Free Stock Market Course Knowledge Base
Can I trade the stock exchanges offshore, thus creating tax free income? Is it possible If I have a 2nd passport, and with that open an offshore business or bank account or both in that country. and then trade the offshore (out of united states) stock market. and with that being said, if i am trading as a non us citizen in a low tax or 'no tax' haven would I be able to essentially pay as little as zero taxes on the profits from trading? thank you for your time! (all legally course) -j.p.
Where can I find free download of Pantyhose TV Commercial, old and new? Hi all, I am taking this marketing course, and am assigned to research project regarding to nylon, pantyhose and stocking commercials. I am trying to collect more resources and I can't find any pantyhose tv commercial online. Is there a website where I can download these for free? I need to collect commercials for different nylon companies. thanks in advance for your help, truely appreciated!!
Market multiple and inflation rates and other...? Recently I have picked up Peter Lynch's "Learn to Earn" book. He talks about a market multiple in the book and does a cross study of Nike and J&J and says that the market multiple was more than what J&J's PE was. Where can I find up to the minute or whatever market multiples? Also, Where could I find inflation rates as well. I know that they are based upon the Consumer Price Index but I am not educated enough to figure it out based upon that. Thirdly, since I am in the education stage of stock investing, I would like to know if anybody can recommend a stock market simulator game that doesnt coincide with the real market but is simulated for the sake of learning at a faster pace than waiting for the markets. If I could find a game that does correspond to the markets that would be nice as well. Of course I am looking for free games and no money involved. (Just thought I would make that clear) Thanks for the info
While the Democrats stand against near all of the president’s wartime policies — and in the process court defe While the Democrats stand against near all of the president’s wartime policies — and in the process court defeat — the stock market is standing with Bush, and the chance for victory. It has been widely reported that President Bush simply refuses to turn against the surge in Iraq, or even compromise on it. At the same time he admonishes Congress to toss out troop-withdrawal timetables and to give General Petraeus’s new counterinsurgency plan time to work. And you know what? While the Democrats stand against near all of the president’s wartime policies — and in the process court defeat — the stock market is standing with Bush, and the chance for victory. Early last week, when the Democratic leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi launched their latest anti-war offensive, stocks dropped about 150 points. Then, in a press conference a few days later, after Bush discussed clear successes in Iraq’s Anbar province, the Dow Jones soared nearly 300 points, marching ever closer to the 14,000-point plateau. Of course, shares trade on the profit and interest-rate fundamentals of the economy. But if you ask folks on Wall Street what their biggest worry is, most will say another 9/11. They rank another attack far ahead of passing sub-prime mortgage problems or wiggles in consumer spending. The stock market, in fact, is voting for the president to stay on offense. Here’s a case in point. The highest-ranking Iraqi leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq was just arrested, after which he told interrogators that Osama bin Laden’s inner circle enjoys considerable influence over the Iraqi al-Qaeda branch. “Communication between the senior al-Qaeda leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani,” said Brigadier General Kevin Bergner. “There is a clear connection between al-Qaeda in Iraq and al-Qaeda senior leadership outside Iraq.” And Wall Street connected the dots, too: That day the Dow had been down 150 points. But it rallied back 100 points after the Iraqi capture came across the tape. This brings me to a larger point. Despite the criticism President Bush has received over his Iraq War policies, isn’t it interesting that stock markets have been booming since early 2003, when Saddam was overthrown and the president signed his supply-side tax cuts into law? (Bush, of course, never gets any credit on either of these points.) In just the past year alone, the Dow has gained a remarkable 30 percent. Meanwhile, Europe and Asia are up about 30 percent, Japan 23 percent, and emerging markets more than 60 percent. Clearly, the world is voting — with real money — for the American system of free-market capitalism. And it’s my strong suspicion that the majority of the global investing community supports the Iraq War and a steadfast U.S. commitment to stop terrorism. They seem to know that if the U.S. doesn’t do it, no one else will. I have long believed that stock markets are the best barometer of the health, wealth, and security of a nation. And today’s stock market message is an unmistakable vote of confidence for the president. Even the best low-tax, limited-government economic policies can be thwarted if the men and women going to work in the morning can’t get safely back to their homes and families at night. And the fact that the world economy is experiencing the greatest economic boom in history is a direct rebuke to jihadists everywhere. Al-Qaeda despises our country and its capitalist freedoms. And unless stopped cold in their tracks they will strive to destroy the U.S. financial system and free-market development around the world. The spread of free trade, the free movement of capital, low taxes, and the breathtaking rise of the Internet — these are generating more jobs, wealth, and prosperity than ever before. And this amounts to a collective thumbing of the nose at the terrorists. It’s as though world markets are saying that history is on our side, and that the crazed self-proclaimed terrorist clerics will ultimately be defeated. Free-market capitalism, 10. Al-Qaeda, 0. And just as Bush won’t give up on the surge, he’s not about to default to the Democrats on the supply-side investment tax cuts that helped deliver a near six-year economic boom. “I’m not going to raise taxes,” he told me in a recent White House meeting of conservative columnists, and he pledges to veto non-defense appropriation bills that exceed a $933 billion line in the sand. He also vows to work overtime to get a free-trade deal with the pro-American countries of Columbia and Peru, not only to expand economic activity, but also to counter the anti-American and socialist policies of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. The media likes to paint Bush into a bunker, making him the victim of a torrent of criticism from which they say he can’t recover. But here are the plain facts: The president’s tax cuts helped reinvigorate investors and businesses. The nation has been safe from attack for nearly six years. And General Petraeus’s counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq just may be working. In other words, Mr. Bush deserves a lot more credit than most are willing to give him.
Will Our (US) Economy recover ? Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D. March 17, 2005 NewsWithViews.com Contrary to a widespread belief, socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe did not collapse because of the clever geostrategic maneuvers of the Reagan Administration. Neither did the East Bloc break up because its leaders were incompetents who put into practice the wrong plans. Particular politicians and policies--East or West--had next to nothing to do with it. The East Bloc fell apart--and had to fall apart, no matter what anyone did--because of an obscure principle of economics known as "the impossibility of rational economic calculation under bureaucratic central planning". Socialism failed--and must always fail--because, without prices for goods and services generated by a free market, central planners cannot allocate resources and manpower intelligently. But central planners cannot allow a free market to set prices (otherwise there could be no central planning). In the long run, this self-imposed bureaucratic blindness to the real values of people and things results in monumental waste, the failure of central plans to deliver sound capital investments and advancing standards of living, and finally the collapse of those societies that allow politicians and bureaucrats, rather than free entrepreneurs and workers, to direct the course of economic affairs. Although this principle had been recognized by other economists for almost a century theretofore, it received systematic exposition in Ludwig von Mises's seminal treatise, Socialism, first published in the 1920s. So, during the heyday of central planning from the 1920s to the 1980s, no one should have been unaware of the problem. Nonetheless, the political elite and the intelligentsiia ignored it, just about everywhere. In the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, where Stalin and his successors imposed industrial-strength central planning through police-state terrorism and slave labor in the Gulag, the price was higher than in (say) the United States, to which Franklin D. Roosevelt was able to administer only a diluted dose of the same poison. But a price there was, paid as usual by common people. Economic theory also teaches that any scheme of fiat currency and fractional-reserve central banking is just as inherently flawed, incapable of permanent existence, and inevitably doomed to disaster as all-around, full-blown socialism, because fractional-reserve central banking systematically subverts the free market's structure of prices through expansion of currency and credit--which results in redistribution of wealth, misallocation of scarce capital, and collapse in either depression or hyperinflation followed by depression. This is no new insight. The problems fractional-reserve banking causes were widely discussed in the 1800s; and the whole subject of political versus free-market money was exhaustively examined by Ludwig von Mises, in his treatise The Theory of Money and Credit, first published in the 1920s. (Probably the best book on this subject now available for the average reader is Murray Rothbard's The Mystery of Banking.) But, throughout the Western world during the 1900s and even unto the present moment, the political elite, high finance and big business, and their hired intelligentsiia have generally ignored these problems--doubtlessly because irredeemable currency and fractional-reserve central banking have served their short-term interests, and the costs of the system have always been paid by picking the pockets of the common man. For this country's system of fractional-reserve central banking, though, Americans cannot blame some foreign dictator such as Stalin, but instead need to indict their own home-grown usurpers and tyrants: primarily, Presidents Woodrow Wilson (who signed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913), Franklin Roosevelt (who outlawed private possession of gold for use as currency in 1933-1934), and Lyndon Johnson (who repudiated the government's promise to redeem its paper currency in silver coin in 1967-1968). Some people also assign a large share of responsibility to Richard Nixon, who terminated redemption of Federal Reserve Notes in gold for foreign banks in 1971. This, however, is unfair. By "closing the gold window", Nixon extricated this country from an especially expensive variety of parasitism by the Federal Reserve System: its ability to prop up the value of Federal Reserve Notes by looting America's gold reserves. Indeed, such was Nixon’s legal duty. Because the Federal Reserve System as a whole is unconstitutional, paying out this nation's gold in redemption of Federal Reserve Notes is unconstitutional, too. (Nixon, of course, was far from being a constitutionalist. But, as folk wisdom teaches, "God writes straight with crooked lines".) In the case of the Federal Reserve, economic history all too strongly confirms economic theory. In 1913, the Federal Reserve's touts predicted that it would allow bankers and politicians to "manage" currency "scientifically", and thereby to end business cycles, eliminate inflation, and forefend depressions. Yet, the country soon suffered a sharp, albeit short depression in 1920-1921, followed by the horrendous collapses of the stock market and the banks in 1929-1933, and the Great Depression that festered for the remainder of the 1930s. And since World War II, Federal Reserve Notes have lost more than 90% of their purchasing power--which is a serious consequence of inflation by any reasonable standard
Any tips on getting out of debt faster? We are on a good plan (e.g., paying of high-interest loan first), saving, working more, etc... and we have consilodated most of our debt with one of our banks and are already paying a low interest rate. Following this course of action, we would probably be debt free in about 4 years paying about 400 a month over that time. Is there a way, other than the obvious ways mentioned above, to pay off debt quicker... Any other suggestions (stock market? tricks? anything?) Thanks...
Is Great INFLATION coming ?? 2008/2009? The so-called "credit crisis" is gaining momentum. Investors increasingly question the solidity of the banking system, as evidenced by banks' tumbling stock prices and rising funding costs. With bank credit supply expected to tighten, the profit outlook for the corporate sector, which has benefited greatly from "easy credit" conditions, deteriorates, pushing firms' market valuations lower. In fact, peoples' optimism has given way to fears of job losses and recession on a global scale. Free market advocates, however, should not get carried away by the price action in the market place. In a free market, there is nothing wrong with individuals reassessing hitherto held expectations, entailing changes in relative prices. A free market is a discovery process, based on trial and error. Usually the effects of errors made by some are compensated for by the gains of successful decisions taken by others, and the economy expands. Sometimes, however, the effects of errors dominate, and the economy experiences what people call a crisis: income growth is (feared to be) lower than what people think it should, and could, be. In that sense a crisis is a correction of bad decisions. It is an indispensable part of the free market. It pushes those producers out of business who do not satisfy the needs of their clients, and it rewards those who serve their customers well. A crisis must be feared, however, if it has been caused by government action, and if the obvious signs of the crisis provoke ever greater doses of government intervention. In this case, the market would be prevented from doing its job properly. Bad decisions would be perpetuated, and the ultimate crisis may become nasty. Diagnosing the Causes of the Crisis It is against this background that one may wish to review the US central bank's series of rate cuts, the latest being a big 75-basis-points rate slash on January 22, 2008, which brought the official Fed Funds Target Rate to 3.5%.[1] While the Fed's moves were mostly hailed in public as appropriate measures to help the economy avoid recession, Austrian economists hold a completely different view. According to the Austrian Monetary Theory of the Trade Cycle it is the government-run money-supply monopoly that has not only caused the crisis; the theory also diagnoses that rate cuts will not solve the crisis, but will make it even worse. Central banks, the government agents holding the power over the printing press, pursue a monetary policy of "interest rate steering" or, in other words, pushing the interest rate down as much as possible by relentlessly increasing credit and money supply. It is this inflationary monetary policy that causes trouble. Ludwig von Mises pointed out that today credit expansion is exclusively a government practice. As far as private banks and bankers are instrumental in issuing fiduciary media, their role is merely ancillary and concerns only technicalities. The governments alone direct the course of affairs. They have attained full supremacy in all matters concerning the size of circulation credit. While the size of the credit expansion that private banks and bankers are able to engineer on an unhampered market is strictly limited, the governments aim at the greatest possible amount of credit expansion.[2] Initially, the artificial lowering of the interest rate creates an illusion of richness and affluence. The increase in the money stock via bank credit expansion erroneously suggests that the supply of savings increases. Investment picks up, and the economy expands. The illusion of plentiful resources leads to malinvestment, and sooner or later the boom turns into a bust. While the money-fueled expansion is a manifestation of the crisis, it is actually the slump — the correction of malinvestment — that people complain about. The alleged fight against the crisis Once a crisis unfolds, central banks are called upon to lower interest rates — in ignorance of the fact that a monetary policy of pushing down the interest rate has caused the misery in the first place. Cheaper borrowing costs, it is believed, would revive the economy by stimulating investment and consumption, thereby adding to output and employment. Lower interest rates would raise the prices of stocks, bonds, and housing, translating into "wealth effects" which in turn strengthen demand. The obsession with a policy of lowering the interest rate is rooted in a deep-seated ideological aversion against the interest rate. It is a destructive ideology, in particular if the government is in charge of the money supply. Because then the government central bank will lower the interest rate to whatever is deemed appropriate from the viewpoint of the government, pressure groups, and vested interest. However, the interest rate is a reflection of peoples' "time preference": because of scarcity, people value goods and services available today ("present goods") more highly than goods and services available at a later point in time ("future goods").[3] This is why present goods trade at a premium over future goods. That premium is the interest rate, or the "time preference rate." The interest rate is a free-market phenomenon. A policy of suppressing the market interest rate through a government-sponsored credit expansion, Mises noted, is a policy against the free market: Credit expansion is the governments' foremost tool in their struggle against the market economy. In their hands it is the magic wand designed to conjure away the scarcity of capital goods, to lower the rate of interest or to abolish it altogether, to finance lavish government spending, to expropriate the capitalists, to contrive everlasting booms, and to make everybody prosperous.[4] Causing Inflation A monetary policy of lowering the interest rate via expanding credit and money corresponds to the widely held view that "some inflation" is a requisite for economic expansion. In fact, the "inflation bias" has become so widespread that nowadays inflation (the rise in the money supply) is much less feared than deflation (the decline in the money supply). Mises was aware of what happens once the inevitable crisis caused by a manipulation of the interest rate unfolds: "In the opinion of the public, more inflation and more credit expansion are the only remedy against the evils inflation and credit expansion have brought about."[5] The current credit crisis is a sad case in point: with monetary policy having caused inflation and malinvestment, it is now called upon to pursue a policy that leads to even more inflation and malinvestment. Could monetary policy become "ineffective," that is, could it fail to create inflation? For instance, the Bank of Japan's rate cuts around the beginning of the 1990s — as a reaction to falling asset prices and a growing volume of bad loans in banks' portfolio — did not succeed in bringing credit and money growth rates back to precrisis levels. Even with official rates at virtually zero, the economy remained in stagnation and the Japanese stock market continued to decline. Against the backdrop of the Japanese experience it should be noted that there is no limit to central-bank money printing. Central banks can, at any one time, buy any assets from banks and nonbanks such as bonds, real estate, foreign currencies, etc. If a central bank buys, say, debt from the corporate sector, it increases the money stock in the hands of nonbanks directly; the commercial banking sector is not needed for increasing the money supply. Central banks' unlimited power over the money supply has been made pretty clear by the chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Ben S. Bernanke, in November 2002: [T]he U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation.[6] So if the government is determined to create inflation, there should be hardly any doubt that there will be inflation. The Fed's series of rate cuts suggests that the bank tries to create additional credit and money via lowering the interest rate on base money. But if such action fails to yield inflation, it does not take much to expect that the central bank may take recourse to less "regular" operations, if and when such an inflation policy is deemed necessary to solve the credit crisis. So far, at least, US bank credit and money supply growth has remained at a very high level. In December 2007, banks' commercial and industrial loans grew at 10.9% y/y, and total bank loans and leases were up 10.8% y/y. Real estate loans — most likely as a consequence of the defaults in the subprime markets — slowed down somewhat, but were still running at 6.3% y/y. Against this background the Fed rate cuts should actually accelerate the erosion of the exchange value of money further. Threatening Freedom Inflation is a societal evil. It redistributes real wealth from creditors to debtors. It impairs the role of money as a means of exchange. The efficiency of the market's price mechanism is greatly reduced, encouraging bad decisions, which in turn harm peoples' economic well-being. At the end of the day, inflation is a serious threat to freedom. The majority of the people, suffering badly from inflation, would most likely blame the free market for their plight, rather than blame the central bank for the debasing of the currency. Print $17 Audio $25 Mises noted: Nothing harmed the cause of liberalism more than the almost regular return of feverish booms and of the dramatic breakdown of bull markets followed by lingering slumps. Public opinion has become convinced that such happenings are inevitable in the unhampered market economy. People did not conceive that what they lamented was the necessary outcome of policies directed toward a lowering of the rate of interest by means of credit expansion. They stubbornly kept to these policies and tried in vain to fight their undesired consequences by more and more government interference.[7] From the Austrian viewpoint, the current credit crisis appears to be a precursor of great inflation. If a deliberate policy of great inflation is chosen in the United States, a monetary policy of debasing the currency would most likely also take hold in other currency areas of the world. The credit crisis has become a threat to the free societal order: as people become dispirited with the free market order, the door would be pushed open for anti–free market policies. --------------------------------------... Thorsten Polleit is Honorary Professor at the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management. Send him mail. See his archive. Comment on the blog. Notes [1] The FOMC rate cut was made "in view of a weakening of the economic outlook and increasing downside risks to growth. While strains in short-term funding markets have eased somewhat, broader financial market conditions have continued to deteriorate and credit has tightened further for some businesses and households." US Federal Reserve, Press Release, 22 January 2008. [2] Mises, L. v. (1996), Human Action, p. 794. [3] For the explanation of the Austrian theory of the interest rate, see Rothbard, M.N. (1993), Man, Economy, and State: A Treatise on Economic Principles, pp. 31 1 day ago - 2 days left to answer.
politics of our time is as dark as ever, but with a bright ligths in the horizon? politics of our time is as dark as ever, but with a bright ligths in the horizon? Its the 1930¨s all over Again ? with all the political wrong decisions..........? It's the 1930s All Over Again by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. DIGG THIS Jittery stock markets, an economy drunk on credit, and politicians calling for varieties of dictatorship: what a sense of déjà vu! Let us recall that the world went bonkers for about ten years way back when. The stock market crashed in 1929, thanks to the Federal Reserve, and with it fell the last remnants of the old liberal ideology that government should leave society and economy alone to flourish. After the federal Great Depression hit, there was a general air in the United States and Europe that freedom hadn't worked. What we needed were strong leaders to manage and plan economies and societies. And how they were worshipped. On the other side of the world, there were Stalin and Hitler and Mussolini, but in the United States we weren't in very good shape either. Here we had FDR, who imagined himself capable of astonishing feats of price setting and economy boosting. Of course he used old-fashioned tricks: printing money and threatening people with guns. It was nothing but the ancient despotism brought back in pseudo-scientific garb. Things didn't really return to normal until after the war. These "great men" of history keeled over eventually, but look what they left: welfare states, inflationary banking systems, high taxes, massive debt, mandates on business, and regimes with a penchant for meddling at the slightest sign of trouble. They had their way even if their absurd posturing became unfashionable later. It's strange to go back and read opinion pieces from those times. It's as if everyone just assumed that we had to have either fascism or socialism, and that the one option to be ruled out was laissez-faire. People like Mises and Hayek had to fight tooth and nail to get a hearing. The Americans had some journalists who seemed to understand, but they were few and far between. So what was the excuse for such a shabby period in ideological history? Why did the world go crazy? It was the Great Depression, or so says the usual explanation. People were suffering and looking for answers. They turned to a Strongman to bail them out. There was a fashion for scientific planning, and the suffering economy (caused by the government, of course) seemed to bolster the rationale. All of which brings me to a strange observation: when it comes to politics, we aren't that much better off today. It's true that we don't have people running for office in ridiculous military suits. They don't scream at us or give sappy fireside chats or purport to be the embodiment of the social mind. The tune is slightly changed, but the notes and rhythms are the same. Have you listened carefully to what the Democrats are proposing in the lead-up to the presidential election? It's just about as disgusting as anything heard in the 1930s: endless government programs to solve all human ills. It's as if they can't think in any other way, as if their whole worldview would collapse if they took notice of the fact that government can't do anything right. But it also seems like they are living on another planet. The stock market has a long way to fall before it reaches anything we could call low. Mortgage interest rates are creeping along at the lowest possible rates. Unemployment is close to 4%, which is lower than even Keynesians of old could imagine in their wildest dreams. The private sector is creating a miracle a day, even as the stuff that government attempts is failing left and right. The bureaucracies are as wasteful and useless as they've ever been, spending is already insanely high, debt is skyrocketing, and there's no way that any American believes himself to be under-taxed. The Democrats, meanwhile, go about their merry business as if the public schools were a model for all of society. Oh, and let us not forget their brilliant idea of shutting down the industrial economy and human prosperity so the government can plan the weather 100 years from now. We can only hope that there are enough serious people left to put a stop to this harebrained idea. But before we get carried away about the Democrats, let's say a few words about the bloodthirsty Republicans, who think of war not as something to regret, but rather the very moral life of the nation. For them, justice equals Guantánamo Bay, and public policy means a new war every month, and vast subsidies to the military-industrial complex and such other Republican-friendly firms as the big pharmaceutical companies. Sure, they pay lip service to free enterprise, but it's just a slogan to them, unleashed whenever they fear that they are losing support among the bourgeois merchant class. So there we have it. Our times are good, and yet we face a choice between two forms of central planning. They are varieties of socialism and fascism, but not overtly: they disguise their ideological convictions so that we won't recognize that they and their ilk have certain predecessors in the history of political economy. Into this mix steps Ron Paul, with a message that has stunned millions. He says again and again that government is not the way out. And even though his political life is nothing short of heroic, he doesn't believe that his candidacy is about him and his personal ambitions. He talks of Bastiat, Hazlitt, Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard – in public campaign speeches. And let no one believe that this is just rhetoric. Take a look at his voting record if you doubt it. Even the New York Times is amazed to discover that there is a principled man in politics. It is impressive how crowds are hard pressed to disagree with him. How much good is he doing? It is impossible to exaggerate it. He provides hope when we need it most. You see, the American economy may look good on the surface but underneath, the foundation is cracking. The debt is unsustainable. Savings are nearly nonexistent. Money supply creation is getting scary. The paper-money economy can't last and won’t last. One senses that the slightest change could cause unforeseen wreckage. What would happen should the bottom fall out? Scary thought. We need ever more public spokesmen for our cause. In many ways, the Mises Institute bears a heavy burden as the world's leading institutional voice for peace and economic liberty. So does LewRockwell.com. And we are working in every way possible to make sure that the flame of freedom is not extinguished, even in the face of legions of charlatans and power-mongers. Even though the politics of our times is as dark as ever, there are bright lights on the horizon. July 28, 2007 Llewellyn H. Rockwell,
Religion as a Black Market for Irrationality? Christopher Hitchens has written, with characteristic candor and eloquence, that "[r]eligion is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children." This ten-fold indictment needs little support from me, as evidence of its truth has been crashing down upon us for centuries. However, I’ve been asked to provide such superfluities by the editors of this page. There is nothing like racing to the aid of a man who needs none. Each of my essays for On Faith has highlighted one or another facet of Hitchens’ jewel of blasphemy. I recently argued that religion is “contemptuous of women” at some length. Here, I offer further thoughts on how religion is “irrational” and “invested in ignorance”. *** Reason is a compulsion, not a choice. Just as one cannot intentionally startle oneself, one cannot knowingly believe a proposition on bad evidence. If you doubt this, imagine hearing the following account of a failed New Year’s resolution: “This year, I vowed to be more rational, but by the end of January, I found that I had fallen back into my old ways, believing things for bad reasons. Currently, I believe that smoking is harmless, that my dead brother will return to life in the near future, and that I am destined to marry Angelina Jolie, just because these beliefs make me feel good and give my life meaning.” This is not how our minds work. To believe a proposition, we must also believe that we believe it because it is true. While lapses in rationality can often be detected in retrospect, they always occur in the dark, outside of consciousness. In every present moment, a belief entails the concurrent conviction that we are not just fooling ourselves. This constraint upon our thinking has always been a problem for religion. Being stocked stem to stern with incredible ideas, the world’s religions have had to find some way to circumvent reason, without repudiating it. The recommended maneuver is generally called “faith,” and it actually appears to work. Faith enables a person to fool himself into thinking that he is maintaining his standards of reasonableness, while forsaking them. There is a powerful incentive to not notice that one is engaged in this subterfuge, of course, because to notice it is to fail at it. As is well known, such cognitive gymnastics can be greatly facilitated by the presence of others, similarly engaged. Sometimes, it takes a village to lie to oneself. In support of this noble enterprise, every religion has created a black market for irrationality, where people of like minds can trade transparently bad reasons in support of their religious beliefs, without the threat of criticism. You, too, can enter this economy of false knowledge and self-deception. The following method has worked for billions, and it will work for you: How to Believe in God Six Easy Steps 1. First, you must want to believe in God. 2. Next, understand that believing in God in the absence of evidence is especially noble. 3. Then, realize that the human ability to believe in God in the absence of evidence might itself constitute evidence for the existence of God. 4. Now consider any need for further evidence (both in yourself and in others) to be a form of temptation, spiritually unhealthy, or a corruption of the intellect. 5. Refer to steps 2-4 as acts of “faith.” 6. Return to 2. As should be clear, this is a kind of perpetual motion machine of wishful thinking—and it leads, of necessity, to reduced self-awareness and diminished contact with reality. But it is reputed to have many benefits, and once you get it up and running you will be in fine company. In fact, from the looks of it, you will never be lonely again. Enjoy! All of the above text is by best-selling author of "Letter to a Christian Nation" Sam Harris. It was taken from a recent submission to the Washington Post. What are your thoughts? Link to the article. http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2007/09/religion_as_a_black_market_for.html
Its the 1930¨s again? politics of our time is as dark as ever, but with a bright ligths in the horizon? Its the 1930¨s all over Again ? with all the political wrong decisions..........? It's the 1930s All Over Again by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. DIGG THIS Jittery stock markets, an economy drunk on credit, and politicians calling for varieties of dictatorship: what a sense of déjà vu! Let us recall that the world went bonkers for about ten years way back when. The stock market crashed in 1929, thanks to the Federal Reserve, and with it fell the last remnants of the old liberal ideology that government should leave society and economy alone to flourish. After the federal Great Depression hit, there was a general air in the United States and Europe that freedom hadn't worked. What we needed were strong leaders to manage and plan economies and societies. And how they were worshipped. On the other side of the world, there were Stalin and Hitler and Mussolini, but in the United States we weren't in very good shape either. Here we had FDR, who imagined himself capable of astonishing feats of price setting and economy boosting. Of course he used old-fashioned tricks: printing money and threatening people with guns. It was nothing but the ancient despotism brought back in pseudo-scientific garb. Things didn't really return to normal until after the war. These "great men" of history keeled over eventually, but look what they left: welfare states, inflationary banking systems, high taxes, massive debt, mandates on business, and regimes with a penchant for meddling at the slightest sign of trouble. They had their way even if their absurd posturing became unfashionable later. It's strange to go back and read opinion pieces from those times. It's as if everyone just assumed that we had to have either fascism or socialism, and that the one option to be ruled out was laissez-faire. People like Mises and Hayek had to fight tooth and nail to get a hearing. The Americans had some journalists who seemed to understand, but they were few and far between. So what was the excuse for such a shabby period in ideological history? Why did the world go crazy? It was the Great Depression, or so says the usual explanation. People were suffering and looking for answers. They turned to a Strongman to bail them out. There was a fashion for scientific planning, and the suffering economy (caused by the government, of course) seemed to bolster the rationale. All of which brings me to a strange observation: when it comes to politics, we aren't that much better off today. It's true that we don't have people running for office in ridiculous military suits. They don't scream at us or give sappy fireside chats or purport to be the embodiment of the social mind. The tune is slightly changed, but the notes and rhythms are the same. Have you listened carefully to what the Democrats are proposing in the lead-up to the presidential election? It's just about as disgusting as anything heard in the 1930s: endless government programs to solve all human ills. It's as if they can't think in any other way, as if their whole worldview would collapse if they took notice of the fact that government can't do anything right. But it also seems like they are living on another planet. The stock market has a long way to fall before it reaches anything we could call low. Mortgage interest rates are creeping along at the lowest possible rates. Unemployment is close to 4%, which is lower than even Keynesians of old could imagine in their wildest dreams. The private sector is creating a miracle a day, even as the stuff that government attempts is failing left and right. The bureaucracies are as wasteful and useless as they've ever been, spending is already insanely high, debt is skyrocketing, and there's no way that any American believes himself to be under-taxed. The Democrats, meanwhile, go about their merry business as if the public schools were a model for all of society. Oh, and let us not forget their brilliant idea of shutting down the industrial economy and human prosperity so the government can plan the weather 100 years from now. We can only hope that there are enough serious people left to put a stop to this harebrained idea. But before we get carried away about the Democrats, let's say a few words about the bloodthirsty Republicans, who think of war not as something to regret, but rather the very moral life of the nation. For them, justice equals Guantánamo Bay, and public policy means a new war every month, and vast subsidies to the military-industrial complex and such other Republican-friendly firms as the big pharmaceutical companies. Sure, they pay lip service to free enterprise, but it's just a slogan to them, unleashed whenever they fear that they are losing support among the bourgeois merchant class. So there we have it. Our times are good, and yet we face a choice between two forms of central planning. They are varieties of socialism and fascism, but not overtly: they disguise their ideological convictions so that we won't recognize that they and their ilk have certain predecessors in the history of political economy. Into this mix steps Ron Paul, with a message that has stunned millions. He says again and again that government is not the way out. And even though his political life is nothing short of heroic, he doesn't believe that his candidacy is about him and his personal ambitions. He talks of Bastiat, Hazlitt, Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard – in public campaign speeches. And let no one believe that this is just rhetoric. Take a look at his voting record if you doubt it. Even the New York Times is amazed to discover that there is a principled man in politics. It is impressive how crowds are hard pressed to disagree with him. How much good is he doing? It is impossible to exaggerate it. He provides hope when we need it most. You see, the American economy may look good on the surface but underneath, the foundation is cracking. The debt is unsustainable. Savings are nearly nonexistent. Money supply creation is getting scary. The paper-money economy can't last and won’t last. One senses that the slightest change could cause unforeseen wreckage. What would happen should the bottom fall out? Scary thought. We need ever more public spokesmen for our cause. In many ways, the Mises Institute bears a heavy burden as the world's leading institutional voice for peace and economic liberty. So does LewRockwell.com. And we are working in every way possible to make sure that the flame of freedom is not extinguished, even in the face of legions of charlatans and power-mongers. Even though the politics of our times is as dark as ever, there are bright lights on the horizon. July 28, 2007 Llewellyn H. Rockwell,
Its the 1930¨s all over Again ? with all the political wrong decisions..........? It's the 1930s All Over Again by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. DIGG THIS Jittery stock markets, an economy drunk on credit, and politicians calling for varieties of dictatorship: what a sense of déjà vu! Let us recall that the world went bonkers for about ten years way back when. The stock market crashed in 1929, thanks to the Federal Reserve, and with it fell the last remnants of the old liberal ideology that government should leave society and economy alone to flourish. After the federal Great Depression hit, there was a general air in the United States and Europe that freedom hadn't worked. What we needed were strong leaders to manage and plan economies and societies. And how they were worshipped. On the other side of the world, there were Stalin and Hitler and Mussolini, but in the United States we weren't in very good shape either. Here we had FDR, who imagined himself capable of astonishing feats of price setting and economy boosting. Of course he used old-fashioned tricks: printing money and threatening people with guns. It was nothing but the ancient despotism brought back in pseudo-scientific garb. Things didn't really return to normal until after the war. These "great men" of history keeled over eventually, but look what they left: welfare states, inflationary banking systems, high taxes, massive debt, mandates on business, and regimes with a penchant for meddling at the slightest sign of trouble. They had their way even if their absurd posturing became unfashionable later. It's strange to go back and read opinion pieces from those times. It's as if everyone just assumed that we had to have either fascism or socialism, and that the one option to be ruled out was laissez-faire. People like Mises and Hayek had to fight tooth and nail to get a hearing. The Americans had some journalists who seemed to understand, but they were few and far between. So what was the excuse for such a shabby period in ideological history? Why did the world go crazy? It was the Great Depression, or so says the usual explanation. People were suffering and looking for answers. They turned to a Strongman to bail them out. There was a fashion for scientific planning, and the suffering economy (caused by the government, of course) seemed to bolster the rationale. All of which brings me to a strange observation: when it comes to politics, we aren't that much better off today. It's true that we don't have people running for office in ridiculous military suits. They don't scream at us or give sappy fireside chats or purport to be the embodiment of the social mind. The tune is slightly changed, but the notes and rhythms are the same. Have you listened carefully to what the Democrats are proposing in the lead-up to the presidential election? It's just about as disgusting as anything heard in the 1930s: endless government programs to solve all human ills. It's as if they can't think in any other way, as if their whole worldview would collapse if they took notice of the fact that government can't do anything right. But it also seems like they are living on another planet. The stock market has a long way to fall before it reaches anything we could call low. Mortgage interest rates are creeping along at the lowest possible rates. Unemployment is close to 4%, which is lower than even Keynesians of old could imagine in their wildest dreams. The private sector is creating a miracle a day, even as the stuff that government attempts is failing left and right. The bureaucracies are as wasteful and useless as they've ever been, spending is already insanely high, debt is skyrocketing, and there's no way that any American believes himself to be under-taxed. The Democrats, meanwhile, go about their merry business as if the public schools were a model for all of society. Oh, and let us not forget their brilliant idea of shutting down the industrial economy and human prosperity so the government can plan the weather 100 years from now. We can only hope that there are enough serious people left to put a stop to this harebrained idea. But before we get carried away about the Democrats, let's say a few words about the bloodthirsty Republicans, who think of war not as something to regret, but rather the very moral life of the nation. For them, justice equals Guantánamo Bay, and public policy means a new war every month, and vast subsidies to the military-industrial complex and such other Republican-friendly firms as the big pharmaceutical companies. Sure, they pay lip service to free enterprise, but it's just a slogan to them, unleashed whenever they fear that they are losing support among the bourgeois merchant class. So there we have it. Our times are good, and yet we face a choice between two forms of central planning. They are varieties of socialism and fascism, but not overtly: they disguise their ideological convictions so that we won't recognize that they and their ilk have certain predecessors in the history of political economy. Into this mix steps Ron Paul, with a message that has stunned millions. He says again and again that government is not the way out. And even though his political life is nothing short of heroic, he doesn't believe that his candidacy is about him and his personal ambitions. He talks of Bastiat, Hazlitt, Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard – in public campaign speeches. And let no one believe that this is just rhetoric. Take a look at his voting record if you doubt it. Even the New York Times is amazed to discover that there is a principled man in politics. It is impressive how crowds are hard pressed to disagree with him. How much good is he doing? It is impossible to exaggerate it. He provides hope when we need it most. You see, the American economy may look good on the surface but underneath, the foundation is cracking. The debt is unsustainable. Savings are nearly nonexistent. Money supply creation is getting scary. The paper-money economy can't last and won’t last. One senses that the slightest change could cause unforeseen wreckage. What would happen should the bottom fall out? Scary thought. We need ever more public spokesmen for our cause. In many ways, the Mises Institute bears a heavy burden as the world's leading institutional voice for peace and economic liberty. So does LewRockwell.com. And we are working in every way possible to make sure that the flame of freedom is not extinguished, even in the face of legions of charlatans and power-mongers. Even though the politics of our times is as dark as ever, there are bright lights on the horizon. July 28, 2007 Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. Thanks, Asawalli, but im trying to give answer to soo many question from regular and honest hard working people, who is asking every day: Why the world is up side down?
Where should a young guy like me start? I'm going into my second year of college as a business student. Each year I'm becoming more and more interested in the stock market and trading but where do I start. Of course, I'm your typical broke college student. I have absolutely no money right now but I will have a job and will continue to have a job in the future. I research a lot on the subject of trading and I am also involved in a virtual trading contest online to learn the terms and trends but now I want it to be reality. Where do I start? Find a broker they say, but with little money how do I do that, I understand I need to save but is there no other way to start from scratch? Are the online trades really a good start? I need a mentor! Short-term trading or Long-term trading ... maybe both? Are there any other alternatives I should research besides Yahoo finance or MSN money? Anything else you think I should know, feel free to let me know!
I want to learn about Forex? My problem is that it is too damn complicated. I downloaded a free demo but I failed miserably. I taught my self how to trade on the stock market but this seems a little more confusing. I would love to take a course at college or somewhere but I don't know what the course would be called. Can anyone help me out. I live in Toronto if it matters it was a free trial i didn't lose any money. I just thought it was very confusing as opposed to stocks which felt simpler. Everyone's telling me that forex is much easier, but I haven't seen that so far.
Why are they hiding how bad the macroeconomics totality is against the american people? Can you imagine if someone wrote about that tied it all together? from the record consistently high gas prices which could suddenly go much higher at any time now, record budget deficits, free falling dollar, 15% of american manufacturing has been outsourced overseas and of course the record jobs being outsourced, record trade deficits, an economy that is headed towards being a mostly service based economy, record influx of illegal aliens taking jobs and depressng wages, HB1 visa imports of cheap labor instead of investing in educating our children to do those jobs, high drop outs rising, 2 wars going on which look to be very perpetual...iraq alone is soon to reach 2 trillion dollar mark, millions of working americans unable to afford having health inusrance cause health care is unaffordable as well as pharmaceuticals, millions of americans losing their homes due to foreclosures even though interest rates are extremely low, the stock market is lacking confidence yet all I am hearing is temporary band aid solutions, blame some poor sap arguments, and (gulp) some people are even claiming that what we need to do is do more of the very same things in terms of economic/fiscal policies that we have been doing the last several years that have led to this mess in the first place. Why is no one stepping up and being honnest with the american people and calling a spade a spade and advocating serious fundamental change in a new complete direction...almost...starting all over again...and draw up a new economic plan. This path that we are on is not working...ok, its working for some people but not for the country as a whole. After all oil and gas companies have been making record profits and so have pharmaceutical companies..and american companies that do outsource jobs and get access because of it to new markets overseas do have more profits.
53: True or False: The first development of paper money began in China, probably during the 1500s.? 1: Scarcity is defined as: not having sufficient resources to produce enough to fulfill unlimited subjective wants. not having sufficient resources to fulfill limited subjective wants. having sufficient resources to fulfill unlimited subjective wants. having sufficient resources to fulfill limited subjective wants. 2: A ______ is a market where price is determined by the unregulated interchange of supply and demand. This is in contrast to a _______ where supply, demand, and price are set directly by government. open market, controlled market free market, controlled market open market, closed market free market, closed market 3: ______ is the direct exchange of goods or services without the use of money. consumerism barter economy retail 4: Which of the following is not one of money's main uses? medium of exchange unit of account measure of worth store of wealth 5: The main economic goals of nearly all nations are to promote: economic stability and high employment with a minimum increase in prices. economic growth and high employment with a minimum increase in prices. economic stability and low employment with a maximum increase in prices. economic growth and high employment with a maximum increase in prices. 6: A recession is usually defined in macroeconomics as: a fall of a country's real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in two or more successive quarters of a year. a fall of a country's real GDP in two or more successive years. a general drop in the real GDP. a severe depression. 7: When the price of oranges rises, it is very likely because the number of oranges demanded at the existing price _____ the number of oranges actually available. is greater than is less than is equal to not enough information 8: The hope for profits and the threat of losses is what forces a business owner in a capitalist economy to produce at the lowest cost and sell what the customers are most willing to pay for. This is an example of: Supply and demand Economic growth The downfall of capitalism Profits as incentives 9: Whether we look at laws, prophetic teachings, psalms; or the gospel of Jesus, we find the constantly reiterated conviction that all oppression, including economic oppression, is _____ the Divine will. contrary to accepted as caused by not enough information 10: Which of the following is not a type of economy? capitalist socialist consumerist feudal 11: Which of the following is not one of three economic commands given by God? The price of land must be fixed. Water must be communal. There must be restrictions put on interest. Profit on food must be forbidden. 12: When large supplies of an item are made, the item's cost will go _____. When very few supplies of the item are made, the price will go _____. When the demand of an item is _____, the price rises. When the demand of an item is _____, the price will go down. down, up, high, low up, down, high, low down, up, low, high up, down, low, high 13: Which of the following is a tragic effect of unemployment? Wife and child abuse increase. Divorce rates go up. Street crime flourishes. All of the above. 14: Economics is the study of: the use of alternative resources which have multiple uses. the use of available resources which have multiple uses. the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses. the use of scare resources which have very few uses. 15: __________ comes from the concept of specialization. Private business Communism Division of labor Supply and demand 16: If a shipwrecked sailor on a desert island is capable of either catching 10 fish or harvesting 5 coconuts in one day, then the opportunity cost of producing one coconut is ____ fish. one two three five 17: The two main Ingredients of the U.S. Economy are: natural resources and land land and labor natural resources and labor land and money 18: The American free enterprise system emphasizes: public ownership. private ownership. both public and private ownership. not enough information. 19: Usually the short term goal of open market operations is to: create more jobs. achieve a specific long term interest rate target. achieve a specific short term interest rate target. increase stock market values. 20: During the 1870-1920 period the industrialized nations set up _______, with one of the last being the Federal Reserve in 1913. credit unions gold reserves central banking systems private banking systems 21: When used as part of a commodity money system, which of the following is not a function of paper currency? to reduce the danger of transporting gold to reduce the possibility of debasement of coins to avoid the reduction in circulating medium to hoarding and losses to avoid the decrease in value of precious stones 22: The gold standard, in theory, limits the power of governments to cause _______ by excessive issue of paper currency. price inflation unemployment wealth and poverty stagflation 23: In practice all types of monetary policy involve modifying the amount of base currency in circulation. This process of changing the liquidity of base currency is called _______. seignority interest rate adjustment open market operations none of the above 24: An anti-trust law is a policy or action that seeks to: promote monopolistic powers within a market. curtail monopolistic powers within a market. protect monopolistic mergers from discrimination. protect small business owners from dishonest dealings. 25: _____ is the act of converting a publicly operated enterprise into a privately owned and operated entity. Shares formerly owned by the government, as well as management control, are sold to the public. Specialization Merging Monopolizing Privatization 26: Approximately ____ of all above-ground gold is held in reserves by central banks. 10% 25% 50% 85% 27: The Industrial Revolution began in Europe in the _______________, and it quickly spread to the United States. late 19th and early 20th centuries late 18th and early 19th centuries late 17th and early 18th centuries mid 20th century 28: The "Gilded Age" of the second half of the 19th century was the epoch of: gilds. mergers. tycoons. automobiles. 29: A person who takes the risk of organizing and operating a new business venture is called a: tycoon. sole proprietor. entrepreneur. corporation. 30: What did America experience in the 1920's? An economic boom An economic bust A long bull market A long bear market 31: October 24, 1929, the day when 13 million shares were sold is now known as: Black Monday Black Tuesday Black Thursday Black Friday 32: In America, during the _____, the number of workers providing services grew until it equaled and then surpassed the number who produced goods. 1930s 1950s 1970s 1990s 33: Stagflation is a situation in which a nation's economy is characterized by relatively: high price inflation and low rates of economic growth. low price inflation and high rates of unemployment. high rates of economic growth and low price inflation. low unemployment rates and high rates of economic growth. 34: Communism is an economic theory which stresses that the control of the means of producing economic goods in a society should reside in the hands of those who: have the biggest economic advantage. invest their labor for production. have the most education. are elected to office by the public. 35: In a typical ________ arrangement, a successful company authorizes an individual or small group of entrepreneurs to use its name and products in exchange for a percentage of the sales revenue. wholesale franchising marketing corporate 36: Which of the following does not form a true statement by correctly completing the sentence? Large businesses are important to the overall economy because they are better equipped to: conduct research and develop new goods. offer more varied job opportunities and greater job stability. offer higher wages and better health and retirement benefits. provide the goods and services wanted by the surrounding community. 37: In general, government antitrust officials see a threat of monopoly power when a company gains control of ________ of the market for a commodity or service. 25% 30% 66.6% 90% 38: Which of the following is not one of the roles of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? sets and enforces tolerable limits of pollution cleans up polluted streams, rivers, and marshes establishes timetables to bring polluters into line with standards has the authority to coordinate and support research and anti-pollution efforts 39: Which of the following are not practiced market strategies? Buying on margin Selling short Selling long Options 40: ________ is an economic policy or doctrine that opposes government interference in or regulation of business or commerce beyond what is necessary for a free-enterprise system to regulate itself. Communism Laissez-faire Fiscal policy Free-enterprise policy 41: Which of the following is not a method that corporations use to raise capital? issuing bonds or preferred stock selling common stock borrowing and using profits selling goods and services directly to the public 42: Monetary base is defined as: currency in circulation. currency in circulation plus foreign debts owed. currency in circulation plus banks' required and excess deposits at the central bank. bank's required and excess deposits at the central bank. 43: A policy is referred to as _______ if it reduces the size of the money supply or raises the interest rate. An _______ policy increases the size of the money supply, or decreases the interest rate. contractionary, expansionary expansionary, contractionary fiscal, monetary monetary, fiscal 44: Governments spend money on a wide variety of things. Which of the following is not a way in which these expenditures can be funded? Taxation of the population Seignorage, the benefit from printing money Borrowing money from another country, resulting in a foreign deficit Borrowing money from the population, resulting in a fiscal deficit 45: When products become more expensive over time, ______ is occurring. deflation inflation stagflation none of the above 46: A(n) _____ is an economic disadvantage, such as lower efficiency or higher costs. diseconomy noneconomy net loss unexpected loss 47: Keynesian economics is an economic theory based on the ideas of 20th century British economist John Maynard Keynes. Keynesian economics promotes a ________, where both the state and the private sector play an important role. fixed economy mixed economy socialist economy communist economy 48: Because economics is a study of ______, it deals with incentives and their consequences. cause and effect profits and losses wealth and social status money and will power 49: In 1652, the _______ became the first American colony to make coins. Roanoke Colony Plymouth Colony Massachusetts Bay Colony New Hampshire Colony 50: Which of the following is not directly affected by the quantity of money in a country? the level of prices the quality of service the rate of economic growth the amount of employment 51: True or False: Prices not only ration existing supplies, they also act as powerful incentives to cause supplies to rise or fall in response to changing demand. True False . . 52: True or False: Money is defined as anything that is generally accepted by people in exchange for the things they sell or the work they do. True False . . 53: True or False: The first development of paper money began in China, probably during the 1500s. True False . . 54: True or False: Typically, price controls are imposed in order to keep prices from rising to the levels that they would reach in response to supply and demand. True False . . 55: True or False: In the normal course of events, people's demand for housing space stays the same over a lifetime. True False . . 56: True or False: During the Great Depression of the 1930s, agricultural price support programs led to vast amounts of food being deliberately destroyed. True False . . 57: True or False: When a supermarket chain buys $10,000 worth of bread, it gets its money back much faster than when a piano dealer buys $10,000 worth of pianos. True False . . 58: True or False: The cost of producing a given product or service remains the same despite the volume being produced. This is what economists call "economies of scale." True False . . 59: True or False: Both profit and losses force businesses to change with changing conditions or find themselves losing out to competitors who spot the new trends earlier or who understand their implications better. True False . . 60: True or False: The advantage of a command economy is that vast amounts of knowledge about the needs and wants of the consumer do not ever have to be brought together, but are coordinated automatically by prices that convey what numerous people want. True False . . 61: True or False: The amount of profit left after a business pays for its employees, utility expenses, raw materials, parts, labor, and other expenditures is the gross profit. True False . . 62: True or False: Cost is the difference between what consumers pay and what the products cost to produce and distribute. True False . . 63: True or False: All oppression, including economic oppression, is contrary to the Divine will, provoking God to wrath and agony over his children's treatment of one another. True False . . 64: True or False: In the Bible, not only is the desire for riches condemned, but those who already are wealthy are described as barely able to enter the kingdom, if at all. True False . . 65: True or False: During the Great Depression, the American unemployment rate reached as high as 53%. True False . . 66: True or False: Poverty is the condition for more than twenty-five million Americans, one in eight people, including one-sixth of the nation's children. True False . . 67: True or False: Capitalism is an economic system based on public ownership of the means of production. True False . . 68: True or False: The Gross Domestic Product represents the total goods produced inland by domestic and foreign companies. True False . . 69: True or False: Money does not have to be involved to make a decision be economic. True False . . 70: True or False: The cost of producing an automobile is fundamentally the same whether you are producing 100 cars a year or 100,000 cars a year. True False . . 71: True or False: The biblical writers sensed that the economic order can easily slip into an unjust distribution of wealth, and they sought means to right the balance and to structure society so that there would be a more equitable sharing of wealth. True False . . 72: True or False: Wholesale is the purchase of individual items at a higher price, whereas retail is the purchase of large quantities of goods at a lower price. True False . . 73: True or False: The quality of available labor -- how hard people are willing to work and how skilled they are -- is at least as important to a country's economic success as the number of workers. True False . . 74: True or False: Most economists agree with returning to a gold standard. True False . . 75: True or False: In the United States, the Federal Reserve can only directly set the discount rate; it engages in open market operations to alter the federal funds rate. True False . . 76: True or False: By the end of 1999, the American economy had grown continuously since March 1991, the longest peacetime economic expansion in history. True False . . 77: True or False: A particular strength of larger businesses is their ability to respond quickly to changing economic conditions. They often know their customers personally and are especially suited to meet local needs. True False . . 78: True or False: Telephone companies, like electric utilities, are considered to be natural monopolies. True False . . 79: True or False: What early colonial prosperity in America there was resulted primarily from basket-weaving. True False . . 80: True or False: On Monday, October 19, 1987, the value of stocks plummeted on markets around the world, eclipsing even the famous October 1929 market crash. True False . .
Can one person change an election? Seriously! I have been posting what I hope is thoughtful arguments against the bad policy the Demo Team is pushing forward. It seems that there are plenty of people that agree with me …. So …. What can we all do to get our message out there and influence people? Letters to the Editor, Forums, and Blogs? This is a link to a list of every newspaper (nearly) in the US. http://www.usnpl.com/ Take a minute to help. Copy and paste from articles you agree with. DO SOMETHING! PART 1 Your average American gets an idea for a product (or service). He (she) draws up a business plan and finds investors or secures a bank loan to start a business. The business buys property and hires builders. They contract for equipment and machinery to be made. They hire employees to make their product or line of products, and they sell them to retailers. The retailers hire people to price, display, and sell the products or services. The idea spreads throughout the system creating jobs and chances for many. If they are able to sell their product at a competitive price and the consumers find use and value in their product, they may succeed. If not, they must cut costs or fail. That’s what happens in a Free Market system. If you work and are good at what you do, you have a chance. This is a simple example of how (now don’t choke on the term) Trickle Down Economics works. You can apply this model to Grannies Bakery on the corner, IBM, GM, or Starbucks. To deny this process is to deny the indisputable. It starts with an idea, and it ends with a chance for jobs and success. It’s a chance to take one idea, make an improvement on it, and start a business of your own. That’s why McDonalds is not the only one out there selling hamburgers! That is the American Dream! A chance! Competition makes products better and less expensive. Competition makes services more responsive and less expensive. Does Trickle Down mean if companies are successful and make more money, that soon my job flipping burgers is suddenly going to start paying me 75k a year? No. It means businesses will expand and give others a chance for a job. It will also give everyone more chances for advancement. If your skill level, motivation, or lack of education relegates you to flipping, maybe that should encourage you to learn to do more and be the best you can be at your job. The Free Enterprise Capitalist system simply gives everyone willing to participate the best chance to live comfortably and succeed. What about those executives making 10 million a year? Do I think that is right? No. But what do you think he (she) is doing with all that money? Stuffing the mattress? Bank savings accounts? The mattress pays nothing, and the bank only pays a few points of interest per year. They are way too greedy for that. What they do is buy. They buy goods, services, and invest in stocks from their company and others! That creates more chances for all of us. I do not think the Free Enterprise System should be allowed to run wild. Everything needs rules to keep it on course. Interest groups play an important part in the system. Saving Trees, Dolphin free tuna, and the Global Warming groups all need to play a part to keep greed from trampling the innocent. However, we have, in many areas, allowed these groups to stop progress instead of guide it. We have all paid for it. We have also paid for government intervention and paid dearly. NAFTA and our government’s refusal to insist that trading partners remove their tariffs on our products have made them too expensive for other nations to import and buy. But no one is talking about that now, are they? Obama says we should “Stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship our jobs overseas”. Like it or not, we are competing in a global economy. To stay competitive, companies must lower their costs. Unfortunately, that means finding less expensive work forces, less restrictive controls, and lower tax rates. Giving tax breaks does not cause companies to ship jobs overseas; it is encouragement to keep them here! Bad tax policy also spreads throughout the system. It causes lay offs, closings, slows production, and stifles investing. If the Government is hostile to business, all will lose some and some will lose all. That will increase our dependency on those in our government that created the problem in the first place. Does that sound like anyone is looking out for you? We don’t need that kind of “change.” We need a CHANCE!
How much harm can they do if elected? Should we vote for the best chance? Your average American gets an idea for a product (or service). He (she) draws up a business plan and finds investors or secures a bank loan to start a business. The business buys property and hires builders. They contract for equipment and machinery to be made. They hire employees to make their product or line of products, and they sell them to retailers. The retailers hire people to price, display, and sell the products or services. The idea spreads throughout the system creating jobs and chances for many. If they are able to sell their product at a competitive price and the consumers find use and value in their product, they may succeed. If not, they must cut costs or fail. That’s what happens in a Free Market system. If you work and are good at what you do, you have a chance. This is a simple example of how (now don’t choke on the term) Trickle Down Economics works. You can apply this model to Grannies Bakery on the corner, IBM, GM, or Starbucks. To deny this process is to deny the indisputable. It starts with an idea, and it ends with a chance for jobs and success. It’s a chance to take one idea, make an improvement on it, and start a business of your own. That’s why McDonalds is not the only one out there selling hamburgers! That is the American Dream! A chance! Competition makes products better and less expensive. Competition makes services more responsive and less expensive. Does Trickle Down mean if companies are successful and make more money, that soon my job flipping burgers is suddenly going to start paying me 75k a year? No. It means businesses will expand and give others a chance for a job. It will also give everyone more chances for advancement. If your skill level, motivation, or lack of education relegates you to flipping, maybe that should encourage you to learn to do more and be the best you can be at your job. The Free Enterprise Capitalist system simply gives everyone willing to participate the best chance to live comfortably and succeed. What about those executives making 10 million a year? Do I think that is right? No. But what do you think he (she) is doing with all that money? Stuffing the mattress? Bank savings accounts? The mattress pays nothing, and the bank only pays a few points of interest per year. They are way too greedy for that. What they do is buy. They buy goods, services, and invest in stocks from their company and others! That creates more chances for all of us. I do not think the Free Enterprise System should be allowed to run wild. Everything needs rules to keep it on course. Interest groups play an important part in the system. Saving Trees, Dolphin free tuna, and the Global Warming groups all need to play a part to keep greed from trampling the innocent. However, we have, in many areas, allowed these groups to stop progress instead of guide it. We have all paid for it. We have also paid for government intervention and paid dearly. NAFTA and our government’s refusal to insist that trading partners remove their tariffs on our products have made them too expensive for other nations to import and buy. But no one is talking about that now, are they? Obama says we should “Stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship our jobs overseas”. Like it or not, we are competing in a global economy. To stay competitive, companies must lower their costs. Unfortunately, that means finding less expensive work forces, less restrictive controls, and lower tax rates. Giving tax breaks does not cause companies to ship jobs overseas; it is encouragement to keep them here! Bad tax policy also spreads throughout the system. It causes lay offs, closings, slows production, and stifles investing. If the Government is hostile to business, all will lose some and some will lose all. That will increase our dependency on those in our government that created the problem in the first place. Does that sound like anyone is looking out for you? We don’t need that kind of “change.” We need a CHANCE!
Investing as a sole proprietorship vs individual for tax purposes? If I wanted to set up a sole proprietorship company for my day-trading/investing in the stock market/forex... Can I write off all of the stuff I would need (a % of utilities, courses, new computer to trade with, etc) as business expenses and claim the investment revenue as Capital Gains so that 50% of it is automatically tax free right off the top, or would I have to declare it as business revenue and pay based on the full amount? If I can't offset expenses as a company but claim the earnings as capital gains then it probably isn't worth it, right?
Where can I take summer Finance courses? I am a high school senior with an interest in finance. In the past, I have traded stocks on an amateur level through my parents' account. Last summer I took an internship at a hedge fund, and learned a little about the financial markets. I am in no way an expert and would like to further my understanding of securities trading, analysis, and related endeavors. Are there any summer courses or internships I could take that would teach me these subjects? I live in New York City, but I can go anywhere in the U.S. and am willing to pay for the education. I am 18, but unless there is an age minimum please don't bother telling me I'm too young to be worrying about this. Feel free to email with questions. I appreciate your time and advice.
Should we give money to poor ppl? ZAKAAT (Alms) Ramadan is the month of giving and benevolence, the Messenger was more benevolent than a falling rain. Muslims are encouraged to emulate the Messenger of Allah (saas), to assess and pay their Zakaat during the month of Ramadan, thus combining the two pillars of Islam at the same time. Zakaat (alms) is the name of what a believer returns out of his or her wealth to the neediest of Muslims for the sake of the Almighty Allah. It is called Zakaat because the word Zakaat is from Zakaa which means, to increase, purify and bless. Who Should Give Zakaat The obligation of Zakaat is mandatory on every Muslim who possesses the minimum Nisaab, whether the person is man, woman, young, old sane or insane. Because the proof of Zakaat in Al-Qur`an and Sunnah is general and does not exclude young or insane. Allah (SWT) stated that: "Of their goods take alms so that thou mightiest purify and sanctify them..." (Al-Qur`an, 9: 103) Imam Ibn Hazim said that every Muslim young or old sane or insane needs to cleanse his or her wealth with Zakaat because of generality of the evidence. Anas bin Malik reported that the Messenger of Allah (saas) said: "Trade with the money of the orphan, lest it is eaten up by Zakaat." (At-Tabraani) In another Hadith `Amru bin Shuaib related from his grandfather that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever is entrusted with money of an orphan should trade with it and should not leave it sitting to be used up by charity." (Tirmidhi) The point of reference in these reports is that the Messenger (saas) urged the trustee on the estate of people who due to age or other reasons cannot manage their own financial affairs, to invest it in a business that will yield a return and make it grow until they are in a position to do so themselves. For, if proper investment is not made with an ophan's inheritance, it will be depleted by charity, thus leaving the orphan with little or nothing. The Nisaab The Lawgiver, Allah has prescribed the minimum amount that is obligatory for Zakaat in different ranges of properties, and that minimum amount is known as nisaab. The reason for nisaab is to ensure that no one is forced to give Zakaat out of what he or she does not have, and that no wealth goes without Zakaat. Nisaab is also an insurance against the tyranny of the state to tax the poor and or the neediest as is the case in many countries. Nisaab is a reference point for the average Muslim who is not sure whether he possesses the minimum wealth on which Zakaat is obligatory. The wealthy need not worry about the Nisaab. Zakaat is obligatory on their entire wealth and must be paid out at the end of financial year that they set for their Zakaat. The Nisaab will not be valid unless it fulfills two conditions: 1) The amount that has reached Nisaab must be the excess or surplus known as "faadil" from one's essential needs such as food, clothing, housing, vehicles, tools and machinery that is used in business. The essentials for living are exempted from Zakaat. Although what constitutes nisaab may change from one country to another, the amount that is needed for the basic needs of living in different countries is very similar, because the market place determines the prices, whether it is an official market or a non-official market. In the poorest countries people do without or live below the poverty standard, and that is why many go hungry or without basic essentials. However, we must realize that Zakaat is an act of worship (ebadah) like Salaat. The element of intention (niyyah) is necessary, and we should not overly rely on state agencies to determine for us the requirements of our religious duty. The so called the "consumption basket" (that is poverty level as determined the social security administration which are updated every fiscal year) may not be the same as what Islam considers minimum Nisaab. In the industrialized countries, the consumption basket may include items that are not necessarily essential, such as entertainment, extra clothing, variety of food, eating in restaurant or eating at home, owning more than one car as opposed to having three cars in the driveway, drinking water as opposed to juices, eating regular food or special "health" food. This is why I believe it is essential that we do not lose site of the fact that Zakaat is ebadah of wealth, like salaat and fasting. Non Muslims may consider all the things mentioned above as essentials while Muslims will not. Indeed, no Muslims in good standing will attempt to hide behind the label of consumption basket so as to evade Zakaat. Nisaab eliminates the possibility of injustice or unfair treatment of the Zakaat payer. To suggest that if we do not follow the rules of International Monetary Fund or the arbitrary figures of social security administration or department of agriculture we will be doing injustice to the Zakaat payer is ludicrous. 2) Nisaab must mature, that is the money is not liable for Zakaat unless it has remained a full year in the possession of a person. This is the understanding of the majority of the scholars. Imam Abu Hanifah (raa) said: "What should be considered is the existence of nisaab at the beginning and the end of the Zakaat year set by the payer". It does not matter if the nisaab money increases or decreases during the calendar year, as we will explain later. This condition does not include farm produce, for it is due on the day it is harvested. Allah (SWT) stated: "... But render the dues that are proper on the day that the harvest is gathered..." (Al-Qur`an, 6: 141) According to Imam Al-`Abadi, (raa) Zakaat money is of two kinds: one that by its nature can not be invested and Zakaat of this category is due on the day of harvest. This includes all the farm produce that is liable for Zakaat. The other is wealth that can be invested in the hope of a good return, like cash, gold or silver, because the opportunity is there that cash in one's hand can be invested for a good return. This includes currency investment, merchandise and livestock. Their Zakaat is not due until they have matured in one full year. The proof of this condition is the Hadith related by Ibn `Umar that the Messenger of Allah (saas) said: "He who acquires property is not liable for Zakaat on it till a year passes." According to Ibn Rushd (raa) this is the understanding of the majority of scholars, including the four rightly guided Khalifahs. Zakaat Of Salaries The condition of yearly term maturity applies to the commodities on which the Lawgiver said Zakaat is due, and this includes silver, gold, modern paper currency and livestock. Paper currency is analogous to silver, therefore, it takes the case of silver. There is no Zakaat on salary, earned income from wage earners or professionals or independent contractors until such money matures in a full year. There is no such thing as paying your Zakaat on the day you receive your paycheck. What the wage earner must know is that he or she can purify that money with charity (sadaqah) anytime they cash the paycheck. Allah (SWT) states: "And in their wealth and possessions (was remembered) the right of the needy, he who asks and he who (for some reason) was prevented (from asking)." (Al-Qur`an, 51: 19). We can deduce from the concept of "yearly maturity" of wealth on which Zakaat is due as encouraging, among other things, saving on the part of the Zakaat payer, and enhances the chances for eradicating poverty, because if the poor receives his rightful share of Zakaat there will be the possibility that he can take Zakaat money and invest it and become a Zakaat payer instead of recipient. This possibility will be lost if he receives few Zakaat dollars every month. To say that the wage earner just brings his check home and spends everything on necessities and lives from check to check with nothing left over means the person is eligible for Zakaat. Using farm produce as analogous to salary for Zakaat is wrong analogy. As Imam Al-`Abadi said, these are two different categories of money. $2, 500.00 cash can be invested by the person and expect a good return whereas it will be difficult to invest a bushel of corn. It can be traded as a commodity, which is what it is. This why we must know that analogy has rules that must be followed before it is applied. Certainly the jurists are unanimous that earned income, known as almal al-mustafadah, should either be added to existing money and wait until that amount reaches maturity and then give their Zakaat; or if there is no money on hand the time one possesses this money, he or she should wait one full year before assessing it for Zakaat. Zakaat is one of the five pillars of Islam and a vital element in the religion of Islam. It is the twin sister of Salaat. In Al-Qur`an, Allah (SWT) stated: "So establish regular Prayer and give regular Alms; and obey the Messenger; that you may receive mercy." (Al-Qur`an, 24: 56) Also, "...Establish regular Prayer and give regular Alms, and loan to Allah a beautiful loan...." (Al-Qur`an, 73: 20) "And they have been commanded no more than this: to worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, being true (in faith); to establish regular Prayer and to practice regular charity; and that is the religion right and straight." (Al-Qur`an, 98: 5) In a famous Hadith reported by `Umar Bin Khattab (raa), the Messenger of Allah (saas) responded to Jibreel (as) and said: "... Islam is to testify that there is no deity but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, to perform the prayer, to pay Zakaat, to observe fasting in Ramadan, and to make pilgrimage to the house of Allah if you are able to do os...." (Bukhari, Muslim) There is consensus among Muslim scholars that it is mandatory on every believer who is financially able. Whoever knowingly denies this obligation, while he possesses the minimum amount, would be considered a disbeliever and a renegade from Islam. Whoever is stingy, or tries to cheat, is considered among the wrongdoers. Zakaat is mandatory on four categories of items. 1. Farm produce of seeds and fruits, such as wheat, barley, rice, dates, raisins, cocoa, pistachios, coffee, cashews. Allah (SWT) stated: "O you who believe, give of the good things which you have (honorably) earned, and of the fruits of the earth which We have produced for you..." (Al-Qur`an, 2: 267) Also: "... But render the dues that are proper on the day that the harvest is gathered..." (Al-Qur`an, 6: 141) Thus, these two verses and many others indicate that Zakaat is due on farm products that reached the minimum amount (nisaab). No farm product is liable for Zakaat unless it is a product that is considered as food and can be stocked or saved naturally without refrigeration. If the produce is perishable fruit, such as grapes, there is no Zakaat. But if one sells them they will pay their Zakaat on the profit earned when it matures. The nisaab is 612 kilos, which equals 1,346.40 lb. There is no Zakaat on produce that is less than this amount. If the farm produce or crops grow dependant on rainwater, or without any man's labor or irrigation, Zakaat due is one-tenth of the total. If it is grown by irrigation, then the Zakaat due is half of one-tenth of the total produce. There is no Zakaat on fruits like apples or oranges or vegetables which are perishable and need refrigeration for long storage, but they should be considered as any income if the profit earned from their sale reaches the amount of Zakaat, then Zakaat should be given. 2. Cattle, including camels, cows, sheep and goats, that are freely graze and are raised for trade and production. For Zakaat to be obligatory, the number must reach the nisaab. The nisaab of camels is five, of cows 30, of sheep and goats, 40. By freely grazing is meant the animal goes out to feed without the owner buying or bringing it feed or hay. If it is not a grazing animal, there is no Zakaat in the stock by itself. The stock will, however, be considered as articles of trade, then will be assessed for Zakaat as articles of trade when the profit earned from their sale reaches the amount by itself or in combination with other articles of the trade. 3. Merchandise and goods of trade and commerce. This includes anything that is obtained for the business of buying and selling: land, animals, food provisions, fabric, cars, spare parts, etc. This inventory is evaluated annually and assessed for Zakaat, whether the value is the same as the amount spent on it, more, or less. The owners of grocery stores, like any other business, must evaluate every item and give their Zakaat. Simple bookkeeping of inventory, orders, cash on hand, and credits, that is non-delinquent loans, will give one a good picture of the zakaatable assets. But if one is unable to account for everything in the store or shop, he should assess it according to his ability until he is sure that his conscience is clear. There is no Zakaat on what is within one's dwelling or property which includes food, drinks, furniture, houses, animals, cars, clothes and shoes. The only exception is gold and silver. There is no Zakaat on assets from rentals or lease, whether they are apartment units, taxi cabs, etc. That is, there is no Zakaat on the apartment units, buses or cars for rental like yellow cabs company or trucks for rental or equipments. But there is Zakaat on the proceeds or incomes from these rental assets if these assets reach the executable amount, either by themselves or in combination with other assets. Business Activities Many scholars are of the opinion that any business activity that brings any return to the entrepreneur or investor should be assessed for Zakaat. If the activity has a prescribed nisaab, such as gold, silver or paper currency, that nisaab is applied for Zakaat. But if the business has no declared nisaab, its nisaab is the nisaab of commerce, one reason being that most business activities are considered as commerce and because, in actual fact, it is not factitious business name, such as GM, Apple or GE that is taxed for Zakaat, it is the individual investor. We do not tax cooperations such IBM, Apple, GM or Rajihy Bank but the individual investors, share holders and owners of these corporations. Indeed, there are enough rules in Zakaat books to cover all types of business activity, be it cash or risk investment. If the business activity is analogous to commerce, it should be assessed the same rate as commerce. To subject the business to a different Zakaat rate of 10%, which is the rate of farm products instead of its correct rate of 2.5%, the rate of commerce, is unfair and unjustified. Besides, there is no proof, even a weak one, to justify this unfair arbitrary taxation. The difference between 2.5% and 10% is high. The Zakaat system is not like a state revenue collection, but Allah's `ebadah. However, if a business person decides to give more than 2.5% after deducting all the expenses including depreciation, Allah (SWT) will accept it from him. 4. Gold and silver, whether used for commerce or jewelry. Allah (SWT) states: "...And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty. On the day when heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the fire of hell, and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks and their backs. This is the (treasure) which you buried for yourselves: taste you, then, the (treasures) you buried." (Al-Qur`an, 9: 34-35). By hoarding is meant refusal to give it in the path of Allah, which includes Zakaat. In a hadith reported by Abu Hurairah (raa), the Messenger of Allah (saas) said: "For the owner or possessor of gold and silver who does not fulfill its obligation, on the Day of Resurrection it will be cast into sheets of fire and be branded on his forehead, side and back. Whenever it cools it is to be repeated for him in a day whose length is the length of fifty thousand years, until the judgement is rendered among the people." (Muslim). By its obligation is meant assessing it for Zakaat. In another version: "No possessor of a treasure who does not give its Zakaat." Zakaat is mandatory in gold and silver, irrespective of its form: in coins, raw or nugget, or jewelry for wearing, or for rent, because of the generality of evidence of Zakaat without any detail. In a report by Abdullah bin `Amr bin `Aas (raa), he related that a woman came to the Messenger of Allah with her daughter. On the daughter's wrist were two heavy gold bracelets. The Messenger asked her, "Do you pay Zakaat on this?" She replied, "No." The Messenger said: "Would it please you that Allah will encircle you with two bracelets of fire?" The reporter commented that she took them off and threw them down in front of the Messenger, and said: "They are for Allah and his Messenger." (Ahmed, Tirmidhi). The Messenger's wife reported that: "The Messenger entered into my house and saw in my hand a huge ring made of silver, so he asked, `What is this?' I replied, `I made them to beautify myself for you, O Messenger of Allah.' He inquired, `Do you give their Zakaat?' I said, `No,' or `Allah willing.' He said: `It will suffice you in the hellfire.'" (Abu Dawuud). Zakaat is due on gold when it reaches the amount of (nisaab), which is 20 Dinaar. According to a hadith, the Messenger said: "No Zakaat on you is due until it reaches 20 dinaar." (Abu Dawud) The Islamic dinaar (currency) is one mithqal, a unit of weight which weighs four and one quarter of a gram. Thus, the nisaab is 85 grams. This is equal to $30.00 US dollars. Similarly, there is no Zakaat on silver until it reaches five oqiyah, because the Messenger said: "There is no Zakaat on less then five oqiyah." (Muslim/Bukhari) Oqiyah is equal to forty Islamic dirhams. The nisaab is 200 dirhams. One dirham is equivalent to 595 grams. The zakaatable amount in both the gold and silver is a quarter of a tenth only. Paper Currency There is Zakaat on modern paper currency because it is equivalent to silver. During the early days of Islam, silver and gold were the currency of exchange minted into dirham for silver and dinaar for gold. Silver, not gold, had a larger circulation. Thus many scholars are of opinion that silver should be the standard for the paper currencies of today because that is more advantageous to the Zakaat payer, as it raises the minimum nisaab whereas gold lowers it. Although both metals are no longer circulated, they are still considered as a security against ever fluctuating paper money. Silver should be used as a standard to assess Zakaat annually, not paper currency, even if the currency is hard currency like the US dollar, Yen and Deutch Mark or Pound Sterling. Because these currencies are backed by political decisions that may not have anything to do with the economy, the value and strength of this paper money depends largely on all haram usury system of interest rates. Thus, the Zakaat payer should look up in the local newspaper's financial or business section for the price of silver which is currently about $3.82. per ounce. The nisaab, then, is 596 x .04=28.80 ounce multiplied by$3.82= 90.91. therefore. The nisaab is about $100.00, as of December 17, 1991. The nisaab should be based on the market value of the currency. If the money is hard currency, there will be no problem, but if the money is a non-marketable currency, like most currencies in the third world countries, the nisaab should be based on the black market, which realistically reflects the value of the currency on the money market. In any case, the silver rate should be used to assess the Zakaat. If the nisaab is determined, the zakaatable amount is 2.5%, or .025 multiplied by the amount. For instance, if the zakaatable amount is $56,000.00 it will be 56,000. x .025 = $1,400.00. Zakaat is due on gold, silver, and or paper currency, whether it is cash in hand or credit in the hands of borrowers. Zakaat is due on debts or cost of merchandize or rental money. If the borrower is a wealthy person that you know will pay back the debt, the lender (that is Halaal lending free of usury) should include that money in the assessment and give its Zakaat. However, one can delay Zakaat on a loan until he receives payment, then return its Zakaat for the past years that he was unable to assess for Zakaat. If the borrower is poor or is refusing to pay the debt, there will be no Zakaat on the money until the lender receives the money. Then he will assess it for Zakaat of one past due year, but there will be no Zakaat in the years before that. There is no Zakaat on precious stones such as diamonds, or metals such uranium, regardless of their value. Gold and silver, of course are assessed for Zakaat. However, if a person possesses any of these stones or metals, he should give their Zakaat like any other articles of trade. If a person possesses diamonds or any other precious stones as an edge against inflation or for ornaments, there will no Zakaat on these. How To Give Zakaat Zakaat may be assessed and returned in two ways: a) Make a record of all money earned, either daily or monthly, which has reached the nisaab and remains in the treasury. The Zakaat of that money would be due one year later on the same day the money was earned and reached nisaab. This means every month's income must be set aside and assessed for Zakaat and so will be the case for the rest of the months. For instance, the income of January, 1991 will be assessed for Zakaat in January, 1992, and the income of February, 1991 will be assessed for Zakaat in February 1992, etc. This method of assessing Zakaat is very difficult because it entails complete bookkeeping of daily or monthly earnings. b) The best way is to set a day or a month, preferably Ramadan, for your annual Zakaat return calendar, say Ramadan 1st, 1412. One year later on the same day Ramadan, 1413, your Zakaat is due and payable. Whatever is in the savings is due for Zakaat, regardless of whether all the amount in the savings reaches a year or not. For instance: if you have $20,000.00 in the savings account on the 1st of Ramadan, 1412 and one year later by the 1st of Ramadan, 1413 there is $50, 000.00, your Zakaat will be assessed for $50,000.00, that is: $50.000.00 x .025= $1,250.00. If, on the other hand, by the 1st of Ramadan, 1413 the amount in the savings is $15,000.00, your Zakaat will be for the amount in the savings, that is $15,000.00 x .025= $375.00. This method is the best because it is easy to assess, meets one's obligation and relieve one's conscience. The Recipient Of Zakaat Knowing who qualifies as recipient of Zakaat is an important aspect of Zakaat collection in Islam. Fortunately, Allah (SWT) has been merciful to us in that He Himself spelled out the people eligible to receive Zakaat. In Surah Tawbah He stated: "Alms are for the poor and the needy; and those employed to administer (the funds); for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to truth); for those in bondage and in debt; in the cause of Allah; and for the wayfarer: (thus is it) ordained by Allah, and Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom." (Al-Qur`an, 9: 60) In this verse Allah enumerated the people who deserve this divine welfare, and they are as follows: The poor and the needy. These are individuals, and those under their care, to live on. By the poor and needy is meant the people whose income or salaries, or whatever material goods they have, fall short of the cost of living in a given environment and economy. The poor and the needy should be given what will suffice them and their families for one full year. The needy who want to get married and have no means should be given enough for this purpose, and so, too, the student who needs money for tuition, rent, food, and books. The working poor should be given supplementary Zakaat. But the wealthy, or any person with enough income to live on should not be given Zakaat, even if they asked for it. Instead, they should be warned and admonished for asking for what does not belong to them. In a hadith reported by Abdullah bin `Umar, the Messenger of Allah (saas) stated: "A man keeps on asking others for something till he comes on the day of Resurrection without any piece of flesh on his face." (Bukhari/Muslim). This hadith indicates a humiliating appearance before Allah (SWT) that awaits a person who asks illegally. Some said: this hadith implies Allah will punish a person with the very limb, the face, that he used to impress on others to give him their money unlawfully. In another hadith reported by Abu Hurairah, the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever asks people for their money so as to get rich, he is asking for flames of fire. It is up to him to ask for more or less (he should beware)." (Muslim) This hadith indicates the severity of the punishment, the more one asks the more punishment, the less one asks the less the punishment. In another hadith, reported by Hakeem bin Hizaam said: I begged the Messenger of Allah and he gave me. I begged again, and he gave me. I begged again and he gave me. He then said: "This money is green and sweet; he who receives it from people with a cheerful heart, Allah will bless him in it; he who receives it, with an avaricious mind would not be blessed in it. He will be like the person who eats without being satisfied; and the upper hand is better than the lower hand" (Muslim) This hadith gave an analogy between money and green, ripened fruit that people love to eat. Thus, it indicates that both are greatly loved but easily finished. For money that is easy come easy go, one must be careful about the punishment that awaits the illegal eater. If a person asks for Zakaat and there are no signs of wealth, and he does not know that he should not ask, or a person who is well and able, who can work, but does not; if these people do not know that it is not permissible for them to ask, it may be given anyway. In a hadith reported by Ahmed, Abu Dawud, and Nasa'e, two men came to the Messenger of Allah (saas) and asked for Zakaat. He looked at them closely and found them strong and able, he said, "If you want I will give you. But you should know that the wealthy or an able person who can work has no share in Zakaat" (Ahmad) Those who administer the Zakaat department, assigning people for collecting, bookkeeping, making lists of people eligible for Zakaat, and a financial calendar. These people will receive Zakaat as compensation for their work, even if they are wealthy. This does not include a person who works as an agent for one or two wealthy people to take Zakaat for himself. They should donate their time for Zakaat disbursement and do it with honesty and truthfulness. If they can not, they should be paid or rewarded for their time. In a hadith related by Abu Musa Al-Ashi`ari (raa), the Messenger of Allah said: "A trustworthy Muslim executor is the one who executes completely what has been entrusted to him of Zakaat money in good faith." (Bukhari) That is, he will give the Zakaat money to any of the eligible recipients of Zakaat. He should carry on the duty voluntarily, but if he can not distribute the money without being paid, the Zakaat payer should pay him for his work. The payment for the service of distributing Zakaat should not come out of Zakaat money. The new converts to Islam whose hearts we want to harmonize into the fold of Islam, either because their faith is weak or we are afraid of their being harmed, should be given Zakaat to strengthen their Iman or until we no longer fear their harm. The bonds person who has contracted with his master to buy himself out of bondage deserve Zakaat and should be given enough to pay off their debt to the master and be freed themselves; similarly, Muslim prisoners of war if their freedom is tied to monetary payment, deserve Zakaat sufficient enough to secure their release. On the other hand, if a pearson accidently killed someone and have no means to pay off the blood money, he should be helped from Zakaat funds. The people in debt are of two kinds: (A) The guarantor, who takes the responsibility of someone else's debt so as to reconcile the two warring parties, to extinguish the fire of fitnah between them. If the person requests Zakaat money to pay off this debt he should be given it, which will encourage him to continue in this noble cause. In a hadith reported by Qubaysah Al-Hilaaly (raa), he said I was under debt (hamaalah) and I came to the Messenger (saas) and begged him to help me pay it off. The Messenger told him: "Wait until we receive charity, so we will command that it be given to you." However, the Messenger stated: "O Qubaysah, begging is not permitted except for one of three categories of people: A man who has incurred debt (as guarantor to reconcile blood wit) for him begging is permissible till he pays that off, after which he must stop it; a man whose property has been destroyed by calamity which has smitten him; for him begging is permissible till he gets what will support life or will provide him reasonable subsistence; and a man who has been smitten by poverty, the genuineness of which should be confirmed by three knowledgeable members of his people; for him begging is permissible till he gets what will support him, or will provide him subsistence. Besides these three, Qubaysah, begging is forbidden for every other persons, and one who engages in such consumes that which is forbidden." (Muslim) (B) Whoever incurs debt and has no money to pay it back will be given from Zakaat to help pay his debt, whether the amount is large or small; or his creditor should be paid directly on his behalf, so long as it is paid off. Zakaat can be given in the path of Allah. By this is meant to finance a Jihad effort in the path of Allah, not for Jihad for other reasons. The fighter (mujahid) will be given as salary what will be enough for him. If he needs to buy arms or some other supplies related to the war effort, Zakaat money should be used provided the effort is to raise the banner of Islam. The wayfarer. This is the traveller who in a strange land runs out of money. He or she deserves Zakaat, enough money to take him back to his country, even if he is wealthy and can find someone to loan him the money. On his part, he should take with him on his trip sufficient money, if he is wealthy, so that he will not need Zakaat. Zakaat money can not be used to pay off other obligations, such as giving Zakaat money to people you are obligated to take care of by law; or Zakaat money can not be used to pay for hotel and food expenses. It is, however, permissible to give Zakaat to a wife or family member, provided it is not part of their daily living expense money, but is needed to pay off a debt for one's wife if she can not pay it. So is the case for one's parents if they can not pay their debt. Zakaat money may be given to members of the family for their expenses if one is not obligated to take care of them financially. The wife can pay off a debt of her husband with Zakaat money, because he may be among the eight eligible recipients and she is not obligated to spend on him as he is on her. The eight eligible recipients of Zakaat can be denied their right to Zakaat without proof from Al-Qur`an or Sunnah. In a hadith reported by Ibn Mas`ud, his wife Zaynab heard the Messenger of Allah order women to give Zakaat, so she asked the Messenger (saas): " O Messenger of Allah, you commanded us to give Zakaat, and I have jewelry that I wanted to assess for Zakaat, but my husband Abdullah bin Mas`ud claimed that his son deserves it more than anyone." The Messenger replied: Your husband Ibn Mas`ud is right. Your son deserves your charity more than anyone." In another hadith reported by Salman bin `Aamir, he said the Messenger of Allah said: " Charity to the poor is only charity, but charity to the rest of kind is charity and maintenance of relations (sillah)." (Nisaee) No loan should be written off as Zakaat because Zakaat is taken and given. Allah (SWT) said: "Of their goods take alms...." (Al-Qur`an, 9: 103) And in a Hadith the Messenger has been reported as saying: "Allah has mandated on you Zakaat to be taken from the wealthy and to be given to the poor." Thus, writing off debt is not taken. For instance, If you loan a person money, you can not write off that loan as a Zakaat. However, it could be written off as sadaqah charity. Furthermore, loan, delinquent or not, is considered an absent money, therefore, it should not be transacted in Zakaat. for Zakaat is assessed only in cash in hand. Besides, debt money is valued less than cash in the hand, and using that money for alms is like exchanging good money for bad. The assessor of alms should try to give his Zakaat to an eligible person, but if he makes a mistake and gives it to an ineligible person it is accepted. In a hadith related by Abu Hurairah, he said the Messenger said: "A man expressed his intention to give charity, so he came with his charity and placed it in the hand of an adulteress. In the morning the people were talking and saying charity was given to an adulteress last night. The donor said: O Allah, to thee be the Praise - charity to an adulteress! He then again expressed his intention to give charity, so he went out with it and placed it in the hand of a rich person. In the morning the people were talking and saying charity was given to a rich person. The donor said, O Allah to You be the praise - charity to a rich man! He then expressed his intention to give charity, so he went out with his charity and placed it in the hand of a thief. In the morning the people were talking and saying charity to the thief. So the man said, O Allah to You be the praise (what a misfortune that charity has been given) to the adulteress, the rich and the thief! Then someone came to him and told him your charity has been accepted. As for the adulteress the charity might become the means whereby she might restrain from fornication. The rich man might perhaps learn a lesson and spend from what Allah has given him, and the thief might thereby restrain from committing theft. (Muslim/ Bukhari) http://www.islamfortoday.com/beliefs.htm
what plz tell me is it true or fake?if true then next procedure.? Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:09:32 0700 Printer Friendly Version From: Recruitment TexacoOil To: abhi_bond2004@sify.com Subject: Texaco Online Employment system Language Mail Full Headers Dear Abhijit Murlidhar Naralkar. Thank you for contacting us. Please be informed that you have been automatically employed by TEXACO Oil Group London and we are proud to notify you that your experiences and qualifications where found suitably qualified for the requirements to work in our company.You are to resume work within 50days with a monthly salary of £7,500. Therefore, your two years contract document will be signed as soon as you arrive London. Your work permit processing number is 532#, date of issue is 28th July 2008, and length of issue is 2 years. A hard copy of your employment letter has been sent to the United Kingdom Immigration Service London. Therefore, you are required to officially and immediately contact the United Kingdom Immigration Service London to apply for your work/residence permit papers and residence visa to United Kingdom, as we have made a contract agreement deal with them to process your work permit/residence visa within the period of 50 days for your work resumption in TEXACO Oil Group London. Your designation will be to work as an Administrative Officer in the customer service department in UK where you will operate the switchboard and direct calls appropriately, thereby providing company marketing informations on stocks to clients or customers willing to invest on Company products. Also note that you will undergo a three months course in TEXACO Oil Group London with a monthly income of £7,500, so as to be enlightened on company rules and regulations, departmental schemes/facilities in various sectors and project activities carried out by TEXACO Oil Group London. Lecture on matters concerning your duty as a Administrative Officer will as well be conducted for broader understanding of your position and responsibility in TEXACO Oil Group London. Therefore, your visit to London will be under the job position offered to you as a Administrative Officer regardless of your qualification/experiences and you can be privileged to gain another position within 3 months of the first visit to London, on your choice sector of work or area of choice duty especially if the Management of TEXACO Oil Group London recommends of your efficiency on duty. After your three months course study period, you will gain a level promotion in which you will be given the privilege to work in any of the TEXACO oil, gas, industrial resources that suits your area of course study with a higher monthly income in TEXACO Oil Group London. We provide a lot of free services to our staffs and such services includes; . Quality single or family housing in company community/staff quarters. . Personal effects shipment and excess baggage allowances. . Access to some of the finest social and recreational facilities in London. . Free medical care in TEXACO Oil Group London for you and your family for contract duration. . Company Suits and free dry cleaning . Excellent educational assistance benefits with family status. . Complete meals also for you and your family as deemed appropriate. . Life insurance Policy. . Maximum and efficient security both in work place and housing Community. According to the recruitment process as used on your behalf, there will be no interview until you are in London. Your interview will be conducted as an exam which you will sit for after you have undergone and worked with us for three months. This is part of your course study exercise and if Texaco Oil Group London discovers that you did not make good grade after your three months course study, you will be retrenched from working with us and will go back to your country. As an employee, your working hours shall consist of 48 hours a week, 6 days a week, Tuesdays to Sundays and from 7:30am to 3:30pm, 3:30pm to 11:00pm or 11:00pm to 7:30am between weekly shifts. There shall be 1hour lunch break: Timing shall be agreed with immediate supervisor. You are also entitled to 3 weeks paid holiday per annum. At the end of one year service, an extra days holiday entitlement is given - followed by a further one day holiday entitlement for each of the next year service: bringing maximum holiday entitlement to two (2) weeks. This depends on your agreement to continue working with the Company. In all but one instance, You must report any grievance to the immediate supervisor. Where and only where, the grievance is with the immediate supervisor, you can make his grievance known to the immediate supervisor at your TEXACO Customer Service Management Department. Please note that you are advised never to go to your country Embassy or Immigration Service for information on the processing of your residence papers/visa to United Kingdom to start work with Texaco Oil Group London because we did not sign any contract agreement with them to procure you a work permit/residence papers/visa to United Kingdom neither where they given any authorization to procure these documents for you. But your country embassy will be contacted by the United Kingdom Immigration Service London immediately after your residence papers/visa and work permit documents are processed and registered with your country Boarder Agency so as to pass your residence papers/visa and work permit clarifications when presented and allow you free entrance to United Kingdom. You