Exclusive Teleseminar Invitation

I want to extend a very special invitation to you.

On March 11th, I’m going to be conducting a live 60-minute teleseminar called…

How to Create a Perpetual Moneymaking Machine

I’m going to personally tell you about a brand new moneymaking strategy (via telephone). You can listen to the entire teleseminar from the privacy and comfort of your own home. And to make things even better, I’m not going to charge you anything to attend. Not one dime.

I’m going to be revealing the exact moneymaking method that I used to generate a reported 45 million dollars in profit in just 18 months. During the call, I may discuss the law of attraction, success strategies of secret societies, infomercials and media, direct marketing, controversial topics, business strategies, investing techniques, the millionaire mindset or even personal things about myself. You will never know, unless you attend.

This is my way of saying thanks to you.

Before I give you the sign up information, I need to share something VERY IMPORTANT…

Due to the number of call-in lines, I can only take a limited number of students. Therefore, it is crucial that you reserve your spot right now – today! There is no question that with today’s economy being what it is, and people’s general desire to make more money quickly —- this event will fill up fast. Signups are first-come, first served!

For more details and to reserve your spot right away, please click here.

Do not delay. How to Create a Perpetual Moneymaking Machine will teach you how to potentially become financially free or even a millionaire. Do not delay; this teleseminar will fill up fast. Remember, I can only take so many students on the call. Sign up and reserve your spot right away.

I look forward to chatting with you on March 11th.

Wall Street Bonuses and Unemployment Continue To Grow

February 26, 2010

The International Forecaster

People should not underestimate the rational of those in high places because their agenda may be totally different then what they say it is. That includes the predicament of Dubai and Greece and a host of other nations that include the US and UK. The credit crisis, borne of the subprime crisis just didn’t happen; it was planned that way. Are we supposed to believe that the Fed took interest rates close to zero and that they flooded the monetary system with money and credit, because they were incompetent or stupid, hardly? The Fed, banking and Wall Street knew subprime loans were not AAA, but triple BBB. They all knew the syndication of these bonds were a fraud, which they allowed and which kicked off the credit crisis. Again, all is not as it seems to be. Thus, those of you who believe it was greed and incompetence are wrong. Up until four years ago it was Sir Alan Greenspan who sold his soul out to the Illuminists, now it is Ben Bernanke.

The troubles that countries are having with sovereign debt are growing exponentially. First it was Dubai supposedly with $100 billion in debt problems, which in fact may be underwater three or four times that number. Then, of course, there are a host of others. In the case of Dubai, British banks are holding the bag and probably will go down in flames. Greece cannot find any support even from Goldman Sachs. The Germans don’t want to help even though they knew Greece never was qualified to be in the euro. Greece is in a state of denial; is demanding reparations from Germany, which in 1960 paid a substantial amount to Greece in compensation. Germans for some time have wanted to exit the euro and the eurozone, some 71%. They have been sick and tired of carrying most of the rest of the zone with their balance of payments surplus. Greece makes up about 2.4% of GDP of the zone hardly enough to be concerned about. Eurozone governments would be better off writing off Greek bonds than subsidizing the country. Any bailout would be short lived, because so many other nations are in serious trouble. Let’s face it the eurozone is really Germany, France and the Netherlands.

For the last two months the dollar with the help of insiders Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, who knew the Greek problem was on the way, has had an unusual rally that is about to end. They obviously knew the IMF would announce another gold sale and that the Fed would raise the discount rate. How could they not know with Goldman controlling the Treasury and Morgan the Fed? They also knew like any other observant economic professional that M3 was being reduced to almost no expansion as was happening simultaneously by the ECB and England, an event that would tend to strengthen the dollar. Doing this they all are playing a very dangerous game. If they lose control deflation will overwhelm inflation and a deflationary depression could begin. That will happen eventually, but the elitists would like it to happen on their timetable. The US has to find a way to end monetization and they have run out of options. The only possibility is for government to steal Americans’ retirement plans. The trouble is almost all sovereign debt cannot be avoided. Now the only question is when will the big conference begin to revalue, and devalue currencies, settle debt default and form a new international currency-trading unit in part backed by gold? All nations have been well aware for a long time that sovereign debt and some corporate and individual debt will never be repaid. That is why nations have reduced dollar holdings from 64.5% of foreign reserves to 61.4%. With the exception of four nations sovereign debt is not worth the paper it is written on. They are Switzerland, Canada, Australia and Norway.

The dollar rally will soon end and speculators should begin to take short positions. All the good news for the dollar is out. For the moment it is the best of a bad lot. Then only real money is gold and silver. In the future more and more people worldwide will realize that and eventually there will be a stampede into the two precious metals. America will produce a debt to GDP ratio or 95% to 100% this year.

A staggering blow to the Illuminists is the exposure of the criminal cartel known as Goldman Sachs in their testimony to Congress and now helping Italy and Greece illegally circumvent eurozone rules. This will push the public away from investment and toward the safety of gold and silver.

In an attempt to smother inflation and hyperinflation the US government may follow China’s lead and increase reserve requirements. That may reduce inflation, but it would also bring the US closer to deflationary depression. One false step and the game is over. That risk also includes the ECB and England. Funds already are not being lent out and such further constriction could be disastrous. Credit has already dropped by trillions of dollars as unemployment continues to grow. There is now no question that there will be no recovery. How can there be when there is little money and credit available to grease the skids of recovery. All we are seeing is a switch to stage 2 of inflation. The question is will central banks lose control, and it is obvious they are acting in concert, and fall victim to a deflationary depression.

Domestically real estate foreclosures, both residential and commercial, continue to climb. The government’s attempt to assist the residential market has been pathetic in a situation that is overwhelming. By next year, 50% of homeowners could be under water. Business can’t get the loans they need, so they cannot increase employment and the more workers fired the more who have lost their homes.

Click here for the full report

The Kevin Trudeau Show: 2-24-10

Today, Kevin explains who really controls the mainstream media outlets and gives you detailed proof that they are deceiving the public, especially with his court proceedings. Plus, find out how high fructose corn syrup is like crack cocaine!

Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!


Click below to hear The Kevin Trudeau Show RIGHT NOW!!!

Eco Friendly Brands and the Truth

February 22, 2010

Organic Consumers Association

By Peter Aldhous and Phil McKenna

IF YOU care about the environment, you may want to show that in the way you spend your money. Maybe you shop at an organic food store rather than a conventional supermarket. You probably look at energy efficiency labels before buying a new laptop. And if you’re really serious, you may even be concentrating your nest egg into “green” investment funds.

All of these decisions could help steer us towards a truly green economy – but only if consumers and investors have a good idea of which companies have genuinely minimised their impact on the environment. Do the corporations that benefit from our environmentally conscious purchasing and investment choices deserve their green halo?

To find out, New Scientist teamed up with two companies that have collected the most relevant data. Earthsense, based in Syracuse, New York, has polled US consumers on their perceptions of the “greenness” of various companies. Trucost, headquartered in London, has compiled an unparalleled quantitative assessment of companies’ global environmental impact (see interactive graphic, and “How we crunched the numbers”).

Bringing these two sets of information together shows just how confused ordinary people are about companies’ green credentials. Overall, there was no correlation between the Earthsense and Trucost scores, suggesting that US consumers have little idea about companies’ environmental performance relative to each other. And looking within industrial sectors, the only hint of accurate consumer awareness came for technology companies (see “Geeks, gadgets and the environment”).

In some cases there were dramatic mismatches between perceptions and reality. Take media firm Discovery Communications: its environmental impact, per dollar earned, is almost indistinguishable from TV and movie giant Viacom. Yet Discovery has a stellar green reputation that Viacom does not enjoy – which could be due to Discovery’s content, which includes Animal Planet TV and websites such as TreeHugger.

Some of the greatest confusion surrounds the food and beverage sector. Of the 115 firms we analysed, producers of food and drinks stood out as having the highest environmental impact – significantly different from media firms, retailers, technology companies and manufacturers of personal and household goods. Yet there were no significant differences in consumer perceptions between the sectors. In general, US consumers fail to recognise the high environmental costs associated with agriculture and food processing.

When it comes to perception, one company’s high score truly stands out: Whole Foods Market, which operates more than 270 stores, mostly in the US. As a purveyor of “natural and organic produce”, everything about Whole Foods shouts green. In addition to its overall branding, the company has taken steps to reinforce its environmental credentials, including improving the efficiency of its refrigerators and reducing packaging. But Trucost’s modelling rates Whole Foods no better than conventional supermarkets such as Safeway.

Click here for the full report

Man Bulldozes House Ahead of Foreclosure

February 22, 2010

WLWT

Like many people, Terry Hoskins has had troubles with his bank. But his solution to foreclosure might be unique.

Hoskins said he’s been in a struggle with RiverHills Bank over his Clermont County home for nearly a decade, a struggle that was coming to an end as the bank began foreclosure proceedings on his $350,000 home.

“When I see I owe $160,000 on a home valued at $350,000, and someone decides they want to take it – no, I wasn’t going to stand for that, so I took it down,” Hoskins said.Hoskins said the Internal Revenue Service placed liens on his carpet store and commercial property on state Route 125 after his brother, a one-time business partner, sued him.The bank claimed his home as collateral, Hoskins said, and went after both his residential and commercial properties.

“The average homeowner that can’t afford an attorney or can fight as long as we have, they don’t stand a chance,” he said.

Hoskins said he’d gotten a $170,000 offer from someone to pay off the house, but the bank refused, saying they could get more from selling it in foreclosure.

Hoskins told News 5’s Courtis Fuller that he issued the bank an ultimatum.

“I’ll tear it down before I let you take it,” Hoskins told them.

And that’s exactly what Hoskins did.The Moscow man used a bulldozer two weeks ago to level the home he’d built, and the sprawling country home is now rubble, buried under a coating of snow.

“As far as what the bank is going to get, I plan on giving them back what was on this hill exactly (as) it was,” Hoskins said. “I brought it out of the ground and I plan on putting it back in the ground.”

Hoskins’ business in Amelia is scheduled to go up for auction on March 2, and he told Fuller he’s considering leveling that building, too.

RiverHills Bank declined to comment on the situation, but Hoskins said his actions were intended to send a message.

“Well, to probably make banks think twice before they try to take someone’s home, and if they are going to take it wrongly, the end result will be them tearing their house down like I did mine,” Hoskins said.Hoskins said he’s heard from people all over the country since his story first aired Thursday, and he said most have been supportive.

He said he sought legal counsel before tearing down his home and understands the possible consequences, but he has never doubted his decision once he made it.

“When I knew I was going to lose it, I decided to take it down,” Hoskins said.

Click here for the full report

Top 5 Health Insurers Post 57% Profit Gain

February 12, 2010

The Raw Story

By John Byrne

If no health care overhaul passes Congress, health insurers may be in for a windfall — and one far larger that most Americans probably realize.

According to a study by a pro-health reform group published Thursday, the nation’s largest five health insurance companies posted a 56 percent gain in 2009 profits over 2008. The insurers including Wellpoint, UnitedHealth, Cigna, Aetna and Humana, which cover the majority of Americans with insurance.

The insurers’ hefty profit gains came even as 2.7 million more Americans lost their insurance coverage due to the declining economy.

A lobbyist for American’s Health Insurance Plans, the trade group that represents insurers in Washington, D.C., attributed the gain in 2009 profits to a poor performance in 2008. In 2008, insurers were forced to write down their stock holdings because of the US market’s declines. Insurance companies keep a great deal of money in the markets, earning interest from the time between premiums are paid and the time when health providers are paid.

“It is disingenuous to look at the profits at one company today compared to where it was in the depth of a recession,” Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, told the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Click here for the full report

Britain Faces Oil Crunch Within 5 Years

February 11, 2010

Telegraph

It said the challenges facing the UK would exceed those presented by the financial crisis and said the poorest in society were most vulnerable to potentially significant increases.

The report said Government must acknowledge the risks to the economy and to produce contingency plans for transport, retail, agriculture and alternative power.

‘Unless we do so, we face a situation during the term of the next government where fuel price unrest could lead to shortages in consumer products and the UK’s energy security will be significantly compromised,” it said.

The report was compiled by the Industry Taskforce for Peak Oil and Energy Security, a group of private British companies whose members include Sir Richard, Brian Souter, chief executive of Stagecoach, Scottish & Southern Energy boss Ian Marchant and Philip Dilley, chairman of consultancy firm Arup.

Virgin Group founder Sir Richard – whose airline and rail businesses are sensitive to volatility in the cost of crude – said businesses and Government should work together to prepare the economy.

”UK competitiveness will be hampered unless we can develop viable, affordable and secure long term sources of alternative energy,” he said.

While the report did not address climate change directly, it stressed ”massive areas of overlap” between the issues of depleted resources and pollution.

It said transportation was particularly vulnerable to rising oil prices, with businesses from supermarkets to manufacturers reliant on delivery networks.

The group said alternative methods of powering vehicles – for example electrification of the railways – should be explored and infrastructure developed.

It recommended removing the current £9 billion tax break on fuel for domestic airlines and using the money for public transport investment, while also encouraging a shift away from car travel.

”The UK’s freight network, cars and public transport systems are almost entirely dependent on oil,” Mr Souter said.

”The twin threats of the oil crunch and climate change make that unsustainable.”

Mr Marchant warned economic growth ”will be endangered” as price rises hike the cost of raw materials and deplete consumers’ spending power.

”There is the danger of creating a social recession as the poorest households get hit the hardest by higher prices,” the Scottish & Southern Energy boss said.

Government was also urged to plan for food price hikes, as agriculture relies on oil-related products like fertilisers.

The report comes amid general fears about future energy security and costs in the UK.

Energy watchdog Ofgem has warned electricity and gas may become unaffordable for an increasing number of households unless drastic action is taken to secure power supplies.

Oil prices have been particularly volatile in recent years, spiking at $147 a barrel in July 2008 before plummeting to $32 a barrel that December amid the financial crisis and onset of the economic downturn.

It climbed again to around $70 to $80 late last year and has stayed relatively static as many world economies remain under pressure.

Global economic woes have pushed the ”oil crunch” point – when global demand will use up stocks faster than they can be replaced by new production – back by two years and given governments and firms more time to work out how to act.

But oil prices are still predicted to climb to a sustained level above $100 a barrel within the next five years.

And the UK is seen to be particularly vulnerable to price fluctuations as it increasingly relies on energy imports.

Sudden supply shocks would ”quickly reverberate throughout the UK’s supply chain”, according to Dr Robert Falkner of the London School of Economics, who compiled part of the report.

”Air travel and road haulage are now the key reasons behind our dangerous addiction to oil,” he said.

The widely expected de-coupling of gas and oil prices should ease the pressure on household energy costs.

”Nevertheless, a rise in living costs – in the form of higher travel and transport costs and consumer prices – is firmly on the agenda,” he added.

Click here for the full report

Study Shows Why it is So Scary to Lose Money

February 8th,  2010

reuters.com

The study of two women with brain lesions that made them unafraid to lose on a gamble showed the amygdala, the brain’s fear center, activates at the very thought of losing money.

The finding, reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, offers insight into economic behavior and suggests that humans evolved to be cautious about the prospects of losing food or other valued possessions.

Benedetto De Martinoa of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena and University College of London and colleagues were studying why people will turn down gambles that are likely to lead to gain.

“Laboratory and field evidence suggests that people often avoid risks with losses even when they might earn a substantially larger gain, a behavioral preference termed ‘loss aversion’,” they wrote.

“For instance, people will avoid gambles in which they are equally likely to either lose $10 or win $15, even though the expected value of the gamble is positive ($2.50).”

They studied two women with a rare genetic condition called Urbach-Wiethe disease, which damages the amygdala, the almond-shaped center in the brain that controls fear and certain other acute emotions.

The researchers compared the women’s responses to 12 people with undamaged brains. They noted this kind of study usually involves only a few people as it is not possible or ethical to deliberately damage a person’s brain to see what happens.

The volunteers were asked to make gambles in which there was an equal probability they would win $20 or lose $5 (a risk most people will take) — or would win or lose $20 (one most people will reject).

The two patients with damaged amygdalas fearlessly risked a $50 pot.

“We think this shows that the amygdala is critical for triggering a sense of caution toward making gambles in which you might lose,” Colin Camerera of University College London, who worked in the study, said in a statement.

“A fully functioning amygdala appears to make us more cautious,” added his colleague Ralph Adolphs. “We already know that the amygdala is involved in processing fear, and it also appears to make us ‘afraid’ to risk losing money.”

The study could also help researchers understand why some people are more willing to take risks than others. Perhaps genetic differences in the DNA activated in the amygdala explain it, the researchers said.

Click here for the full report

Social Security Bailout Is Next

February5, 2010

Yahoo Finance

By Allen Sloan

Don’t look now. But even as the bank bailout is winding down, another huge bailout is starting, this time for the Social Security system.

A report from the Congressional Budget Office shows that for the first time in 25 years, Social Security is taking in less in taxes than it is spending on benefits.

Instead of helping to finance the rest of the government, as it has done for decades, our nation’s biggest social program needs help from the Treasury to keep benefit checks from bouncing — in other words, a taxpayer bailout.

More from CNNMoney.com:

• Obama’s Budget: Impact on Your Taxes

• Stimulus: Secret Sequel in the Budget

• Bang for the Buck. Finally.
No one has officially announced that Social Security will be cash-negative this year. But you can figure it out for yourself, as I did, by comparing two numbers in the recent federal budget update that the nonpartisan CBO issued last week.

The first number is $120 billion, the interest that Social Security will earn on its trust fund in fiscal 2010 (see page 74 of the CBO report). The second is $92 billion, the overall Social Security surplus for fiscal 2010 (see page 116).

This means that without the interest income, Social Security will be $28 billion in the hole this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.

Why disregard the interest? Because as people like me have said repeatedly over the years, the interest, which consists of Treasury IOUs that the Social Security trust fund gets on its holdings of government securities, doesn’t provide Social Security with any cash that it can use to pay its bills. The interest is merely an accounting entry with no economic significance.

Social Security hasn’t been cash-negative since the early 1980s, when it came so close to running out of money that it was making plans to stop sending out benefit checks. That led to the famous Greenspan Commission report, which recommended trimming benefits and raising taxes, which Congress did. Those actions produced hefty cash surpluses, which until this year have helped finance the rest of the government.

But even then, it was clear the surpluses would be temporary. Now, years earlier than projected, Social Security is adding to the government’s borrowing needs, even though the program still shows a surplus on paper.

If you go to the aforementioned pages in the CBO update and consult the tables on them, you see that the budget office projects smaller cash deficits (about $19 billion annually) for fiscal 2011 and 2012. Then the program approaches break-even for a while before the deficits resume.

Social Security currently provides more than half the income for a majority of retirees. Given the declines in stock prices and home values that have whacked millions of people, the program seems likely to become more important in the future as a source of retirement income, rather than less important.

It would have been a lot simpler to fix the system years ago, when we could have used Social Security’s cash surpluses to buy non-Treasury securities, such as government-backed mortgage bonds or high-grade corporates that would have helped cover future cash shortfalls. Now it’s too late.

Even though an economic recovery might produce some small, fleeting cash surpluses, Social Security’s days of being flush are over.

To be sure — three of the most dangerous words in journalism — the current Social Security cash deficits aren’t all that big, given that Social Security is a $700 billion program this year, and that the government expects to borrow about $1.5 trillion in fiscal 2010 to cover its other obligations, about the same as it borrowed in fiscal 2009.

But this year’s Social Security cash shortfall is a watershed event. Until this year, Social Security was a problem for the future. Now it’s a problem for the present.

Click here for full report.

To Pay Off The National Debt Is Now Mathematically Impossible

February5, 2010

The Economic Collapse

A lot of people are very upset about the rapidly increasing U.S. national debt these days and they are demanding a solution. What they don’t realize is that there simply is not a solution under the current U.S. financial system. It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.

And the U.S. government would still be massively in debt.

So why doesn’t the U.S. government just fire up the printing presses and print a bunch of money to pay off the debt?

Well, for one very simple reason.

That is not the way our system works.

You see, for more dollars to enter the system, the U.S. government has to go into more debt.

The U.S. government does not issue U.S. currency – the Federal Reserve does.

The Federal Reserve is a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers.

If you will pull a dollar bill out and take a look at it, you will notice that it says “Federal Reserve Note” at the top.

It belongs to the Federal Reserve.

The U.S. government cannot simply go out and create new money whenever it wants under our current system.

Instead, it must get it from the Federal Reserve.

So, when the U.S. government needs to borrow more money (which happens a lot these days) it goes over to the Federal Reserve and asks them for some more green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes.

The Federal Reserve swaps these green pieces of paper for pink pieces of paper called U.S. Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve either sells these U.S. Treasury bonds or they keep the bonds for themselves (which happens a lot these days).

So that is how the U.S. government gets more green pieces of paper called “U.S. dollars” to put into circulation. But by doing so, they get themselves into even more debt which they will owe even more interest on.

So every time the U.S. government does this, the national debt gets even bigger and the interest on that debt gets even bigger.

Are you starting to get the picture?

As you read this, the U.S. national debt is approximately 12 trillion dollars, although it is going up so rapidly that it is really hard to pin down an exact figure.

So how much money actually exists in the United States today?

Well, there are several ways to measure this.

The “M0″ money supply is the total of all physical bills and currency, plus the money on hand in bank vaults and all of the deposits those banks have at reserve banks. As of mid-2009, the Federal Reserve said that this amount was about 908 billion dollars.

The “M1″ money supply includes all of the currency in the “M0″ money supply, along with all of the money held in checking accounts and other checkable accounts at banks, as well as all money contained in travelers’ checks. According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 1.7 trillion dollars in December 2009, but not all of this money actually “exists” as we will see in a moment.

Click here for full report.

Next Page »