PennyStockPayCheck.com Rss

Featured Posts

Chase Bank Limits Cash Withdrawals, Bans International... Before you read this report, remember to sign up to http://pennystockpaycheck.com for 100% free stock alerts Chase Bank has moved to limit cash withdrawals while banning business customers from sending...

Read more

Richemont chairman Johann Rupert to take 'grey gap... Billionaire 62-year-old to take 12 months off from Cartier and Montblanc luxury goods groupRichemont's chairman and founder Johann Rupert is to take a year off from September, leaving management of the...

Read more

Cambodia: aftermath of fatal shoe factory collapse... Workers clear rubble following the collapse of a shoe factory in Kampong Speu, Cambodia, on Thursday

Read more

Spate of recent shock departures by 50-something CEOs While the rising financial rewards of running a modern multinational have been well publicised, executive recruiters say the pressures of the job have also been ratcheted upOn approaching his 60th birthday...

Read more

UK Uncut loses legal challenge over Goldman Sachs tax... While judge agreed the deal was 'not a glorious episode in the history of the Revenue', he ruled it was not unlawfulCampaign group UK Uncut Legal Action has lost its high court challenge over the legality...

Read more

Extend migrants’ benefits says EU

Category : Business, World News

The European Commission will unveil plans on Wednesday to extend the length of time home states must support their own citizens seeking work in other EU countries.

Read this article: Extend migrants’ benefits says EU

Post to Twitter

Youth unemployment in Europe – how is it affecting you?

Category : Business

The number of unemployed young people is at record levels across Europe, rising to over 50% in some countries. Share your experiences, frustrations, tips or success stories of finding work where you live.

Youth unemployment is one of the biggest problems facing the EU and it isn’t showing any signs of letting up. As of March 2013, 5.690 million young people (under 25) were unemployed in the wider EU area of 27 countries, with 3.599 million in the eurozone .

Greece has recorded an unemployment rate of 59.1% at the beginning of this year with Spain reporting 55.9%, Italy 38.4% and Portugal 38.3%.

We would like to hear your experiences of the job market in your country. Are you worried about finding a job after you leave training or education? Have you been successful in finding employment or have you been out of work for a long time? How has your life been affected due to a lack of employment opportunities? Do you have any tips on finding work you’d like to share?

Share your experiences and concerns by filling in the form below. A selection of the best responses will be posted on the site as part of a readers’ panel.

Munger: It’s time to break up the banks

Category : Stocks

Warren Buffett’s chief lieutenant, Charlie Munger, says Brown-Vitter won’t work.

Read the original post: Munger: It’s time to break up the banks

Post to Twitter

Starting a food business: Q&A roundup

Category : Business

Last week a panel of experts answered your questions on starting up in the food industry. Here are the highlights

Monique Borst is a food business development expert

How can you check if your food business idea is viable?: In my experience, people often mistake their aptitude for cooking or passion for food as a shoo-in for business success. Rather than write a full business plan, one quick and easy way to determine whether your food business idea is potentially viable is to run through this checklist:

1. Do I have a market for it?

2. Do I know how to reach the people who might want this?

3. Do I have the resources, skills and time to do this?

4. Is this something people will pay for?

5. How sustainable is this business?

6. Is the business marketable?

Paul Bray is an associate director at Smith & Williamson

Be sensible when financing your food business: The key message has to be not to over-stretch yourself in the early periods. Start small and grow at a sensible pace, otherwise you will be running around chasing your tail – get a sound start underway and then progress in time, rather than rush.

Jean Edwards is the managing director at Deli Farm Charcuterie

Farmers’ markets are a good way to test your product when starting up: When I started just over seven years ago my only sales were through a regular weekly farmers’ market; it was a brilliant way of getting to market and meeting people, getting feedback and so on. By the end of our first summer I was too busy to attend the market on a regular basis, but would never look back on the contacts that I made from there.

What sort of environmental health regulations arise when starting a food business from home? A lot depends on what type of business you are thinking of starting and where you see your customer base. All food premises have to be passed by environmental health, so I would suggest you have a preliminary meeting with your local environmental health officer (EHO), explain exactly what you are intending to do and they will advise you. Remember your EHO is a source of free information – use them as a resource and not the enemy!

Miranda Ballard is the co-founder at Muddy Boots, a beef burger company

What to think about in terms of location: You’ll know where you should be by doing research into the market and your demographic. Go where your customers are so that you’re surrounded by them and you can start selling to them. Remember to be where you want to be too – no point living where you’re not happy. There’s no point taking all the risks and stresses of having your own business if you’re not happy with where you’re living. What’s best for the business is also what’s best for you – there’s more chance the company will survive if you’re happy.

You can still be a British brand with ingredients sourced elsewhere: We’re a British food brand, from a marketing and content perspective. Some of our ingredients (tomato puree, garlic, black pepper) are imported. We’ve seen all those prices go up in the past 18 months because of transport, labour and production. The idea that all food produced in Britain will stay in Britain doesn’t acknowledge the foods that can’t be grown or produced here – our taste buds will have to revert after these glory years!

Think carefully about how you use social media: In the past month, I’ve been really thinking about social media for small businesses. I think there’s a danger that the massive national or global platform that it brilliantly provides can actually sometimes be too wide a marketing spread for the small business. What I mean is, we all know that we’re meant to find our demographic and then target them, to the point of excluding everyone else. I worry that small businesses can get distracted with the cross-demographic appeal of social media. It’s important to remember you have to work hard to find and appeal to your own demographic – a like or a retweet from someone in your demographic is much, much more valuable than 100 from those outside it.

Roopa Rawal is the co-founder at Devnaa, a luxury Indian-inspired confectionery company

Know your brand: Be really passionate about your products and do everything you can to build a good reputation for your brand – interact with consumers as much as possible. Customer care is really important especially with food, as even though ingredients are all written down people will want to be assured of the taste, quality of ingredients, allergy information and so on. The best part is that if they like it they will definitely go out and tell everybody they know about it.

Quality of food is paramount at the moment: I think more so than with healthy eating, consumers are becoming more aware of the quality of what they eat and drink. As people have become more health conscious they’ve also realised that the quality of what they consume plays just as big a part in maintaining their health – even if they want a treat.

Philippa Taylor works at Grand Union PR, a food PR company

Think about how you portray yourself online: Make sure that you have a domain name which is unique to you for a hosted website which you can customise yourself, and that your website is set-up to either sell online, act as a brochure or both. Drive traffic to your site by regularly updating it with seasonal and limited edition products, newsletters, competitions, recipes and testimonials and so on. Link all your promotion together on the social media channels you use and push customers towards your website. Set up Google Analytics so that you can see what works and what doesn’t.

Offline, think about taking information and images from your website and using them in leaflets at markets, on pop-up banners at events, and as press releases for journalists.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To receive more like this you can become a member of the Small Business Network here.

Mossack Fonseca & Co. Sponsors the International Film Festival of Panama

Category : Stocks

PANAMA CITY–(Marketwired – May 3, 2013) –  Mossack Fonseca & Co. will participate as a sponsor of the International Film Festival of Panama (IFF Panama), which will be held from 11 to 17 April 2013. The company participates as a law firm specializing in intellectual property and other legal services. Carlos Sousa-Lennox, Director of Marketing for the company, said: “We are pleased to work with the various cultural initiatives and the protection of intellectual property in this way to support national and international artists.”

See more here: Mossack Fonseca & Co. Sponsors the International Film Festival of Panama

Post to Twitter

From welfare to wages, women fight back against the uncaring market | Selma James

Category : Business

The welfare state is the latest victim of the market’s corruption of all it touches. Fighting like hell is the only option

It’s almost unbearable to wake up to a world in which the welfare state that has defended us from the worst excesses of the market is being destroyed. The only way to hold on to the last vestiges of entitlement, and even reverse defeats, is to fight like hell.

Bereaved but determined families pursuing those who neglected vulnerable patients in Staffordshire had to do a massive piece of organising before the deaths of hundreds were looked into. (Other suspect hospitals are emerging.)

Parents of children needing heart surgery organised against closure of the Leeds heart unit and won a court judgment. Then they had to struggle to prevent that judgment from being circumvented. But they did it.

Attacks on people with disabilities were unthinkable. Now suicides and premature deaths of sick and disabled people targeted by the work capability assessment and other cuts are described by campaigners as “genocide by the back door”.

Single-mother families and large families were protected. Now children in low-income families have become “extra“, targeted even before birth by adoption targets or, once born, by exclusion from schooling and social housing. Asbos and heavy sentences await the inevitable rebellion and protest, including against rising racism.

How did it get to be so threatening to so many?

When the women’s movement began in the 1970s, women were the carers. Working-class women also did waged jobs, but the wellbeing of children and others remained the primary concern. Women formed the movement not to eliminate caring but the dependence, isolation, servitude, invisibility and almost universal discrimination that a wage-dominated (ie male-dominated) society imposed on the unwaged carer.

The women’s movement faced a choice. It could embrace the market: careers for some and low-paid jobs for most. Or it could find another way to live: demanding that the work of reproducing the human race was recognised as central to all priorities. Getting wages from the state for this work, carers would help reshape all social relationships: reorganising work to incorporate men into caring and women into – everything.

Feminism largely chose the market. This enabled governments to demean rather than recognise caring. “Workless”, according to New Labour, mothers are now urged to “do the right thing” – go out to work irrespective of workload, childcare, the needs of those who depend on us.

Cuts in social services and public-sector jobs attack women – three-quarters of public employees. Government aims to push women into the private sector which pays – especially women – less and demands more. This lowers wages generally, imposing working conditions previously unthinkable. Already more families with adults in jobs are in poverty than families where adults are unemployed. When government says it wants “work to pay”, it means driving claimants below the lowest paid: from poverty to destitution, unable to refuse £1 or £2 an hour (many immigrants face this).

The market, which we are urged to love, honour and obey (Marx said it was a fetish), has corrupted all it touches, including the life of the planet. When recently a scientist warned of imminent destruction from climate change, we were told it would be “impractical” to try to stop it. Incredibly, the media did not gasp at this suicidal greed.

Many people say this is not the society they want to live in. But how can we confront all that needs changing?

First we must acknowledge the thousands already refusing hospital and library closures, cuts in benefits and legal aid, factory farming (concentration camps for animals), a poisonous food industry, toxic pharmaceuticals, media-police corruption, sale of playing fields, tax havens, warmongering, criminalisation of protest … Campaigns share one vital tenet: our entitlement to what we are struggling to reclaim.

Our problem is not only that we have allowed cuts – and perhaps the unkindest cut has been of the universality of child benefit, the money that recognises society’s responsibility for children. Our problem is that it has seemed foolish and impractical to dare to challenge the market when no major party is on our side.

With a three-way coalition against us, this has got to be a DIY job. On 1 May, International Workers’ Day, the Global Women’s Strike will launch the petition “Invest in a Caring Society: A living wage for mothers and other carers” – aiming to “redirect economic and social policies towards people and the planet and away from the uncaring market”. A challenge to the market by women, the carers, can only strengthen all those already fighting like hell.

Warning given over phoney job scams

Category : Business, World News

Those struggling to find work or facing money problems are being targeted with phoney job scams, Citizens Advice warns.

Continue reading here: Warning given over phoney job scams

Post to Twitter

French unemployment at new high

Category : World News

The unemployment rate in France rose again last month for the 23rd time in a row, reaching a fresh high with 3.2 million people seeking work, official data shows.

Visit link: French unemployment at new high

Post to Twitter

Alexium International Group Ltd. (AXXIY: OTCQX International) | Home Country News Release – Alexium Commences US Marine Work

Category : Stocks

Alexium International Group Ltd. has filed a Home Country News Release – Alexium Commences US Marine Work To view the full release click here (link to PDF).

Original post: Alexium International Group Ltd. (AXXIY: OTCQX International) | Home Country News Release – Alexium Commences US Marine Work

Post to Twitter

There’s no need for all this economic sadomasochism | David Graeber

Category : Business

If Reinhart and Rogoff’s ‘error’ has discredited the prevailing policy dogma, now is the time for an alternative that works

The intellectual justification for austerity lies in ruins. It turns out that Harvard economists Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff, who originally framed the argument that too high a “debt-to-GDP ratio” will always, necessarily, lead to economic contraction – and who had aggressively promoted it during Rogoff’s tenure as chief economist for the IMF –, had based their entire argument on a spreadsheet error. The premise behind the cuts turns out to be faulty. There is now no definite proof that high levels of debt necessarily lead to recession.

Will we, then, see a reversal of policy? A sea of mea culpas from politicians who have spent the last few years telling disabled pensioners to give up their bus passes and poor students to forgo college, all on the basis of a mistake? It seems unlikely. After all, as I and many others have long argued, austerity was never really an economic policy: ultimately, it was always about morality. We are talking about a politics of crime and punishment, sin and atonement. True, it’s never been particularly clear exactly what the original sin was: some combination, perhaps, of tax avoidance, laziness, benefit fraud and the election of irresponsible leaders. But in a larger sense, the message was that we were guilty of having dreamed of social security, humane working conditions, pensions, social and economic democracy.

The morality of debt has proved spectacularly good politics. It appears to work just as well whatever form it takes: fiscal sadism (Dutch and German voters really do believe that Greek, Spanish and Irish citizens are all, collectively, as they put it, “debt sinners”, and vow support for politicians willing to punish them) or fiscal masochism (middle-class Britons really will dutifully vote for candidates who tell them that government has been on a binge, that they must tighten their belts, it’ll be hard, but it’s something we can all do for the sake of our grandchildren). Politicians locate economic theories that provide flashy equations to justify the politics; their authors, like Rogoff, are celebrated as oracles; no one bothers to check if the numbers actually add up.

If ever proof was required that the theory is selected to suit the politics, one need only consider the reaction politicians have to economists who dare suggest this moralistic framework is unnecessary; or that there might be solutions that don’t involve widespread human suffering.

Even before we knew Reinhart and Rogoff’s study was simply wrong, many had pointed out their historical survey made no distinction between the effects of debt on countries such as the US or Japan – which issue their own currency and therefore have their debt denominated in that currency – and countries such as Ireland, Greece, that do not. But the real solution to the eurobond crisis, some have argued, lies in precisely this distinction.

Why is Japan not in the same situation as Spain or Italy? It has one of the highest public debt-to-GDP ratios in the world (twice that of Ireland), and is regularly featured in magazines like the Economist as a prima facie example of an economic basket case, or at least, how not to manage a modern industrial economy. Yet they have no problem raising money. In fact the rate on their 10-year bonds is under 1%. Why? Because there’s no danger of default. Everyone knows that in the event of an emergency, the Japanese government could simply print the money. And Japanese money, in turn, will always be good because there is a constant demand for it by anyone who has to pay Japanese taxes.

This is precisely what Ireland, or Spain, or any of the other troubled southern eurozone countries, cannot do. Since only the German-dominated European Central Bank can print euros, investors in Irish bonds fear default, and the interest rates are bid up accordingly. Hence the vicious cycle of austerity. As a larger percentage of government spending has to be redirected to paying rising interest rates, budgets are slashed, workers fired, the economy shrinks, and so does the tax base, further reducing government revenues and further increasing the danger of default. Finally, political representatives of the creditors are forced to offer “rescue packages”, announcing that, if the offending country is willing to sufficiently chastise its sick and elderly, and shatter the dreams and aspirations of a sufficient percentage of its youth, they will take measures to ensure the bonds will not default.

Warren Mosler and Philip Pilkington are two economists who dare to think beyond the shackles of Rogoff-style austerity economics. They belong to the modern money theory school, which starts by looking at how money actually works, rather than at how it should work. On this basis, they have made a powerful case that if we just get back to that basic problem of money-creation, we may well discover that none of this is ever necessary to begin with. In conjunction with the Levy Institute at Bard College, they propose an ingenious, yet elegant solution to the eurobond crisis. Why not simply add a bit of legal language to, say, Irish bonds, declaring that, in the event of default, those bonds could themselves be used to pay Irish taxes? Investors would be reassured the bonds would remain “money good” even in the worst of crises – since even if they weren’t doing business in Ireland, and didn’t have to pay Irish taxes, it would be easy enough to sell them at a slight discount to someone who does. Once potential investors understood the new arrangement, interest rates would fall back from 4-5% to a manageable 1-2%, and the cycle of austerity would be broken.

Why has this plan not been adopted? When it was proposed in the Irish parliament in May 2012, finance minster Michael Noonan rejected the plan on completely arbitrary grounds (he claimed it would mean treating some bond-holders differently than others, and ignored those who quickly pointed out existing bonds could easily be given the same legal status, or else, swapped for tax-backed bonds). No one is quite sure what the real reason was, other than perhaps an instinctual bureaucratic fear of the unknown.

It’s not even clear that anyone would even be hurt by such a plan. Investors would be happy. Citizens would see quick relief from cuts. There’d be no need for further bailouts. It might not work as well in countries such as Greece, where tax collection is, let us say, less reliable, and it might not entirely eliminate the crisis. But it would almost certainly have major salutary effects. If the politicians refuse to consider it – as they so far have done –, it’s hard to see any reason other than sheer incredulity at the thought that the great moral drama of modern times might in fact be nothing more than the product of bad theory and faulty data series.