Silver Price Suppression pt 1/3 The End of Silver Price Manipulation, Price To Go Much Higher! (Ted Butler) Market Analyst, At Spread Betting Company WorldSpreads, Comments On The Gold Price Reaching $1500 Silver Price In genuine reality, silver price is rising so it is awfully good for the investors to invest in silver. As a matter of fact, you too can become the smartest investor by buying high quality silver bullion coins. … Money Investment | Gold Silver Price Today; June Contract Gold … Gold and china cost per unit stipulate rates changed aloft via the trade event in the United States. Precious metals were the renouned allowance investment duri. Silver and Gold Prices: The Gold Price Will Go Higher Before this … The GOLD PRICE will go higher before this rally ends. Higher, I say. Here’s a sample of how Comex closes alone can confound you. On Comex the SILVER PRICE ended at 4446.5c, up 54.6c. Not bad, but it ignores the silver price trading in … PM stock and price of silver – Kitco Forums One word for you regarding miners… Nationalization This has nothing to do with silver price and EVERYthing to do with silver price . Watch out Bolivia…who is next? History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse … SLV Silver ETF vs. SLW Silver Wheaton – Price Divergence Quick update on the silver price development as opposed to major silver mining stocks. I’ll stick to SLW – Silver Wheaton as it is considered to be the bellwether stock in the silver miners realm. Although it is mainly a royalty company … inwithbacchus says: @thecigarnut 149% increase in silver price over the past year. Wowza.
Continue reading …A Singapore man who went to a rooftop garden for a cigarette ended up saving a newborn’s life. The retired 60-year-old smoker heard soft mewing noises coming from nearby bushes and discovered a newborn baby buried just beneath the surface, reports the Straits Times . A plastic bag was wrapped around…
Continue reading …
‘Restrepo’ director Tim Hetherington killed in Libya; Elton John opens the 10th Tribeca Film Fest opens in New York; Lindsay Lohan to play Junior Gotti’s wife. (April 21)
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media It looks like MSNBC felt enough pressure from some of us to bring Andrew Breitbart on Martin Bashir’s show today for a second go-round at what some thought would be a more serious interview. To MSNBC: Just get rid of the racists. Pat Buchanan needs to go and Breitbart should not be allowed to appear on anyone’s show to pimp a book which is an intellectually dishonest screed about how devoted Breitbart is to the truth. This is not free speech suppression. It’s simply NOT NEWS. Yes, Martin Bashir did his best to wade through the contradictions and nonsense, but anyone who has ever seen Andrew Breitbart in action knows he’s a verbal bully who can’t shut up long enough to give a straight answer. All he does is filibuster and distract, because he doesn’t really care about the truth. This is all about him. Every time he gets a platform to go on about himself, he uses it. Even in this meltdown at the end of the interview where he just starts ranting about Media Matters talking points and the like, it’s classic Breitbart. Remember, this is the guy who ” just likes doing things that are wrong .” You know what? All three of my kids threw tantrums when they were two years old too. We didn’t put them on national television. We sent them to their room. Take a lesson, MSNBC.
Continue reading …
Tokyo (CNN) — Japan will on Friday begin enforcing an evacuation order on a 20-kilometer zone around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, a top government official said. The restriction –in place since the early days of the nuclear disaster — has often been ignored. Many of the about 78,000 people who have homes in the evacuation zone have gone back in recent weeks to retrieve belongings, and check on farms and businesses. No one will be allowed within 3 kilometers of the crippled nuclear facility and entry within 20 kilometers of the plant will be highly regulated, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano…
Continue reading …Executive Pay Skyrockets 23 Percent In 2010, Top 299 CEOs Get $3.4 Billion
April 21, 2011 No Comment
WASHINGTON — CEOs at 299 U.S. companies earned a staggering $3.4 billion combined in executive compensation in 2010, a new study by the nation’s largest labor union found. Nearly 190 of those chief executives got a pay raise compared to their 2009 levels, the AFL-CIO noted in a report presented to reporters on Tuesday. The total amount of compensation represented a 23 percent increase from the prior year. In all, the sum of the salaries earned by those 299 CEOs equalled the combined average earnings of more than 100,000 workers in their respective companies. The figures, which are part of the union federation’s annual Executive PayWatch — a searchable database examining publicly available payment information from S&P 500 Companies — reflect what AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka called a culture of “runaway CEO pay.” The numbers were presented as part of a larger pitch for Congress and the President to clamp down on executive compensation and protect the gains made on this front in the financial regulatory reform bill passed last year. “The game is pretty rigged when it comes to the directors,” said Trumka. “It is getting a little better because the spotlight that we have been trying to shine on this for 15 years is starting to get a littler brighter now. We are having a moderating effect. But I think if the spotlight were to go away the game would go right back to what it was before.” A request for comment from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which lobbies on behalf of business interests, was not immediately returned. Under the financial regulatory reform bill, commonly known as Dodd-Frank, shareholders of publicly traded companies are given a say-on-pay vote on executive compensation. While the votes are not binding, union officials view them as a vehicle for spotlighting — or at least embarrassing — executives who earn vastly disproportionate wages compared to the rest of their work force. Among those CEOs highlighted in the AFL-CIO’s presentation were Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman (who was awarded salary, stock and other benefits totaling $84.5 million during just nine months of 2010), Occidental Petroleum CEO Ray Irani (who was paid more than $76 million in compensation) and Abercrombie and Fitch CEO Michael Jeffries (who earned more than $36 million). According to the AFL-CIO report, the average pay of the 299 CEOs would cover the salaries of more than 700 minimum-wage workers. “The levels of pay that we are seeing today are simply unacceptable,” said Brandon Rees, Deputy Director of the AFL-CIO’s Office of Investment. Outrage over an imbalance in compensation levels is nothing new for the union federation. The 12 million-member AFL-CIO has been putting out Executive PayWatch studies since 1997. Since then, compensation for CEOs has soared dramatically. At various points, different remedies to curb rising CEO pay have been proposed, including advocating that companies that receive federal funds should be subject to actual caps on executive salaries. Now, however, proponents of limiting CEO pay have scaled back their ambitions, pushing transparency and the subsequent public shame as key remedies. “This is a particularly important time for shareholders and anybody who wants to hold CEO’s accountable, because the regulations are being written right now… and [companies] are doing everything they can to try and dilute those regulations,” said Trumka. “[Any] spotlight that can be put on them right now and their efforts to try to dilute the law and go back to business as usual for Wall Street is very, very helpful.” UPDATE: J.P. Fielder, a spokesman for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, sends over the following reaction to the AFL-CIO’s push to tackle CEO pay. The Chamber feels that corporate executives’ compensation should be based on a balance of individual accomplishment, corporate performance, adherence to risk management, and compliance with laws and regulations, with a focus on shareholder value. The government should not pick winners and losers.
Continue reading …
The news is out this morning that Glenn Beck is planning to leave New York…well, at least leaving his New York-adjacent Connecticut mansion. But the host put a fine point on it this weekend when, at a live event in Albany, he announced that he will not be building his new media empire, which will invent a “new way to communicate with each other,” in New York City. Now, you might think you know why Beck is leaving the Empire State, but as is always the case, there’s never just one reason. And so we have pie charts. Below, we’ve calculated the various factors influencing Beck’s decision to leave New York. If we’ve left any out, just let us know in the comments.
Continue reading …
We’ve been hit by a big batch of dismayed tips from PlayStation gamers this morning, who are finding themselves unable to log in to the PlayStation Network ( again ). Sony’s response has been to acknowledge there’s a problem in the vaguest of terms — “We’re aware certain functions of PlayStation Network are down” — and to promise an update on the situation as soon as it’s available. Alas, that statement was issued over nine hours ago and there’s still no word of either a rectification or an explanation for the outage. The error code provided by the console is, as you can see above, somewhat uninformative as well. So come on, Sony, what is going on with your Network? [Thanks to everyone who sent this in] PlayStation Network down for a long count, what’s up Sony? originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:04:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
Old Spice has introduced a new spokesman in their new somewhat disturbing “Jungle Wilderness” commercial. Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Laughing Squid Discovery Date : 20/04/2011 04:00 Number of articles : 5
Continue reading …
A judge has granted an injunction on the grounds that revelations of a couple’s affair could harm the children involved I wasn’t planning to write about privacy again this week, but just when you think the coast is clear another contentious case comes speeding along the injunction superhighway. This week the court of appeal brings us the “Shhh. Not in Front of the Children Order”. Children, it turns out, can be the new passport to privacy. Don’t get me wrong. I have no objection to the decision in ETK v News Group Newspapers to stop the News of the World naming the man and woman, both married to other people, who had an affair when working together in the entertainment industry (as the judgment tantalisingly puts it). I do worry, however, about how the appeal judges got there. The News of the World argued that there was a public interest in discussing whether the affair was the true reason “X” (not her real name) was dispensed with by her employer. The court of appeal disagreed. Although the newspaper maintained that the relationship was not confidential because the pair’s co-workers knew about it, the appeal court said that was not enough to put it in the public domain. The case could have been won or lost on an examination of those facts alone, weighing, as the law requires, the right to privacy against freedom of expression, but the court of appeal decided to throw children into the balance on the side of the man seeking the injunction. The children were “bound to be harmed by immediate publicity”, said Lord Justice Ward, because it would undermine the family as a whole and “because the playground is a cruel place where the bullies feed on personal discomfort and embarrassment”. These things may be true, but was the court of appeal right to decide that the harmful effect of disclosure on children should “tip the balance” in favour of injuncting a newspaper? Adopting this approach, the court said that the rights of children to be taken into consideration when an injunction is sought are not confined to their article 8 (privacy) rights, but include the duty of the court, under international law and various international human rights documents, to treat the bests interests of the children as paramount when making any decision concerning them. In other words, the court of appeal treated the application for an injunction as an application concerning children. There are problems with viewing privacy through the prism of child-centred decision-making. Despite Lord Justice Ward’s protestations to the contrary, this case means that children are likely to become the trump card in injunctive proceedings: if an application for an injunction is going to be treated as an application concerning children, it is difficult to see how the effect on them will not frequently (if not always) “tip the balance”. More importantly, perhaps, it creates a two-tier right to a private life, which places privacy rights of people who have children above those who don’t. That looks like discrimination to me. Children Media law Privacy Siobhain Butterworth guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …