Home Wealth Project
Extensive Research On How To Build Wealth From The Comfort Of Your Own Home.
Extensive Research On How To Build Wealth From The Comfort Of Your Own Home.
Jul 19th
Write Greats Reports With This Report Writing Kit.
Practical Report Writing.
Jul 11th
Write To More Money is a PDF report on how freelance writers and copywriters can earn more money from their writing. My affiliate program pays 50%.
Write To More Money – Freelance Writing Report Pays 50
Jul 6th
If you are suffering from gout youre just one click away from instant relief. The remedies are hiding right in your kitchen. Our website converts an amazing 20-1. Dr. Jeff Sands report has been sold world in hard copy and now is available as a download.
The Ultimate Instant Gout Relief Report
Jun 12th
A very profitable niche in the increasing green business segment. Now paying 75% commissions.
The Battery Reconditioning Report
May 1st
Follow Samantha Milner as she shows you through this Free Report ($97 Value) how to create your own internet income. Plus Affiliates earn 60% on this top recurring product http://tinyurl.com/yjwz4n5
Make Money Online Free Report
Apr 10th
Learn everything you need to know about becoming an Astrolger and How to Make Money in the Astrology Industry.
How To Become a Top Astrologer In 7 Days Report and Audio Course
Jan 27th
“(The financial crisis) was a fundamental disruption–a financial upheaval, if you will–that wreaked havoc in communities and neighborhoods across this country.”
I’ll say!
If you’re wondering what’s inside the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission’s 600+ page report on the causes of the financial crisis, released today in its full glory, the quote above should give you an idea. The report is no revelation–but who was expecting one? If you want a more colorful, informative idea of what the report is all about, read Kevin Depew’s brilliant take on it. And if you have the next two days to read the entire report, it’s embedded at the bottom of this post.
Here’s a summary of their main findings, none of which should come as a surprise if you’ve been living in American civilization for the past three years.
To me, the real highlights of the report were the quotes, many cliched, but some surprising, like “Tone at the top does matter and, in this instance, we were let down. No one said ‘no.’” Or “…the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision, caught up in turf wars, preempted state regulators from reining in abuses.” This makes me think of two bureaucrats, one in a gray suit and one in tan, engaged in a stapler fight.
But in all seriousness, here’s the summary:
We conclude this financial crisis was avoidable.
(Here’s a longer excerpt to give you a gist of how the report reads)
The crisis was the result of human action and inaction, not of Mother Nature or computer models gone haywire. The captains of finance and the public stewards of our financial system ignored warnings and failed to question, understand, and manage evolving risks within a system essential to the well-being of the American public. Theirs was a big miss, not a stumble.
While the business cycle cannot be repealed, a crisis of this magnitude need not have occurred. To paraphrase Shakespeare, the fault lies not in the stars, but in us.
The prime example is the Federal Reserve’s pivotal failure to stem the flow of toxic mortgages, which it could have done by setting prudent mortgage-lending standards. The Federal Reserve was the one entity empowered to do so and it did not. The record of our examination is replete with evidence of other failures: financial institutions made, bought, and sold mortgage securities they never examined, did not care to examine, or knew to be defective; firms depended on tens of billions of dollars of borrowing that had to be renewed each and every night, secured by subprime mortgage securities; and major firms and investors blindly relied on credit rating agencies as their arbiters of risk. What else could one expect on a highway where there were neither speed limits nor neatly painted lines?
We conclude widespread failures in financial regulation and supervision proved devastating to the stability of the nation’s financial markets.
People had too much faith in the fact that the market would self-correct and that regulators actually policed the financial world, instead of sitting in its pockets. Emphasis on deregulation and self-regulation for the past 30 years set the stage for this. Nobody in government challenged “the institutions they were entrusted to oversee.”
We conclude dramatic failures of corporate governance and risk management at many systemically important financial institutions were a key cause of this crisis.
Banks took on too much risk with too little capital and were too dependent on short-term funding. “Like Icarus, they never feared flying ever closer to the sun.” Quants and mathematical models “replaced judgment in too many instances.”
We conclude a combination of excessive borrowing, risky investments, and lack of transparency put the financial system on a collision course with crisis.
Too many people “borrowed to the hilt,” leaving them “vulnerable to financial distress or ruin.” Banks hid leverage in their products, there was no transparency, and Americans were buying homes on devious mortgages. When it all crashed, “we had reaped what we had sown.”
We conclude the government was ill prepared for the crisis, and its inconsistent response added to the uncertainty and panic in the financial markets.
“…key policy makers of the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve Board, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York who were best positioned to watch over our markets were ill prepared for the events of (the financial crisis). Other agencies were also behind the curve.
We conclude there was a systemic breakdown in accountability and ethics.
We conclude collapsing mortgage-lending standards and the mortgage securitization pipeline lit and spread the flame of contagion and crisis.
We conclude over-the-counter derivatives contributed significantly to this crisis.
We conclude the failures of credit rating agencies were essential cogs in the wheel of financial destruction.
Read the whole sordid thing below:
View full post on Business Pundit
Dec 30th
Small business owners desire certain things from a business bank–specifically, collaboration, openness and a good working relationship. However, a recent study from consumer satisfaction research firm J.D. Power and Associates reveals those needs are going unmet.
The U.S. Small Business Banking Satisfaction Study showed that small businesses’ overall satisfaction with their banks has dropped to 711 on a 1,000-point scale, down from 718 last year. The survey measured customer satisfaction with the overall banking experience by examining eight factors: product offerings, account manager, facility, account information, problem resolution, credit services, fees and account activities.
According to the study, here’s what small business owners value in a business bank:
While small business owners’ perceptions of the financial stability of their banking institution, their personal financial outlook and the economic outlook have all improved this year compared to 2009, this is the second consecutive year that overall customer satisfaction among small business banking customers has declined.
“Despite a sense of optimism in the industry among small business owners, it appears that their financial institutions are failing to keep up with their expectations,” Michael Beird, director of banking services at J.D. Power, said in announcing the results.
As a result of their less-than-stellar customer service experiences, small businesses are more willing to switch banks. Only 19 percent said they “definitely will” stay with their current bank, down from 34 percent in 2008.
“Banks that are able to deliver on key practices and partner with their small business customers have an opportunity to differentiate themselves,” said Beird. He theorized that one reason for the dissatisfaction is that small businesses have fewer sources of capital available than do big companies, and so must rely more heavily on their banks.
The survey of more than 6,000 small business owners also rated specific banks’ customer service. Overall, big banks fared worse than smaller regional banks in the survey. You can download the full survey results at the J.D. Power website.
Editor’s Note: This article was previously published at OPENForum.com under the title: “Small Business Owners’ Satisfaction With Banks is Declining.” It is republished here with permission.
Small Business Owners Report Less Satisfaction With Banks
![]()
View full post on Small Business News, Tips, Advice – Small Business Trends
Dec 1st
The federal deficit commission, a bipartisan group tasked with figuring out how to decrease the national deficit, has released a final report, aptly entitled The Moment of Truth. If the report is approved, then the commission can make official recommendations to Congress. If it’s not voted in, then Obama could still use some of these recommendations to inform his 2011 budget, which will be released early next year.
The proposals in the report, if they are implemented and work, would reduce the deficit by $4 trillion in 10 years, “more than any other effort in the nation’s history.” As the report’s own preamble states, “After all the talk about debt and deficits, it is long past time for America’s leaders to put up or shut up.”
There’s a lot in the report. Here’s what caught my eye about how the deficit commission thinks the national debt can be cut (via CNN and the report itself):
Spending and taxes should each be capped at 21% of GDP.
Cap federal health care spending at rate of economic growth + 1%. This is in addition to several other health care cost-cutting measures.
Reduce the budgets for Congress and the White House by 15 percent. Impose a three-year salary freeze on Congress. Do the same for federal employees and Defense Dept. civilians. Cut the government workforce by 10%, or 200,000 people (then worry about how to stop them from rioting). Eliminate all Congressional earmarks. Reduce federal travel, printing and vehicle budgets. Sell off excess federal real estate.
Cut agricultural subsidies (sorry, lobbyists).
Cut about $200 billion in domestic and defense spending. “The security category would include all defense spending, although for purposes of the caps we address war spending separately,” the report says. This could translate into spending a lot on war (no caps) and cutting out non-war defense spending on veterans, homeland security, and nuclear programs. There’s also a proposal to cut “redundant” weapons from the Department of Defense’s inventory–wonder who’s going to buy them?
The other 1/3 of discretionary spending has to do with housing, education, the arts, science, etc. Here’s the report’s attitude on that: “The government funds more than 44 job training programs across nine different federal agencies, at least 20 programs at 12 agencies dedicated to the study of invasive species, and 105 programs meant to encourage participation in science, technology, education, and math. Many of these programs cannot demonstrate to Congress or taxpayers they are actually accomplishing their intended purpose.” So cut ‘em is the message.
Abolish Alternative Minimum Tax. Reduce or remove tax breaks. No more itemized deductions; all deductions must be standard. Consolidate entire tax system into three tax brackets; put simply: 12% for the poor, 22% for the middle class, and 28% for the rich. Turn deductible mortgage interest into a flat tax credit w/no credit for interest or equity on second homes. Turn itemized charitable giving deduction into a flat tax credit.
Increase proportion of earnings subject to payroll tax in order to fund Social Security. “…The amount of one’s earnings subject to the payroll tax would rise to $190,000 in 2020, about $22,000 higher than it would be under current law,” according to CNN.
Corporate tax rates would be no higher than 29%, with a minimum of 23%. This, I assume, is to incentivize companies to stop offshoring and making creative tax breaks. The report also says no more corporate subsidies.
Increase gas tax by 15 cents/gallon.
Make Social Security solvent by 2085. Give fewer benefits to wealthy recipients and give lower cost-of-living adjustments.
Retirement age, now 67, will increase to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075. Early retirement age will go up from 62 to 64 by 2075. There will be hardship exemptions and a new, welfare-like minimum benefit that isn’t below 125% of the poverty line for workers with 30 years of earnings.
Social security recipients would have their benefits “bumped up” by 5% of the average benefits paid after receiving benefits for 20 years (it’s like a bonus for getting really old).
Establish a disaster fund and tighten restrictions on emergency spending.
None of these changes would start before 2012, and the tax changes wouldn’t begin until 2013.
View full post on Business Pundit
Nov 9th

Image: Alan Mak/Wikimedia Commons
Move over, Shanghai. China’s economic future lies in its center–the 20 biggest cities in inland China, to be exact. The Economist, in a new report, has dubbed this trend CHAMPS (named after some of the leading cities in its inland Top 20 list: Chongqing, Hefei, Anshan, Maanshan, Pingdingshan and Shenyang). These cities, located in rural areas, will lead Chinese urbanization and economic growth in coming years.
Indeed, since 2007, they have already been outpacing their coastal rivals in terms of growth. For example, “Zhengzhou, the capital of Henan province, will in 2020 have a bigger economy than Sweden, Hong Kong or Israel,” writes the Economist. “China’s megacities will attract a relatively high proportion of upper-income earners and their sizes will offer economies of scale and scope that will drive productivity growth in the service sectors.”
Here’s more from The Economist Intelligence Unit’s CHAMPS report, which we received a preview of:
–Just as the emergence of China’s coastal cities was one of the world’s greatest opportunities
in the past three decades, the rise of inland Chinese cities brings with it a fresh source of rapid
growth. With the CHAMPS, businesses have a chance to gain a foothold in cities where the
population will increase by nearly one-third and incomes will grow by over threefold in the short
space of a decade.
–The rise of the CHAMPS reflects China’s transition to a consumption-driven economy, with growth moving away from the export-led eastern seaboard.
–Over the next decade to 2020, the population of the top 20 emerging cities will grow by 27% to 85m, making central China a global hotspot for business opportunity. By contrast, the population of China’s richest 20 cities will only grow by 19% to 100m. The richest cities will still be important but they are already crowded markets.
–In 2009 average incomes in China’s richest 20 cities were 42% higher than in the top 20
emerging cities. By 2020 that gap will have fallen to 15%. Thus the best growth opportunities for products targeted at high-income earners will in most cases be in the inland cities.
–Market uptake of numerous types of consumer goods is still rapidly increasing in the CHAMPS, even though such consumer markets in wealthier cities are approaching saturation. Mobile phones, air conditioners and personal computers are expected to perform exceptionally well in the CHAMPS.
View full post on Business Pundit