<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/layout/rss.xsl" media="screen"?>
<!-- generator="blogHi!/1.0" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
>

<channel>
	<title>Insurance, Credit and Finance Information</title>
	<link>http://insurance.bloghi.com/</link>
	<description>Commentary on the world of finance, money and insurance.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:42:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://bloghi.com/</generator>
	

	<item>
		<title>$21B budget surplus. Is that right?</title>
		<link>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/10/21b-budget-surplus-is-that-right.html</link>
		<comments>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/10/21b-budget-surplus-is-that-right.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:47:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/10/21b-budget-surplus-is-that-right.html</guid>
		<description> 

Yes, you read that right. The federal government ran a $21
billion budget surplus last month, the best January showing in four years, as
both spending and tax receipts set records for the month.
Now this news will be shocking to many. After...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[

<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, you read that right. The federal government ran a $21
billion budget surplus last month, the best January showing in four years, as
both spending and tax receipts set records for the month.<br>
Now this news will be shocking to many. After all it was only last week that
George Bush's 2.7 trillion dollar budget was slammed by many as either a) not
aggressively attacking the budget deficit, or b) slashing many programs for the
needy.<br>
The question is whether the surplus will be used to pay down the deficit, or
whether senators will use it to fund more port-barreled projects. My feeling is
that unfortunately it will be the latter.<o:p></o:p></p>



]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRSS>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/10/21b-budget-surplus-is-that-right.html#comments</wfw:commentRSS>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Confessions of an Economic Hit Man - Eye Opening Book</title>
		<link>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/confessions-of-an-economic-hit-man-eye-opening-book.html</link>
		<comments>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/confessions-of-an-economic-hit-man-eye-opening-book.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 06:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/confessions-of-an-economic-hit-man-eye-opening-book.html</guid>
		<description> 

I am reading Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins. Fascinating look at aid to the
Less Developed Countries (LDC) and the roll that the Developed Countries (DC),
including the US,
play in running up the debt for the LDC. The book...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[

<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I am reading Confessions of an <span style="">Economic Hit Man by </span>John Perkins. Fascinating look at aid to the
Less Developed Countries (LDC) and the roll that the Developed Countries (DC),
including the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place>,
play in running up the debt for the LDC. The book got me thinking about <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region> and the
rebuilding that is going on there. The <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region> government is borrowing tens
of billions of dollars from the DC’s to upgrade their infrastructure. The work
(and a lot of the money) is going to American companies like Haliburton. So in
essence it is a money transfer from the <st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region>
government to US companies, with the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region> government being saddled with
the bills.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>




<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Great book. It will really open your eyes to the while
foreign aid process.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>



]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRSS>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/confessions-of-an-economic-hit-man-eye-opening-book.html#comments</wfw:commentRSS>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>What is a tax cut for the rich?</title>
		<link>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/what-is-a-tax-cut-for-the-rich.html</link>
		<comments>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/what-is-a-tax-cut-for-the-rich.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 05:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/what-is-a-tax-cut-for-the-rich.html</guid>
		<description> 

Leaving in the Northeast I get the privilege of reading the
Boston Globe on a daily basis. The Globe and their columnists often mention the
2003 Bush tax cuts as being the tax cuts of the rich. Can someone explain to me
what that...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[

<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Leaving in the Northeast I get the privilege of reading the
Boston Globe on a daily basis. The Globe and their columnists often mention the
2003 Bush tax cuts as being the tax cuts of the rich. Can someone explain to me
what that means?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>


<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center</span></font><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">, the effect
of eliminating dividend taxation (part of the 2003 tax cut plan) is that the
average benefit for those making less than $10,000 would be $6, and average
benefit for those making more than $1 million would be $45,098. <a href="www.commondreams.org/views03/0115-05.htm">Molly Ivins</a>
asked “Quick, high-schoolers, let's practice up for the those SATs by figuring
out by what percentage $45,098 is bigger than $6.” <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>


<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Now
why I hate to disagree with Ms. Ivins, but a tax cut is a tax cut for everyone.
If I make $10,000 a year and Bill Gates makes $100 million a year and we both
get a 10% reduction in taxes, I might save $1,000 while Bill will save $10
million.<span style="">&nbsp; </span>The percent of savings is the
same. You cannot say that this tax cut favored the rich just because Bill Gates
would save $10 million and I would save $1,000. That is comparing apples to
oranges. We both benefit the same.<br>
</span></font></p>
<p>So can someone please explain to me what a tax cut for the rich is?<br>
<font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>



]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRSS>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/07/what-is-a-tax-cut-for-the-rich.html#comments</wfw:commentRSS>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Unemployment News - Why no celebration</title>
		<link>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/06/unemployment-news-why-no-celebration.html</link>
		<comments>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/06/unemployment-news-why-no-celebration.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 07:39:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/06/unemployment-news-why-no-celebration.html</guid>
		<description> Last week's unemployment figures were met with stoned silence in the
media. You would think that the unemployment rate dropping to a 4 1/2
year low would be cause for celebration. But no. Why?
The unemployment report showed that the unemployment...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[Last week's unemployment figures were met with stoned silence in the
media. You would think that the unemployment rate dropping to a 4 1/2
year low would be cause for celebration. But no. Why?<br>
The unemployment report showed that the unemployment rate for blacks fell to 8.9%, the best since September
2001, while the rate for Hispanics dipped to a five-month low of
5.8%.<br>
Since the Bush tax cits were implemented the US economy has created
over 4 million jobs! And these jobs are not the hamgurger flipping
kind. The average hourly earnings climbed to $16.41 in January, up 0.4%
from December.<br>
<br>


]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRSS>http://insurance.bloghi.com/2006/02/06/unemployment-news-why-no-celebration.html#comments</wfw:commentRSS>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>