According to an interview done at the CNBC Squawk Box of the US Money Reserve President, Philip Diehl about the demise of the penny, he firmly believes that it should remain dormant this is because it does not play a vital role in the daily business transactions. To make it worse, he says that the penny lost its usefulness over 25 years ago. Therefore, the manufacture of the Penny proves to be a liability to the economy because instead of generating profit it causes high losses. The capital used to produce it is more than the profit realised. The penny does not even qualify to be in the stock market ranking due to the loss of its worth over the years.
Philip Diehl comments and says that it lost its popularity among the citizens to the point that nobody uses it anymore hence most people ignore it even if they found it lying down in the streets. He says that for those who take it, it must be less than their minimum wage for their trouble pun intended. Despite all that the interviewer mentions that some economists insist that if the penny is wiped out of the economy then, it could inevitably lead to inflation. The Us Money Reserve President then says that due to technological advancements most transactions are done electronically. Therefore, the penny elimination will not affect much.
The greatest lobbies for the stay of the penny is the zinc industry as the penny is made of 97.5% of zinc. Hence, they make the most profit and the Illinois congregational delegation that protects it as it is the seed on American coinage featuring Abraham Lincoln. Fortunately due to the competition in the marketplace, it will discipline companies not to increase prices hence prevent exploitation of customers. In addition to that, elimination of the penny will enable the money reserve to save up to 105 million dollars annually. In conclusion, Philip Diehl is sure that demise of the penny brings good than harm as there is no hope for it.
Investing is an important and necessary part of life. People need to save a percentage of the income they earn in many cases. This allows them to be able to do things they want to such as save to buy a house they like in a neighborhood they prefer. Saving up a percentage of one’s paycheck also allows the save to be able to do others things such as creating a nest egg that can be later used to help supplement a retirement check or assist a child in getting a start in life by paying for their educational and wedding expenses. Savings also allow the saver to remain calm and free of worrry should something less than ideal happen in their lives such as an inability for a period of time due to a temporary physical problem or an accident of some sort.
However necessary investing is in life, it is not always easy for the ordinary person to figure out. Many people are at a loss to figure out the best way to earn a decent rate of return on their capital and to avoid having their capital eaten away from the strains of inflation. This is why many people look for help. Those who have a background in the fiscal field such as Sam Tabar. Mr. Tabar has an extensive background in the fields of both finance and law. Tabar has done extremely well academically. He was educated at the highly prestigious Oxford University, one of the best universities in all of the United Kingdom. Mr. Tabar also has a law degree from New York City’s Columbia University. Here, he was the editor of the Associate Editor of the school’s highly admired Columbia Business Law Review and one of those students in charge of helping to write and edit articles published in one of the nation’s foremost law journals.
Tabar has spent the last decade working in various areas of law and business. Doing so has allowed him to develop an understanding of both fields that has served his clients well. His jobs since graduating include that of associate at the highly respected law firm based in New York City and known as Skadden, Arps, Slater, Meagher & Flom LLP. He has also worked at other companies including Bank of America where he helped provide both legal and fiscal expertise to the company’s many clients. Mr. Tabar has also been heavily involved in many other areas of law and has focused his attention heavily on the field of hedge funds. He has also been involved in many charitable efforts of all kinds including efforts to help provide support for poor women in the Americans and Africa.
When thirteen year old Lindsea Taylor won concert tickets for every concert on Imagine Dragon’s tour she knew that she wouldn’t be able to attend each and every one of them. She could have pouted, then, because she wouldn’t get the chance to see her favorite band perform all of those times even though she had the tickets, but she didn’t. Instead, she did something great with the tickets that she had been given.
Lindsea Taylor decided that if she wasn’t going to be able to attend all of the concerts, then someone else should be able to, instead. So, she started giving away the tickets to the concerts that she couldn’t attend to cancer patients. She started making a difference in the lives of people that she didn’t even know, by giving them the tickets that she had won.
This girl is truly an unselfish individual from what Susan McGalla sees. She had every right to keep those tickets for herself, even if she couldn’t attend every concert. She had every right to be angry that she couldn’t go to all of the concerts across the country, but that’s not the way that she acted. Instead, out of the kindness of her heart, she decided to give away the tickets to those who she knew would appreciate the chance to attend an Imagine Dragons concert.
A new law “scrapped a per-student formula for distributing aid to Kansas’ 286 school districts” It seems to me that all of these new laws, bills and budgets in regards to schools are coming from a cookie mold of education. All of the lawmakers whether its Kansas or New Jersey whether it’s New York or North Carolina, are running the school systems like big business and big business is not going to produce what we need as far as children’s education. Big business is only going to clump every child together, leaving some at a disadvantage while others will have more of an advantage. Jim Dondero agrees that the bottom line is we have got to build our children up, we have to give them an opportunity and show them how to have a desire for school, for learning, for higher education. Because if their struggle is whether or not they can go to a good school and actually learn something, then how are we to expect anything other than frustration and anger from the students that are leaving high school with a minimal or sub-standard education? Understanding the process of creating laws, I believe there should be a panel of educators, parents and students involved in every process concerning this subject. Who would know what is needed and or wanted better than this trio of people? There’s an old saying that goes “you get out, what you put in”