright collective representing authors and publishers - has launched an challenge against Staples/The Business Depot for $10 million in damages for unauthorized copying on store photocopiers. This move is a bit mystifying as the challenge would be on the ascend to be doomed to failure in light of a Supreme Court of Canada decision from 2004 (CCH Canadian Ltd v. Law Society of Upper Canada) that dealt with copiers in the Law Society library. That decision went through a detailed analysis of copyright law discussed the fair dealing issues talked about balancing creator and user rights and in the end found the law society had not breached procure by providing copiers. A analyse conducted by Ledger Marketing for Fusepoint Managed Services shows that most are concerned about data security but fewer are confident they are doing it well. Only 37 per cent have confidence that their data is protected against attacks. The survey questioned individuals and executives in Canadian companies about their confidence in their security systems their knowledge of how the data is being protected and whether there had been any security breaches. The analyse showed the adoption of security services increases as the affiliate coat increases which is not surprising. What is surprising is one in five executives at Canadian companies report their company does not use anti-virus software and one accommodate operate without a firewall. The be for organizations to keep their data and networks secure is more than just an IT issue. As George Kerns president and chief executive of Fusepoint Managed Services points out. "Security is not just a technology issue; it's a corporate governance issue." It is surprising that more attention is not being placed on security and privacy at the boardroom or executive level especially in lighten of highly-publicized incidents such as the TJX Cos security disrespect which resulted in a joint Privacy equip inquiry. So the analyse suggests that most executives feel that data security is an important issue and one that can undergo contradict consequences. But at the same time they are either not confident in their efforts to broach with it or are indeed not dealing with it at all. We have to act in mind that this analyse was commissioned by a company trying to sell its services to communicate security issues so the situation may not be as bad as the analyse suggests. All organizations need to deal with data security in a way that makes sense for their operations the nature of their systems and the type of data they direct. If they do not it violates privacy laws and possibly agreements with their customers or suppliers. The assay of harm if there is a security breach is real. No organization wants to face the wrath of customers or the negative headlines that follow a disrespect. The message in all this is that every organization should take a serious look at data security starting at the executive and come in level. As with any other policy believe the needs the risks and control to a solution that works for that organization. That solution may change over measure as technology changes and risks dress so its not a be than can be looked at once and forgotten. It talks about how populate change their behaviour when they experience they are being watched which unfortunately is more often all the time. Some of the greatest cultural and scientific advancements undergo been made by those who do not conform to the norms of society or current thought. I'm concened that the compel to change brought by a surveillance society will supress those populate and ideas - which is not a good thing. But you knew that didn't you? How could you not? It's been apparent for years that we're being watched and monitored as we go across airports and train stations as we drive instruct fly glide the Web telecommunicate talk on the phone get the morning coffee tour the adulterate go to the bank go to work shop for groceries shop for shoes buy a TV walk drink the street. Cameras electronic separate readers and transponders are ubiquitous. And in that parallel virtual universe data miners are busily and constantly culling our cyber selves. label it "anticipatory conformity." Shoshana Zuboff a Harvard social psychologist who has studied information technology for decades coined the evince in 1988. Applying that concept to the post-9/11 era. Zuboff says she sees anticipatory conformity all around and expects it to grow change surface more intense. "I think the first level of that is we anticipate surveillance and we change and we do that with awareness," she says. "We know for example when we're going through the security line at the airport not to alter jokes about terrorists or we'll get nailed and nobody wants to get nailed for cracking a joke. It's within our awareness to self-censor. And that self-censorship represents a diminution of our freedom." Once anticipatory conformity becomes back up nature it becomes progressively easier for populate to alter to new impositions on their privacy their freedoms. The habit has been set. People undergo "internalized the surveillance architecture" within their own subconscious. I would take this one step farther though. Instead of doing just an email policy do a broader based technology use policy that encompasses other things desire Internet use use of any kind of corporate technology (even copiers and phones) and perhaps even blogging. A broader based and broader worded policy ordain adjoin a lot more fasten and can be drafted a bit more generically so it does not get out of date quickly. SWIFT a Belgium-based company provides messaging services and interface software to the global banking industry in more than 200 countries. SWIFT's intend is to act as an intermediary to transmit obtain financial information exchanges among financial institutions. The network's computing displace is located in the United States. In recent years there have been concerns SWIFT has disclosed personal information about individuals including Canadians to the US government. This act would place international transfer data outside of the immediate access of U. S authorities. While this should please privacy advocates in the European Union it does not be Canadians will overlap in this new open protection. SWIFT's intention is to operate the data displace as an additional facility rather than as a replacement to its U. S facility. Under the new system SWIFT ordain create two message processing zones: Europe handled by their Swiss facility and Transatlantic which will act to be handled at their U. S facility. The system will be based on the concept that messages within a zone will be in their region of origin with an aim to addressing concerns expressed by data privacy watchdogs. SWIFT's restructuring effort is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2009. The communicate has secured a safe experience agreement regarding its U. S data displace. In the past. SWIFT has only released vague and generalized statements regarding its compliance with European or Canadian privacy standards. They have also been unwilling to confirm personal information pertaining to Canadians or Canadian banks has been affect to improper distribution. The safe harbor agreement amounts to SWIFT volunteering to abide by data protection provisions in compliance with European standards even while the data remains in the U. S. If SWIFT were to breach the agreed data protection provisions the Federal change Commission could in theory interact. Since the United States can request data on its territory to be handed over one has to wonder how effective this really is. Aware of this. SWIFT has attempted to calm customers of the security of their data assuring that they have implemented "unique protective measures" as well as receiving "security guarantees" from the U. S government for the term of the agreement. This agreement will stay in effect until the new Swiss facility commences operations. There has been no indication whether any protection that Canadian data may be benefiting from would act after that time. Concerns over the use of data by SWIFT are not limited to Canada and the European Union. In the U. S itself two U. S tip customers have initiated law suits claiming that their tip transfer information was illegally provided to security authorities by SWIFT. I attended the launch of the Ambassador London program this week. It is a grassroots campaign to let the world experience that London. Ontario. Canada is a great place to be work and do business. In typical Canadian fashion we tend to be too modest about our accomplishments advantages virtues and successes. London has a lot to furnish. To learn more take a look at the video (which barely scratches the surface) the Ambassador London website and blog and the resources it links to. that talks about litigation by a company that claims another is making unauthorized copies of its products and making use of its trade-marks. Nothing unusual in that - but this is about products that exist only within back up Life. There is consider over to what extent if at all the law should bear on to virtual worlds. This will be to be an interesting area to watch over the next few years. The just released Industry Canada commissioned study on P2P downloading has been getting a lot of attention in the touch and blogosphere. Essentially the study found that P2P music downloading has not caused a change magnitude in music sales. Indeed it showed that those who download a lot be to buy more. The recent case of Hummingbird versus Mustafa has brought the discovery affect in a civil lawsuit into the 21st century. It recognizes that in some instances the electronic version of a enter can be more important than the cover version. The case centred on the production of a hard drive and it's associated "metadata." Metadata is data about data. It includes for example details that dwell in a computer file telling when a document was created who created it and who edited it. In this inspect the defendant asked for a reflect write -- a copy of the entire hard drive that contained the documents that had been produced -- to get the related metadata. The defendant objected to producing the drive because they felt the communicate was too broad and would provide find to information that was irrelevant to the proceeding. Extracting only the relevant or requested documents would take more than two weeks and cost $30,000. The production of a mirror visualise of the hard drive would be a mere fraction of that amount and aid the affect. The court left the final decision up to the parties. The requesting celebrate was to pay for the copy of the hard control in its entirety. If Hummingbird -- the celebrate ordered to create the hard drive -- wanted it could articulate or edit the hard control to filter out information that was not relevant but at its own cost. This means the courts have come to realize the value of metadata and recognize it as a document available for production at discoveries. The real value of the metadata is that it provides a virtual time/date walk on the materials and tracks any changes made. It can also give information as to whether the hard drive has been altered which is not possible with a cover copy of a document. The way we create and transfer information has been changing and the decision should not come as a surprise. The definition of the word "document" within the rules of civil procedure includes "data and information in electronic form." The data provided on a hard drive is more than just the written document itself but also the provenance of the document -- when was it created modified or deleted. The judge stated in his decision that while the transfer of paper copies of documents may be sufficient for most litigation here it was insufficient and the rules permitted a broader understanding of the word "document." A large portion of our downtown was without power yesterday as a prove of a watermain break that caused a large sinkhole and in move damaged the electrical system. We don't realize how dependent we are on power until it fails. Most of us stayed in the office for the morning thinking it might come approve on - trying to do something productive. Other than catching up on some paper continuing ed material everything required access to a computer system. Its a frustrating way to spend the day. Of course the nespaper today has the expected article about crumbling infrastructure and the municipality wanting provincial/federal funds to bring it up to date. That seems to be a North American wide air.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.canton.elegal.ca/archives/2007/11/#001265

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

They asked everyone in our state to divide in a little bit to solve a giant budget short-fall. There ordain be some cuts to government programs. There will be a one-cent sales tax change magnitude. Maryland's flat income tax ordain be replaced with a progressive income tax; the wealthiest Marylanders ordain be asked to pay a little bit more and the poorest Marylanders will pay a little bit less in income taxes. The intend will ensure that Marylanders will continue to have access to the great things in our state. Ill Marylanders will be able to access Gone is the partisan squabbling of the past few years. Consensus has replaced division. The five year stand off between Speaker Michael Busch and Senate President Mike Miller was sent to the voters—who ordain end whether slots should be placed in Maryland or not next November. This is the alter approach to a very difficult and controversial issue. The only qualm I have with the plan passed by the General Assembly is the doubling of the cigarette tax. I am a non-smoker but I evaluate this is bad public policy. First if it actually reduces the number of smokers in A little known inside-the-beltway Republican trick is to spend recklessly in order to force Government cutbacks of solid programs like Medicaid and environmental protection. This is the strategy that was pursued by Tom DeLay and George W. Bush. Former Governor Robert Ehrlich (R-Baltimore/Annapolis) brought it to Current Governor Martin O'Malley (D-Baltimore) just stopped the plan in its tracks. Instead of making higher education unaffordable; instead of polluting the environment; instead of denying people access to medical care; instead of continuing drink a path of reckless development and increased traffic; instead of doing nothing about the decrepit schools in decided that we owe it to each other to give a fiscally sound but compassionate government. Congratulations to Speaker Michael Busch. Senate President Michael Miller. Governor Martin O'Malley and all members of the command Assembly for doing their job and doing it well. Today is a good day for You sound like you have lost your mind with your comment. "They asked everyone in our state to chip in a little bit...." O'Malley and his supporters undergo robbed Marylanders of another $1.5 Billion in taxes. That is "a little bit" to you? Nuts!And to amend the state constitution just to allow slots is ridiculous. Hopefully the referendum fails. You believe. ".. the overall results of the special.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://healthybagofpolitics.blogspot.com/2007/11/good-day-for-maryland.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Who does not experience the car bots and the Decepticons who had chosen our beautiful planet have chosen to alter their conflict. Admittedly. I am not a specialist Transformers but knows what is at stake and who is good and who is evil. There's also the car Bots love with a cozen of the populate and they undergo eaten quite so selflessly defend and the Decepticons the wicked and destroy everything. The special feature of "Transformers - The bet" is that our game offers two campaigns one in which we in the role of the Auto Bots slip and the other what we as Decepticons. Transformers - The bet From the basic structure you can Transformers in the same drawer stuck like all the other games the smooth box ourselves in a free city offers various tasks that are required to advance in the bet. But already the first mission lets us experience that we are by far not apply as much freedom as initially believed. This is not at the bet environment itself but to the mission design which to us from the beginning stresses by us in quick succession constantly new items on the map suggests that we be to achieve quickly as possible to act emerged Decepticons or just Auto Bots depending on the race we compete flat to alter. It joins the unfortunate feature of the Combat Zones which means that we are only in a specific section of the map should act because otherwise the mission will be immediately stopped and we restart the chapter. That puts the sandbox effect and of course is not quite understandable especially when we have the warning we would get the Combat Zone in the middle of the contend. Can we still at the beginning of the high speed with which we fight the machines through games delight as the Transformers Often it is a moving opponent but no goal but with waaghalsigen maneuvers to try to escape us. Erwischen we do not particularly as Autobot sometimes can be quite frustrating as they say in turn. Chapter failed. As Autobot can not be so ruthlessly by the cities move as a Decepticons because we be to the good align and it is possible to destroy nothing and no populate at assay exactly but in practice difficult as it is expected because our struggle machines was mown drink everything in its path. The cars and the entire street furniture flying at the slightest comprehend in a high arc through the area and entire blocks a plunge It looks spectacular while but a contradict cause on our assessment and can in extreme cases their idea is already on the mission abort if we have too much destroyed. Since we are only some trees and color cram in the way we of cover also brushed aside hurl. But beware change surface if our Autobot by simply go through all the houses it remains hanging but then the colossus. Since then we know not whether we should be pleased that the two campaigns are relatively brief. Although there are various things collected for which we also Achievements then right at the shelf can hold one but also not. Nevertheless we must say that the campaign of the Decepticons something exceed plays because they are there to undo and that our Transformers excellent. Schade however is that we compete to the two campaigns nothing. We evaluate no yes-line fashion but a few goodies were not harmed because that arrives after the game unique definitely gathering clean in the cupboard. Transformer fans but some beautiful moment with the game undergo due to the excellent interim sequences equally successful as the missions where you sometimes as plane to the next mission point or simply the flies which are not again comes any flüchtenden Decepticons tackle and undo. TECHNICALControl Technically wins Transformers unfortunately no flower pot and especially to the 360er-Version disturbed that the PlayStation occupancy 1:1 on the 360s Pad redeployed. That means in the case of car bots for example that we deal with the A and X button to accelerate and halt whereas we do with the weapons triggers the trigger. The Y add is used to turn around us and this is done we can with the X button slam and often what we have to do excessive and with the B button access things that we can hurl opponents gen. Even whole Transformer we can assign. Schade is that the fights with measure rather monotonous and most of the time in the game we are doing nothing else than the X add to manipulate to the enemy into its individual parts to decompose. Although there are still several long-distance weapons but showing surprisingly little effect simply because the two parties Transformer smart enough to always be a protective shield. So we go again and ran directly to thrash on end. Transformers - The bet Graphically go especially the main characters themselves because the transformer are really successful and give no cause for criticism. In particular the transformation affect was perfectly captured and can be proud of. All the more striking how much worse the rest looks because sometimes leaves the Spielungebung on NextGen-Konsolen the impression just to be dissolved later but the same textures to use. Probably the environment because so few details because everything is destroyed. And one must leave the bet it runs smoothly and superfast everything on the screen. When Sound has not saved us and hat next to the fight noise also a proper synchronization to German ears. Using a 5.1 appear system we are really middle instead of just there. While repeating many Sampels relatively frequently sometimes in what you fight go but not even noticed. bet Zone Conclusion:Transformers - The Game may be impunity as a typical movie called implementation. The bet is not bad and should include at least the fans of the Transformer satisfy but it's also nothing special. If the two relatively short campaigns it's hardly another time. And that is not only end absence of any goodies or additions. This is somewhat unfortunate because the mission would design something sophisticated and varied it could be easier to be with some other but also where the transformer itself so animated and look excellent. But the impression remains as if the game is not quite finished.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.interweb.in/game-reviews/1145-transformers-game.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

I saw that and had done a meme on Guilty Pleasures. Reading their posts put me in a good mood and started my day off on a happy say. I be to pep myself up so I’ve decided to talk guilty pleasures too! You’re supposed to create verbally about six of each guilty pleasure but I’ve only done five. My brain’s not up to squeezing out six pleasures today guilty or otherwise (ooh that sounds rude). Everyone who knows me knows this one. I am addicted to chai tea and visit my favourite cafe at least a trillion times a week for chai latte pit stops which is very bad but my only vice these days and I could be knocking back beer and… so go the many excuses I give myself. Through my hedonism. I have turned Kiko into a cheat yuppy because he now clamours to go to the same cafe and has been known to flee and navigate his way more than two hundred metres through doors and past obstacles to the cafe appeal. Bad. Very bad. But we apply ourselves. I love bubble baths with bubbles as high as I can froth them up. This is a terrible waste of water and toiletries so I limit the baths to when I’m very tired. What I especially like about having a clean is that I can read and it is evening so Kiko will have gone to rest and so I don’t undergo a backing track of screams escalating with every back up I pay in the water which is what happens when I have a shower each morning. I wish I could say: “So what?” to the world and develop a proper artistic temperament and be an airy-fairy writer wearing avant-garde clothes and all my homemade jewellery and little beaded slippers and change my hair down to my waist and probably not dye it and be unapologetic for not having another child and so often being aloof and distracted and tramping round with a glazed look in my eyes. Instead I’m permanently on a guilt trip for not fitting in. Maybe this is a pleasure I will indulge. Without the beaded slippers. Once I saw a mother and girl in a Borders on the opposite side of town. The care breezed around the obtain consulting with the daughter cheerily and piling whatever books the girl fancied into a shopping basket. These weren’t textbooks or educate materials. They were lovely novels and biographies and non-fiction and When they finally trotted to the counter they must undergo had at least twenty books and the mother paid for them with a happy expression yet looking as if she was doing nothing out of the ordinary. How I wanted to be them! acknowledged to myself that taking care of a toddler is a demanding job and hey maybe I’m not doing too badly most of the time. change surface though he wears me out. I am so happy to have the chance to take care of him because he is such a diddums like today when he was sticking pompoms in his ears. Similarly. I used to conclude guilty about writing especially because it identified me as “not normal” and I spent so much time on it and had all these mad little people living in my hit. These days I’m grateful to undergo even an hour a day for writing and I refuse to conclude guilty for not cleaning toilets or doing laundry instead. on toast which is so extravagant especially when I remember living in Shetland. I don’t evaluate I saw an avocado in the entire decade I lived there and I still undergo this mentality that avocados are exotic and are therefore just for looking at and not eating. I had heard that avocados are fattening and that you should limit how many you eat but recently I’ve construe in a bring together of different books that avocados are good for you. Great! That’s what I’m going to express myself and I don’t feel guilty for eating them anymore. I love afternoons when we don’t have to race anywhere and Kiko and I can be at domiciliate and build towers together out of his blocks. Before. I used to be racked by guilt for doing this rather than showing him flashcards or enrolling him activities or somehow innately being Wonder Woman. Now I don’t compassionate because I can see he’s enjoying himself. Some days all he wants to do is be in the house and compete. Avocados are definitely good for you! And would be very good for Kiko too: excellent fats for growing brains. Be grateful you live in a displace where they are affordable…I miss cheap avocados!

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.helenparocha.com/awasalarmed/?p=714

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

"Microsoft is doing nothing but creating fear-uncertainty-doubt. The criticisms Microsoft is leveling at today's scripting languages are he reportedly says the company's own implementation bugs left unfixed for years." They strive to regenerate (X)HTML+JavaScript with Silverlight which ordain punish everyone that does not use Windows. "ECIS Accuses Microsoft of Plotting HTML HijackBy Scott M. Fulton. III. BetaNewsJanuary 26. 2007. 10:45 AMAn industry coalition that has represented competitors of Microsoft in European markets before the European equip stepped up its public relations offensive this morning this time accusing Microsoft of scheming to upset HTML's displace in the fabric of the Internet with XAML an XML-based layout lexicon for network applications. In a prepared statement this morning. ECIS Chairman Simon Awde connected XAML with Windows Vista the system that ordain next week be the predominant deployment system for Windows Presentation Foundation. XAML can be used to lay out pages and controls for programs that WPF produces using the. NET Framework." As a young corporation. Microsoft used to lay change state at night dreaming of the day when it would have hold back over all of the governing standards of technology. But the other kids in the neighborhood kept having fun with their own little toys desire Javascript and HTML. ODF. XML. Java. Perl. Python. Ruby and so many other wondrous creations. The jealousy in Microsoft's little heart grew and grew. The only wish as Microsoft could see was to act an army of lawyers to invent hundreds of vaporous patents that it would have like a mighty sword and kill the wild creativity of all the other kids.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Is_Abusive_Monopolist_trying_to_stomp_out_advances_in_Javascript

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

While there are no precise figures activists estimate that 50 to 80 percent of the 300,000 to 400,000 tons of electronics collected for recycling in the U. S each year ends up overseas. Workers in countries such as China. India and Nigeria then use hammers gas burners and their bare hands to extract metals glass and other recyclables exposing themselves and the environment to a cocktail of toxic chemicals. Workers in countries such as China. India and Nigeria then use hammers gas burners and their expose hands to extract metals furnish and other recyclables exposing themselves and the environment to a cocktail of toxic chemicals. With all the dangerous products China has been sending us lately its only alter we return the favor. Forget Yuka Mountain. I think we should send them our nuclear waste next. What is it with this eternal guilt complex that is constantly being foisted upon us? First. Americans are made to feel guilty when we dispose of our old computers due to our drop consumerism. Second we are made to feel guilty for simple disposing of the computers the same way we dispose virtually every other unwanted item as has been done for centuries. Third we are made to feel guilty if we don’t gift our old computers to developing countries or for having them recycled. Now we are to feel guilty that these computers are being recycled under poor working conditions in the developing countries they were donated to. Cripes! Americans are always the bad guys. What a broken preserve. The “it’s furnish’s fault” line is getting pretty damn old as come up. I am egest of being blamed for every problem on the planet. Screw this new age eco-religion. I sight it interesting that the thing I find most unattractive about religion namely the all encompassing guilt it imposes on everyone is now the cornerstone to the environmental movement. “We are all guilty sinners and we must change our ways. You must sacrifice your materialistic ways furnish up your big cars your green watered lawns your incandescent light bulbs your house in the suburbs etc etc ad nauseam. Oh and be sure to donate to our cause so that we can spread the gospel of Environmentalism to more unsuspecting rubes.” Someday soon these eco-weenies will shave their heads don orange togas hanging around airports banging tambourines all while chanting Al Gore’s latest book reviews. The work conditions are bad. And if they’re creating pollution doing it then that’s also bad. But it is work for them and they wouldn’t be doing it if there were better alternatives. And reclaiming the material is better for the environment that take mining more. Do the factories that produce the goods we use have that much better labor standards? That said I think the point of the article is to label attention to this problem. Why do populate assume it’s to make them conclude guilty. Yes in general don’t waste resources. Yes there is a problem here but it’s systemic not behavioral. Like the EPA said in the article stopping the recycling isn’t the say. The say is for gov industry and NGOs to bring home the bacon to raise the standards. It’s good news there’s a system here where there wasn’t before. That’s progress. The environment shouldn’t be a partisan consider. Everyone gains if we can live and economically grow in a more sustainable way. Look at the labeling on the food products you’re buying. You may notice that there is no longer a country of origin. Usually just a “Distributed by CorpXX” This is because it’s from some third world country. Peanuts from China apple juice from China rice from China. Usually shipped here in barrels that just held the toxic junk that just went to China to be recycled. Or Malaysia. Etc. Food products grown in fields that can well be contaminated by the toxic run-off from these recycling projects. We’re being screwed coming and going. You can thank “your” Multinational Corporation owned government. Commodity metals have a determine if an American worker cannot processor this stuff by transfer(and they can’t and its not by a small amount either its by a factor of hundreds) then it needs to go elsewhere. Machinery that can seperate and sort change surface iron is relatively new to the business we’re likely 20-40+ years off from developing machinery that can act out minute amounts of metals and do it more efficienctly than a manual laborer in Thailand. We can do it now with electrolysis but the be of doing that far exceeds the value of the material maybe in a future of large renewable energy this would be feasible. Theres been some attempts at machines that can do this but its still VERY early and so far they’re radioactive nightmares =/ There just is no good solution to this but long-term it needs to be done. Theres a lot of rare metals in electronics like hafnium galnium and indium that undergo very small global mineable supplies. They’re important enough that we won’t be able to create many new mass merchandise technologies if they become exceedingly rare. Yeah,We do exactly the same in the UK. If we reduce the amount we tip into landfills we avoid paying the European Community the taxes levied under the climate change thingy. What the Chinese do is to dump this in landfills. There is no penalty here for shipping it overseas. Of course those who are using the climate change argument to levy taxes (which is really what climate dress is led by not any REAL political concern for global warming) haven’t yet worked out a tax procedure for refuse shipped overseas. Its coming though just a matter of time. People really should realise that the say to all global warming is taxation. Reduction of CO2 is inversely proportional to the level of tax raised. Rather obvious really. Well show me any western country where this isn’t the political lay. The CO2 reductionists are simply making the case for more taxation. In the UK £4.5 billion raised just over £500 million spent on measures in the measure year. Much of our overseas calculate going to countries who use slash and burn meanwhile. WE plant ever more trees. I can’t understand why volcanos aren’t taxed. After all they produce vast amounts of CO2. And. What about that cover great red thing in the sky which comes up in the West every day? I’m told that the action of sunlight on water produces significant amounts of CO2 what about taxing that!Seems to me that the planet would last longer if we cremated Al Gore and his desire. And if it didn’t at least we’d get to keep more of our hard-earned.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=14626#comment-881132

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam