In order to be officially hired with Woodmen of the World, I needed to be licensed with the state of KY. I had to take two exams yesterday and I passed them both! Praise God! If you need some financial advise, give me a call.
(Right now isn't a bad time to buy if you have the money, because we stocks are low and can go up! Plus, when we change Presidents, the economy really likes it and rebounds some!)
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Camp Address
Well I am sure you all know, I am heading out of the Great Lex Vegas tomorrow to head to camp. Even with all of the greatness of camp, times can still get lonely and I will miss you all. So here is my camp address if you want to send me something (wink, wink!!)
Kent Billingsley
PASSways Staff
Wingate University
P.O. Box 2672
Wingate, NC 28174
I accept checks!
Kent Billingsley
PASSways Staff
Wingate University
P.O. Box 2672
Wingate, NC 28174
I accept checks!
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Ouch! That Liquid Stings
I think we should all pause for a moment and realize history in the making...........Gas prices are $4. Wow! I never thought I would live the day. But who is to blame? Well, as you know I don't like to pick an agenda because then you will just agree with me since most of you are my friends and family, but who is to blame?
The President? I would suggest not totally because he isn't selling oil to the U.S. I think he is an easy target.
Those big oil companies?
Who know? Who cares, I just want it cheaper.
I read an article on MSN.com that was a hard pill for most Americans to swallow.
"The next time you have to take out a loan just to fill up your tank, remember this: Four-dollar-per-gallon gasoline is cheap.
There's no doubt that high fuel prices are hurting low-income consumers, and high energy costs are placing a tax on the economy that is slowing investment while sending billions of dollars overseas. It's unsurprising that presidential candidates and members of Congress issue new proposals practically every day for lowering gas prices: Stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve! Suspend the federal gas tax! Open ANWR to oil drilling!
These proposals are delusions, and Americans are living in a fantasyland when it comes to energy and energy prices. Over the past few years, consumers have been inundated with news stories about the soaring price of gasoline. Invariably, these stories include comments from a motorist who is outraged at the evils of a) Saudi Arabia, b) OPEC, c) Big Oil, d) all of the above.
But by almost any measure, gasoline is still cheap. In fact, it has probably been far too cheap for far too long. The recent price increases are only beginning to reflect its real value.
Paying 1920s prices
When measured on an inflation-adjusted basis, the current price of gasoline is only slightly higher than it was in 1922. According to the Energy Information Administration, in 1922, a gallon of gasoline cost the current-day equivalent of $3.11. Today, according to the EIA, gasoline is selling for about $3.77 per gallon, only about 20% more than 86 years ago.
Given the ever-increasing global demand for oil products -- during the first quarter of this year, China's oil consumption jumped by 16.5% -- and the increasing costs associated with finding, producing and refining crude oil, it makes sense that today's motorists are paying more for their motor fuel than their grandparents and great-grandparents did.
Gasoline is also a fairly minor expense when you consider the overall cost of car ownership. In 1975, gasoline made up 33.4% of the total cost of owning and operating a car. By 2006, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, gasoline costs had declined to just 17.1% of the total cost of car ownership. Of course, fuel costs have risen by about $1 per gallon since 2006, but even with those increases, fuel continues to be a relatively small part of the cost of car ownership.
By contrast, the fixed costs of ownership -- insurance, licensing, taxes and financing -- have increased nearly fivefold since 1975. Maintenance costs have also quintupled over the same time period. Given those increases and the relatively low price of fuel, it's not surprising that Americans are opting for big vehicles with powerful engines.
Considering the overall cost of owning a vehicle, fuel expenses just aren't a very big deal.
High prices, lower consumption
Significant declines in U.S. oil consumption have occurred only after prolonged periods of high prices. Over the last two decades, U.S. consumers have been spoiled by low fuel prices. And those lower prices led to a buying binge that put millions of giant SUVs, pickups and other gas guzzlers on our roads.
Today's higher prices are forcing consumers to adapt. The EIA now expects U.S. gasoline consumption to decline this year -- the first drop in demand in 17 years. In April, sales of small cars in the United States were up by 17% over the same period a year earlier, while sales of SUVs, trucks, and large cars all fell by about 30%.
On the environmental front, people concerned about greenhouse-gas emissions should be cheering today's oil prices. Expensive motor fuel is the only thing that will lead consumers to use less and make the switch to hybrid vehicles, smaller cars and public transit. Higher oil prices are persuading automakers to change their fleets.
Last week, Nissan Motor Company announced that it will begin selling an electric car in the United States and Japan by 2010. Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of Nissan, made it clear that fuel prices were a factor in the company's decision to build electric cars, telling The New York Times that "the shifts coming from the markets are more powerful than what regulators are doing."
A gallon of gasoline in the U.S. is also dirt-cheap compared with gas in other countries. British motorists are paying about $8.38 per gallon for gasoline. In Norway, a major oil exporter, drivers are paying $8.73. In 2007, out of the 32 industrialized countries surveyed by the International Energy Agency, only one (Mexico) had cheaper gasoline than the United States.
Last year, drivers in Turkey were paying three times as much for their gasoline as Americans were. The IEA data also show that in India -- where the per-capita gross domestic product is about $2,700 (about 6% of the per-capita GDP in the United States) -- drivers have been paying more for their diesel fuel and gasoline than their American counterparts.
(Gasoline is also cheap compared with other essential fuels. A Starbucks venti latte costs the equivalent of $23 per gallon, while Budweiser beer runs $11 per gallon.)
The simple truth is that Americans are going to have to get used to more expensive gasoline. And while they may continue grumbling at the pump, they need to accept the fact that even at $3.50 or $4 per gallon, the fuel they are buying is still a bargain."
This article was reported and written by Robert Bryce for Slate.com.
Published May 20, 2008
Even though it hurts, I will quote my father. "Suck it up, you'll be alright"
The President? I would suggest not totally because he isn't selling oil to the U.S. I think he is an easy target.
Those big oil companies?
Who know? Who cares, I just want it cheaper.
I read an article on MSN.com that was a hard pill for most Americans to swallow.
"The next time you have to take out a loan just to fill up your tank, remember this: Four-dollar-per-gallon gasoline is cheap.
There's no doubt that high fuel prices are hurting low-income consumers, and high energy costs are placing a tax on the economy that is slowing investment while sending billions of dollars overseas. It's unsurprising that presidential candidates and members of Congress issue new proposals practically every day for lowering gas prices: Stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve! Suspend the federal gas tax! Open ANWR to oil drilling!
These proposals are delusions, and Americans are living in a fantasyland when it comes to energy and energy prices. Over the past few years, consumers have been inundated with news stories about the soaring price of gasoline. Invariably, these stories include comments from a motorist who is outraged at the evils of a) Saudi Arabia, b) OPEC, c) Big Oil, d) all of the above.
But by almost any measure, gasoline is still cheap. In fact, it has probably been far too cheap for far too long. The recent price increases are only beginning to reflect its real value.
Paying 1920s prices
When measured on an inflation-adjusted basis, the current price of gasoline is only slightly higher than it was in 1922. According to the Energy Information Administration, in 1922, a gallon of gasoline cost the current-day equivalent of $3.11. Today, according to the EIA, gasoline is selling for about $3.77 per gallon, only about 20% more than 86 years ago.
Given the ever-increasing global demand for oil products -- during the first quarter of this year, China's oil consumption jumped by 16.5% -- and the increasing costs associated with finding, producing and refining crude oil, it makes sense that today's motorists are paying more for their motor fuel than their grandparents and great-grandparents did.
Gasoline is also a fairly minor expense when you consider the overall cost of car ownership. In 1975, gasoline made up 33.4% of the total cost of owning and operating a car. By 2006, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, gasoline costs had declined to just 17.1% of the total cost of car ownership. Of course, fuel costs have risen by about $1 per gallon since 2006, but even with those increases, fuel continues to be a relatively small part of the cost of car ownership.
By contrast, the fixed costs of ownership -- insurance, licensing, taxes and financing -- have increased nearly fivefold since 1975. Maintenance costs have also quintupled over the same time period. Given those increases and the relatively low price of fuel, it's not surprising that Americans are opting for big vehicles with powerful engines.
Considering the overall cost of owning a vehicle, fuel expenses just aren't a very big deal.
High prices, lower consumption
Significant declines in U.S. oil consumption have occurred only after prolonged periods of high prices. Over the last two decades, U.S. consumers have been spoiled by low fuel prices. And those lower prices led to a buying binge that put millions of giant SUVs, pickups and other gas guzzlers on our roads.
Today's higher prices are forcing consumers to adapt. The EIA now expects U.S. gasoline consumption to decline this year -- the first drop in demand in 17 years. In April, sales of small cars in the United States were up by 17% over the same period a year earlier, while sales of SUVs, trucks, and large cars all fell by about 30%.
On the environmental front, people concerned about greenhouse-gas emissions should be cheering today's oil prices. Expensive motor fuel is the only thing that will lead consumers to use less and make the switch to hybrid vehicles, smaller cars and public transit. Higher oil prices are persuading automakers to change their fleets.
Last week, Nissan Motor Company announced that it will begin selling an electric car in the United States and Japan by 2010. Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of Nissan, made it clear that fuel prices were a factor in the company's decision to build electric cars, telling The New York Times that "the shifts coming from the markets are more powerful than what regulators are doing."
A gallon of gasoline in the U.S. is also dirt-cheap compared with gas in other countries. British motorists are paying about $8.38 per gallon for gasoline. In Norway, a major oil exporter, drivers are paying $8.73. In 2007, out of the 32 industrialized countries surveyed by the International Energy Agency, only one (Mexico) had cheaper gasoline than the United States.
Last year, drivers in Turkey were paying three times as much for their gasoline as Americans were. The IEA data also show that in India -- where the per-capita gross domestic product is about $2,700 (about 6% of the per-capita GDP in the United States) -- drivers have been paying more for their diesel fuel and gasoline than their American counterparts.
(Gasoline is also cheap compared with other essential fuels. A Starbucks venti latte costs the equivalent of $23 per gallon, while Budweiser beer runs $11 per gallon.)
The simple truth is that Americans are going to have to get used to more expensive gasoline. And while they may continue grumbling at the pump, they need to accept the fact that even at $3.50 or $4 per gallon, the fuel they are buying is still a bargain."
This article was reported and written by Robert Bryce for Slate.com.
Published May 20, 2008
Even though it hurts, I will quote my father. "Suck it up, you'll be alright"
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
First Job
I have accepted my first job!! I am going to be a financial adviser for Woodmen of the World. The branch is located in Nicholasville currently, but the future plans are to move to Lexington. I will be advising people on how to plan for their futures by selling them Life, Health, and other related insurances. I will also help people set up IRA accounts, 401Ks and children college funds.
The opportunities are really great in this job for me to meet lots of people and help people at the same time. Woodmen does a lot of philanthropy in the communities that they work in, which I will enjoy. The first few years will be hard but I will be rewarded based on how hard I work. I don't have to work in an office all day and the hours are not necessarily 8-5. Don't get me wrong, I will work a lot to get started but I am excited. Pray for success and if you think you might want to be one of my clients let me know!! I believe you can trust God with your future and still plan for the future, even though some would disagree.
The opportunities are really great in this job for me to meet lots of people and help people at the same time. Woodmen does a lot of philanthropy in the communities that they work in, which I will enjoy. The first few years will be hard but I will be rewarded based on how hard I work. I don't have to work in an office all day and the hours are not necessarily 8-5. Don't get me wrong, I will work a lot to get started but I am excited. Pray for success and if you think you might want to be one of my clients let me know!! I believe you can trust God with your future and still plan for the future, even though some would disagree.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Finally A New Post
So my sister asked me the other day why I never post on my blog. Well for one reason, I don't seem to have the time. The second reason is that I don't believe the anyone will read it. If you read it, leave me a message with your thoughts so I will know who is reading it....
Tonight's post will hopefully be one of many. I have really been studying the issues of the poor and the socioeconomic issues that go with it. I just finished a book, "Banker to the Poor" by Noble Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus. He is the founder of micro-financing and social business. Here is an over view of what the new concept of social business is and how it works. It isn't a pleasant read, but God encourage me as I wrote it.
A “Social Business” is a non-loss, non-dividend enterprise, created with the intentions to do good to people, to bring positive change to the world, without any short-term expectation of making money. Basically, social businesses make products and provide services that benefit society. Traditional free-market fundamentalism says businesses should maximize the profit for shareholders to receive the maximum return on their investment. Social business organizational structure is basically the same as profit maximizing businesses (PMB). The objective is to employ workers, create goods and services, and provide these to customers for a price consistent with the objective of the social business. The firm must make a profit (thus social businesses are non-loss). Like many non-profit and government aided businesses, they do not make enough to cover their initial investment and accrue losses for many years. A social business makes a profit but does not return it to investors as dividends (non-dividend). The profits are then reinvested into the business to provide better products, services, lower costs, and increase efficiently of the social business. An indirect effect of making a profit is that time spent raising funds can be spent elsewhere. As firms profitability is stable, they can move into new areas and impact other low socioeconomic areas.
So what is the role of investors after they are repaid for their investment? They keep the money and remain as owners. The money they receive can be used for personal use or reinvested into another social business. People who give to philanthropic groups have the same incentive to invest in social business: it makes them feel good. The difference in investing in social business is that the money is returned, like a zero-coupon bond except with no interest. Investors currently have to “re-donate” to the American Red Cross or UNICEF but once a social business becomes self-sustaining, they will never need to provide startup capital or sustainable capital for the same social buisness again. But how will we know we are not giving to a bad social business? Theoretically, there is no bad social business. First, investors will get their initial investment back so they will not loss money. Secondly, when social businesses compete, they will compete just like two profit maximizing businesses do except for a different objective.
PMB’s compete to have the best rating system from rating firms like Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s to attract investors. Investment firms also hire analysts to project the future profitability of PMB so that investors can choose the firm with the best-expected future profitable outcome. Social business will do the exact same except the firm that produces the greatest possible good with their resources will attract investors. Competing social businesses will push each other to innovate and be more efficient like firms in the free-market system. Where PMB’s compete for daily stock returns, social businesses will compete for who can provide the most impact.
Yet another theoretical idea of social business is the idea of a PMB that is owned by the poor to help the poor. The social benefit does not come from the service or product give to society but rather, the owners will give profits will go to help those in need. When the poor run a business, the need for government assisted aid will become irrelevant (assuming every person in need can own a business or have a social business in their community to work for). When government food stamps and social security are not being distributed, foreign aid, road improvements, healthcare, and funds for education will now be available requiring schools to stop selling candy bars for school supplies! The cool thing to remember is that social businesses can also help with these problems when governments cannot find the funds. Social businesses can build roads and schools, make cheaper school supplies, or create a healthcare system for the lower 20% or 50% who do not have healthcare.
The idea of social businesses is based on the facts that there are people who are willing to help. Is their anybody out there willing to help? Yes and they are everywhere. All kinds of organizations are trying but they just can’t get there with handouts because handouts do not fix the long-term. Soup kitchens save millions of lives each year but they need to be restocked, remanaged and refinanced each day. Handouts and government grants are only short-term fixes to the problem. Social business creates a system that actively engages the poor with sustainable income and irradiates the problems of poverty. When 1/5 of the people on Earth that live on less than a dollar a day, 1.1 billion people, start contributing to the economic growth in their own countries, the gross “earth” product will increase. Because globalization is connecting markets and people more each day, the contribution of the bottom 1/5 of the people on Earth will shift short-term and long-term growth rates out faster than before. The reason that economies do not grow as fast as they potentially could are for very complex reasons but much is based on those that job less, homeless, and take up government funds to offset the food, clothing, and healthcare they cannot afford. When did we get the notion that people like handouts? The poor does not and they are more willing to help themselves than we are to help them. When the back of the train is pushing as well, the train will go faster! By bringing the lower portion of the economy, the part that seems to slow economic growth down, the economy is free to move faster: everyone wins!
Isn't this cool?
Tonight's post will hopefully be one of many. I have really been studying the issues of the poor and the socioeconomic issues that go with it. I just finished a book, "Banker to the Poor" by Noble Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus. He is the founder of micro-financing and social business. Here is an over view of what the new concept of social business is and how it works. It isn't a pleasant read, but God encourage me as I wrote it.
A “Social Business” is a non-loss, non-dividend enterprise, created with the intentions to do good to people, to bring positive change to the world, without any short-term expectation of making money. Basically, social businesses make products and provide services that benefit society. Traditional free-market fundamentalism says businesses should maximize the profit for shareholders to receive the maximum return on their investment. Social business organizational structure is basically the same as profit maximizing businesses (PMB). The objective is to employ workers, create goods and services, and provide these to customers for a price consistent with the objective of the social business. The firm must make a profit (thus social businesses are non-loss). Like many non-profit and government aided businesses, they do not make enough to cover their initial investment and accrue losses for many years. A social business makes a profit but does not return it to investors as dividends (non-dividend). The profits are then reinvested into the business to provide better products, services, lower costs, and increase efficiently of the social business. An indirect effect of making a profit is that time spent raising funds can be spent elsewhere. As firms profitability is stable, they can move into new areas and impact other low socioeconomic areas.
So what is the role of investors after they are repaid for their investment? They keep the money and remain as owners. The money they receive can be used for personal use or reinvested into another social business. People who give to philanthropic groups have the same incentive to invest in social business: it makes them feel good. The difference in investing in social business is that the money is returned, like a zero-coupon bond except with no interest. Investors currently have to “re-donate” to the American Red Cross or UNICEF but once a social business becomes self-sustaining, they will never need to provide startup capital or sustainable capital for the same social buisness again. But how will we know we are not giving to a bad social business? Theoretically, there is no bad social business. First, investors will get their initial investment back so they will not loss money. Secondly, when social businesses compete, they will compete just like two profit maximizing businesses do except for a different objective.
PMB’s compete to have the best rating system from rating firms like Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s to attract investors. Investment firms also hire analysts to project the future profitability of PMB so that investors can choose the firm with the best-expected future profitable outcome. Social business will do the exact same except the firm that produces the greatest possible good with their resources will attract investors. Competing social businesses will push each other to innovate and be more efficient like firms in the free-market system. Where PMB’s compete for daily stock returns, social businesses will compete for who can provide the most impact.
Yet another theoretical idea of social business is the idea of a PMB that is owned by the poor to help the poor. The social benefit does not come from the service or product give to society but rather, the owners will give profits will go to help those in need. When the poor run a business, the need for government assisted aid will become irrelevant (assuming every person in need can own a business or have a social business in their community to work for). When government food stamps and social security are not being distributed, foreign aid, road improvements, healthcare, and funds for education will now be available requiring schools to stop selling candy bars for school supplies! The cool thing to remember is that social businesses can also help with these problems when governments cannot find the funds. Social businesses can build roads and schools, make cheaper school supplies, or create a healthcare system for the lower 20% or 50% who do not have healthcare.
The idea of social businesses is based on the facts that there are people who are willing to help. Is their anybody out there willing to help? Yes and they are everywhere. All kinds of organizations are trying but they just can’t get there with handouts because handouts do not fix the long-term. Soup kitchens save millions of lives each year but they need to be restocked, remanaged and refinanced each day. Handouts and government grants are only short-term fixes to the problem. Social business creates a system that actively engages the poor with sustainable income and irradiates the problems of poverty. When 1/5 of the people on Earth that live on less than a dollar a day, 1.1 billion people, start contributing to the economic growth in their own countries, the gross “earth” product will increase. Because globalization is connecting markets and people more each day, the contribution of the bottom 1/5 of the people on Earth will shift short-term and long-term growth rates out faster than before. The reason that economies do not grow as fast as they potentially could are for very complex reasons but much is based on those that job less, homeless, and take up government funds to offset the food, clothing, and healthcare they cannot afford. When did we get the notion that people like handouts? The poor does not and they are more willing to help themselves than we are to help them. When the back of the train is pushing as well, the train will go faster! By bringing the lower portion of the economy, the part that seems to slow economic growth down, the economy is free to move faster: everyone wins!
Isn't this cool?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
