ladytexan- "dreamgarden - I don't know from derivatives, etc., but I'm probably with you on that one." Here is the 'story' on derivatives. You can read more about them at my new post titled: "What Is a Banking Meltdown And Why Is it Possible?" I've been following Martin Weiss for quite awhile. A lot of what he has written has come to pass. I've taken some flak here for 'fear mongering' but I don't care, it is MY money to lose. If I hadn't listened to what he said last year when the first sub-prime rumblings began, I would have lost thousands of dollars. One doesn't even have to pay for his investment newsletter. Its free. I have gotten far more value out of it, than any financial planner ever gave me (and charged a pretty penny for). Check out his credentials. He's been around the 'financial block' so to speak. "What are derivatives? Think of them as bets and debts by the super-rich and the world's largest companies. What's the market for derivatives like? Think of it as a giant international casino: * In the main hall, they bet on the interest-rate roulette. * In the side rooms, they bet on foreign-currency blackjack, commodity craps or stock-market poker. * And in virtually every sector, the bets are financed with generous amounts of borrowed money. But unlike ordinary markets that you and I are familiar with, this giant casino is not just about betting on a price that goes up or down. It's about betting on virtually every quirk and intricacy of nearly every investment under the sun. Some of the bets are high risk; some are not. Some are for hedging against losses; some, for outright speculation. But everywhere, the dangers are undeniable: Danger #1 The Sheer Enormity of the Derivatives Market In its latest survey, the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) calculates that the total "notional" value of all derivatives outstanding in the world is a mind-boggling $415 trillion. That's over eight times the GDP of the entire world economy … twenty times the total value of all U.S. stocks … and fifty times all the Treasury debts of the United States Government. The fear: That any unexpected disruption in this $415-trillion market could throw the world's financial markets into turmoil … bankrupt hundreds of hedge funds … wipe out the profits of big-name financial institutions … sabotage the investments of pension funds … and scramble the portfolios of millions of average investors. Danger #2 The Unbridled Growth In 1998, the last time the derivatives market nearly blew up, there were "only" $80 trillion in derivatives outstanding worldwide, according to the BIS. That was already huge. But as I explained a moment ago, now the total derivatives outstanding has jumped to $415 trillion, or over FIVE times more! And just from 2005 to 2006, it surged by a whopping 39.5%, about TEN times faster than the growth in the global economy. Danger #3 Enormous Risks If the risks were spread among thousands of institutions, each with plenty of capital to back up its bets, this derivatives balloon might not be such a threat. But the U.S. Government's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) reports that, in the United States … Just FIVE banks control 97.1% of the derivatives in the entire U.S. banking system. Worse, among these five banks, none " not ONE âÂ" has the capital to cover its net credit risk, the primary measure the OCC uses to evaluate the risks these banks are taking in their derivatives trading. Links that might be useful: Financial System in Jeopardy (by Martin Weiss) 8/13/2007 www.moneyandmarkets.com/press.asp?rls_id=892&cat_id=6 Financial Weapons of Mass Destruction by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. 05-24-04 www.moneyandmarkets.com/financial-wmd-8784 Distortions, Deceptions and Outright Lies by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. 04-07-08 www.moneyandmarkets.com/issues.aspx? Distortions-Deceptions-and-Outright-Lies-1640

A watcher, here, too. I thought Clint's commercial was tasteless and had nothing to do with the product. As for Joan, I think she was doing all the complaining because he didn't let her be the boss, although he certainly could have involved the gals more than he did. The other commercial, led by Melissa was funny and might have won if they had left out the cursing at the end. I thought Trumps reasoning on why he sent the two that he did, home, was lame. I;m beginning to wonder if there isn't some contractual reason whey Joan & Melissa aren't getting the boot, when I think it has been more than warranted. As for T Warkins being sent home because she 'volunteered to go to the boardroom was a farce and PLEASE don't get me wrong....I am So against drinking and driving, bu the Kardashian (sp?) gal is paying her dues for being caught doing that, and was taking responsibility for it. You can't tell me Trump didn't know about that before she was hired for this show. I think Trump used these two women as patsies so Joan & Melissa stayed around. I too hope this is the last Apprentice show, and even if it isn't, its the last one I'll follow. Dottie

Peke, Skeeter was adorable and loved to play fetch. He had silky hair on his head and tail but a little bit wavy and coarser on his body. I miss his kisses and how he understood my moods. He was deaf since I adopted him at 17.5 weeks and had seizures but he was so intelligent and loved me and his life. I miss him so much. Yes, dogs are so happy to see us when we come home and give us so much joy and love. That is wonderful your first Pekingese lived until 18. I hope my Sassy who seems to be healthy (Maltese like Skeeter) lives until 18. She turned 12 on 12-01-13 and still loves to go for walks and car rides but I can see she is slowing down. So sorry for your loss.

No offense, after all, you did ask, but frankly I think it was a tacky thing to say. I'm sure glad it wasn't said to the kid. Saying is that ALL? would probably crush the guy. It raises the point/problem I have about how materialistic society has become and with all the Hallmark Holidays forcing people to spend money they don't have on things the recipient can't and giving it to people they may not even like that much! Then comes the issue for some: Is $2500 significant to this guy? I know it would be for me. But I know people that will spend that for trinkets and would consider a ring like that an insult. Lots of things can come into play, right? I see the logic on both sides of the gift issue. And yes, traditionally it's a conditional gift and in most states, legally it's considered a conditional gift. Then again, I also see 2/3 of all marriages ending in divorce and with the lifelong commitment now turned into till irreconcilable differences do us part it could well be a very very extravagant gift. I definitely think the guy's mother felt a little defensive and I see why. It probably was quite a sacrifice for him and rather than give her a bunch of trinkets and trash, he chose to put it all together. Reminds me of people born near Christmas and are offended that they don't have a separate birthday party & present instead of a combined. If I ever get engaged again, I think I'll go for a $25.00 ring and a $2475 television/audio system or something and make it fair, she can keep the ring on her and I'll keep the TV and stuff at my place until we get married! :D