If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, please contact the Network Advertising Initiative (NAI) at (207) 467-3500 or www.networkadvertising.org.
Looks like your mother was right when she told you to sit up straight.
Health-care practitioners from physical therapists to surgeons to psychologists increasingly take posture into account when evaluating patients and offer tips and tools for improvement.
It's important for maintaining good alignment, with ears over the shoulders, shoulders over hips, and hips over the knees and ankles. Body weight should be distributed evenly between the feet.
Seated posture, especially while using a computer, is critically important and deserves more attention, experts say, in part because it can affect a person's posture while standing and walking. Experts say it is essential to think about posture while walking, getting up out of a chair or using a cellphone or tablet.
The hunched-over position of the typical electronic-device user is of particular concern.
Because poor posture can often be caused by obesity or weak muscle tone, correcting it isn't a quick fix for many patients. Even for people in good shape, bad posture habits can be so ingrained that it takes constant vigilance to improve them.
One in five people in their 20s and early 30s is currently living with his or her Baby Boomer parents.
60% of all young adults receive financial support from them. That's a significant increase from a generation ago, when only 1 in 10 young adults moved back home and few received financial support. The common explanation for the shift is that people born in the 1980s and early 1990s came of age amid several unfortunate and overlapping economic trends.
Those who graduated college as the housing market and financial system were imploding faced the highest debt burden of any graduating class in history. Nearly 45% of 25-year-odds, for instance, have outstanding loans, with an average debt above $20,000.
These boomerang kids are not a temporary phenomenon. They appear to be part of a new and permanent life stage.....and.....represent a much larger anxiety-provoking but also potentially thrilling economic condition that is affecting all of us.
We are living not simply in an unequal society but rather in two separate, side-by-side economies.
For those who crack the top 20%, there is great promise. For those at work in the much larger pool, there will be falling or stagnant wages and far greater uncertainty. A college degree is no longer a guarantee, especially for those who graduate from lower-ranked for-profit schools. If they want to make it to the top 20%, they now need to learn a skill before they get a job.
Source: The New York Times Magazine, June 22, 2014
This chart tells you everything you need to know about the opportunities that financial forecasting firm Elliott Wave International (EWI) sees in India's stock market:
A multidecade bull market began in Indian stocks in the year 2003.
Even in the depths of the 2008 financial crisis, EWI forecast that the bull market would continue.
Its forecast has remained valid despite all the political volatility of the past six years in India. In other words, politics has in no way influenced EWI's analysis.
Most political commentators credit the recent surge in Indian stocks to the electoral victory in May by India's Bharatiya Janata Party and its charismatic new leader, Narendra Modi.
But Elliott Wave International looks at stock market trends from a different perspective: Its analysts believe that financial trends ebb and flow in waves.
You may have heard the term supercycle. It refers to a long-term boom in a financial market lasting at least several years and as long as several decades.
According to EWI's analysis, a supercycle began in Indian stocks in the late 1970s, when the BSE Sensex Index began. Within that long-term trend, a smaller boom (which they call a cycle) began in 2003 in India, paralleling similar booms in other emerging markets around the world.
The good news is that India's cycle bull market still has plenty of years ahead of it. In fact, EWI believes that the biggest opportunities in the cycle boom for Indian and international investors are happening right now.
Want to learn more details? Then you should read the special Interim Report that EWI's Asian analyst issued on March 23, 2009, to alert his subscribers to the "rewarding long-term opportunity" he foresaw in Indian stocks then. It's an excellent example of how their analysis can help you to see the bigger picture that those caught up in the news and politics often miss. It will also explain to you the cycle pattern that is driving India's bull market today -- and that will continue to do so for many years.
To get started reading the whole report now for free, all you have to do is become a Club EWI member. There are no strings attached. It's free for you to learn more about the amazing long-term opportunities in India that only the Wave Principle can help you to take advantage of.
Club EWI is the world's largest Elliott wave community with more than 325,000 members. Membership is 100% free and includes free reports, tutorials, videos, special events, promotional offers, and access to other valuable EWI resources.
This article was syndicated by Elliott Wave International and was originally published under the headline India's Equity Bull Market: Who foresaw it in October 2008?. EWI is the world's largest market forecasting firm. Its staff of full-time analysts led by Chartered Market Technician Robert Prechter provides 24-hour-a-day market analysis to institutional and private investors around the world.
To many Americans, middle-class success looks like a nice colonial with a lawn, white picket fence and two cars in the driveway.
Not only was that vision interrupted for millions during the housing crisis, but it may be outmoded. When investors parse economic data to see how close the U.S. economy is to getting “back to normal,” they must redfine normal.
One million housing starts is actually a modest level, even in a data series going back to 1959, and low on a population-adjusted basis. For example, rebased to the number of Americans in 1959, starts averaged 1.185 million through 2002 when the housing bubble began to inflate. The three-month average now stands at an adjusted 545,000.
In 1960, nearly three-quarters of adults were married, compared with barely half today, and people tied the knot six years younger on average, according to Census Bureau data. Furthermore, the fertility rate in 1960 was 80% higher, resulting in more babies born to a smaller population.
There is less need for self-standing suburban homes today and more for smaller, cheaper apartments.
This article was syndicated by Elliott Wave International and was originally published under the headline (Video) The Single Most Important Market Indicator You Probably Aren't Using. EWI is the world's largest market forecasting firm. Its staff of full-time analysts led by Chartered Market Technician Robert Prechter provides 24-hour-a-day market analysis to institutional and private investors around the world.
Bob Prechter explores price action in crude oil to deliver an important investment lesson
By Elliott Wave International
The following is a timeless clip from Robert Prechter's presentation as the Social Mood Conference on April 5, 2014.
Bob explores price action in crude oil to deliver an important investment lesson for all of us.
This video is a prime example for how the Wave Principle can help you prepare for moves in markets of all kinds that conventional analysis misses completely. To learn more about Elliott Wave Analysis, see the link below to three free videos from Elliott Wave International, the world's largest independent financial forecasting firm.
Learn the Why, What and How of Elliott Wave Analysis
The Elliott Wave Crash Course is a series of three FREE videos that demolishes the widely held notion that news drives the markets. Each video will provide a basis for using Elliott wave analysis in your own trading and investing decisions.
This article was syndicated by Elliott Wave International and was originally published under the headline (Video) How -- and Why -- the Markets Fool Investors. EWI is the world's largest market forecasting firm. Its staff of full-time analysts led by Chartered Market Technician Robert Prechter provides 24-hour-a-day market analysis to institutional and private investors around the world.
Retirees significantly underestimated the impact taxes would have on them during retirement years, according to a recent Lincoln Financial Group Survey.
The Survey, “2013 – Expense Challenges of Age 62-75 Retirees,” is based on interviews with 750 individuals, with an annual household income of $100,000 or more, and was developed to better understand how individuals plan and manage living expenses and taxes before and during retirement. The survey has a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percent.
The majority of retirees surveyed anticipated home and mortgage, healthcare and travel/leisure to be the most significant expenses during retirement, when they were asked what they expected their top expenses to be before they retired. However, these retirees found that their actual top expenses included taxes, rather than healthcare.
“Given the current environment, with taxes at a 30-year high, it is critical that advisors help their clients understand all factors – including taxes – when developing a plan to help clients protect their legacies,” said Richard Aneser, Chief Marketing Officer, Lincoln Financial Group Distribution. “Advisors who offer this type of wealth protection expertise will demonstrate their value and unique understanding of their clients’ needs.”
On average, when reviewing all household expenses paid on an annual basis, retirees reported spending the most on federal income tax. Additionally, 36 percent of retirees said taxes were a larger expense than they had anticipated, while 23 percent didn’t even consider planning for taxes as an expense prior to retirement.
Underestimating the role of taxes was not based on a lack of knowledge among those responding to Lincoln’s study, which was conducted late last year. When participants were asked if they were aware of recent tax law changes, 62 percent said they were, while only 16 percent were unaware of tax law changes. Encouragingly, 57 percent of survey participants said their advisor regularly discussed tax changes with them and shared the impact those changes could have on retirement. However, 43 percent said their advisor did not take that initiative.
“Retirement is more of a mindset than a specific age,” said Christopher Price, Advanced Sales Attorney for Lincoln Financial Distributors. “Financial advisors need to have the retirement conversation with their clients early on during regularly scheduled portfolio reviews. Those reviews should include identifying tax-control options and strategies to help mitigate the impact of taxes on the client portfolio.”
Other Key Survey Findings
Women had higher levels of concern, especially as it related to the health of their spouse, healthcare expenses and receiving full Social Security and Medicare benefits throughout retirement.
Reinforcing the need for wealth protection, individuals in the 62-65 range have more intense anxiety than other age segments about major retirement concerns, such as leaving an inheritance, generating enough income, and having assets to last throughout retirement.
About 43 percent of retirees in the 62 to 65 range indicated that they would like to pass on a financial legacy to children, grandchildren or a charity, yet nearly half of the survey participants indicated that they had not worked with a professional to establish an estate plan.
About the Survey
Lincoln Financial Group worked with The Spectrem Group, a leading investor research firm, to determine how individuals plan and manage living expenses and taxes before and during retirement.
There were 750 qualifying individuals who completed an online survey from October 1, 2013 through October 9, 2013. Respondents were categorized in various segments:
Age – 62-65, 66-70, and 71-75;
Income -- $100,000 - $124,000 and $125,000-$999,999; and,
Net Worth -- $100,000 - $499,000, $500,000-$999,999, and $1,000,000 and above.
The survey also included individuals who worked with a financial advisor, as well as those who did not.
Very few people know that the United States did not create a monetary unit pegged to "buy" some amount of metal, as if the dollar were some kind of money independent of metal.
In 1792, Congress passed the U.S. Coinage Act, which defined a dollar as a coin containing 371.25 grains of silver and 44.75 grains of alloy. Congress did not say a dollar was worth that amount of metal; it was that amount of metal. A dollar, then, was a unit of weight, like a gram, ounce or pound. Since the alloy portion of the coin was nearly worthless, a dollar was essentially defined as 371.25 grains -- equal to 24.057 grams, or 0.7734 Troy oz. -- of pure silver. (15.43 grains = 1 gram, and 480 grains = 1 Troy ounce.)
In a nutshell, a dollar was equal to a bit more than 3/4 of an ounce of silver; or, in reverse, an ounce of silver was equal to $1.293.
The same act declared that a new coin, called an Eagle, would consist of 247.5 grains of gold and 22.5 grains of alloy. It valued this coin by law at ten dollars, meaning 3712.5 grains of silver.
In other words, Congress, rather than allowing gold and silver to trade freely against each other, equated the value of a certain amount of gold to the value of a certain amount of silver. Briefly, it established an "official" value for gold so that 247.5 grains of gold = 3712.5 grains of silver. This is an exchange ratio of 15:1. A dollar was 0.7734 ounces of silver, and Congress was declaring that a dollar would buy 0.0515625 ounces of gold, so gold was valued at $19.39/oz.
This stupid attempt at creating an artificial parity drove gold coins out of circulation, because the market had determined that an ounce of gold was in fact worth more than 15 ounces of silver.
Still trying to establish a workable parity, Congress in 1834 passed another coinage act, changing the value of a ten-dollar gold piece from 247.5 to 232 grains of gold (plus 26 grains of alloy), thereby tweaking the gold/silver ratio closer to 16:1. Now gold was pegged at 23.2 grains per dollar, which is equal to 0.04833 ounces, so gold was now valued at $20.69 per ounce.
This was no fix, because after gold was discovered in California the market quickly valued silver higher than gold, thus driving silver out of circulation. Neither Congress nor, as we will soon see, the Fed, can repeal the laws of economics and succeed at forcing a particular value on anything.
The coinage act of 1837 tweaked the purity ratio of gold and silver U.S. coins, making it 90%. This change edged the gold content of an Eagle to 232.2 grains, meaning that one dollar would buy 23.22 grains of gold, so gold was now valued at $20.67per ounce. A dollar, however, was still 0.7734 oz. of pure silver.
The silver standard ended in 1873, when a new Coinage Act scrapped the definition of a dollar as a certain weight of silver and adopted a new standard based on the weight of gold, maintaining the formula of $1 = 1/20.67 ounce of gold. The Gold Standard Act of 1900 declared that gold would remain the only standard for valuing a dollar and confirmed that a dollar was 1/20.67 ounces of gold.
In 1913, Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act. This act gave a new banking corporation the monopoly power to issue dollar-denominated banknotes backed by bonds issued by the Treasury. In other words, it gave the Fed the power, in a roundabout way, to use government debt as backing to counterfeit dollars to benefit the government.
It was counterfeiting because the Fed issued its notes on dollars (gold) it never had, and it would never find itself obligated to liquidate its store of Treasury bonds.
The Fed's counterfeiting diluted the supply of dollar-denominated debt, which naturally led to gold's being worth more per dollar than the notes.
In January 1934, Congress passed the Gold Reserve Act, under which the government seized Americans' gold, canceled all business contracts in gold, outlawed citizens' possession of gold and reduced the amount of gold that would define a dollar.
President Roosevelt personally dreamed up a new value for the dollar, which he pronounced to be 1/35 of an ounce of gold, thus making the "price" of gold $35 per ounce. In one stroke, then, he stole 41% of the value of everyone's dollars in a single moment, to the benefit of the government.
This article was excerpted from Elliott Wave International's new report, "Government, the Fed and the Nation's Money: 200 Years of Ineptitude; 100 Years of Theft and Failure; 50 Years of Economic Regression," authored by Robert Prechter. The full report demonstrates how the government is looting your accumulated wealth, and what you should be prepared for when the Fed-note era comes to a crashing halt.
My dad will turn 84 this year. When he was born, you could walk into a Federal Reserve Bank or the Treasury and redeem your paper money for gold. It actually said you could on every piece of U.S. paper currency:
"Redeemable in gold on demand at the United States Treasury, or in Gold or lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."
You can't do that today, which helps explain why my dad is so grumpy.
But, seriously, I mention my father to make it personal. The move away from the gold standard did happen in the lifetime of some folks who are still around. Is that such a big deal?
Well, it is a big deal when the government unilaterally changes all economic and financial transactions, from having a basis in something, to ...
... A basis in nothing.
Now, a discussion of what money is -- and how society can have a convenient way to exchange goods and services -- gets abstract in a hurry, so I'll save that for another day.
I will use one not-so-common word, which is fiat. It sort of means what happened when God said "Let there be light." Out of nothing comes something.
But in the story of our currency, what we have is fiat money. As in, the Treasury and Federal Reserve put ink on paper and say, "Let There Be Value!"
The problem is: You can't create value from fiat.
Here's some context: The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913. The idea was to keep the financial system from hurting itself.
Did it get less pain? Well -- less than 20 years later -- "hurting itself" only begins to describe the pain of the 1929 crash and Great Depression.
The depression is why President Franklin Roosevelt and Congress moved away from the gold standard in 1934.
Was fiat money a real solution? Mind you, the government didn't make this huge change all at once. In truth it took about 35 years. (When things move slowly, fewer people notice.)
The real question is: Are we better off with fiat money?
Bob Prechter just published a full-blown reply to this question. He dedicated his entire March issue of The Elliott Theorist to answering it.
This article was syndicated by Elliott Wave International and was originally published under the headline Ink + Paper Doesn't Equal Value: Prechter on Fiat Money. EWI is the world's largest market forecasting firm. Its staff of full-time analysts led by Chartered Market Technician Robert Prechter provides 24-hour-a-day market analysis to institutional and private investors around the world.