holiday's Blog

Back When I Was A Kid... by Mac Bledsoe

We must eliminate from our minds a few phrases when we are making decisions about how we will be raising our kids. They are the sayings like: 'When I was a kid...' and 'If I had done that when I was a kid, my dad would have...' or 'Back when we were in school they used to...'

Now, this may sound odd to you coming on the heels of our last article where we took the stand that as a nation, we need to 'recapture the sound of our kids among us just like we used to up at old Fairview Hall.' There is an important distinction here. As parents we must never allow ourselves to fall into the trap of using 'because it was done before,' or 'it has always been that way,' or 'that was the way my parents did it,' as the sole justification for our actions with our kids. It is imperative that we have a sound behavioral, moral, spiritual, ethical, or legal justifications for the actions we are teaching to or demanding of our children. We must be able to explain to our kids in a very logical way, why we are asking them to behave in a particular manner. In essence, we must not only decide: 1) WHAT it is that we want our kids to do but we must also decide, 2) WHY we want them to do it! 'Because it was done to me,' is never a good enough reason to repeat it with our children.

There have been a ton of mistakes made in the past and we are doomed to repeat them if we are not careful to think long and hard about the justification for duplicating those actions with our kids. Following are a couple examples to demonstrate what we are talking about.

Two historical events demonstrate the obvious problems with doing what has always been done before. Slavery was common in early America. We certainly would not advocate the continuation of that practice today simply because it was done before. Neither would we teach our children that women should
be second-class citizens in the United States even though they were not even legally recognized under the Constitution until the 19th Amendment was adopted in the early 20th century. Simply saying that women should not vote only because they never had in the past was a ludicrous idea.

Likewise, it is foolish for us to tell our children that they should wear certain types of clothing simply because that has been an appropriate style in the past. The same goes for hairstyles and many other standards and customs for behavior. Let's look at establishing dress codes for kids.

We are not proposing abandoning all standards of dress for young people but rather, we are saying that we ought to make the standards logical and explainable in a reasoned sort of way and not just on the 'If I had dressed that way my Dad would have killed me,' sort of an explanation.

We can have dress codes... but why do we have them is the critical question. Nobody, in their right mind would say that we scrap any sense of awareness of how our kids dress themselves. However, dressing in a certain way because a previous generation did is rather silly to impose upon our kids (unless, of course, we would like to go back and begin dressing like our forefathers who wrote that Constitution did, simply because 'that's the way they used to do it in this country.') Hey, let's get a few pictures of ourselves as teens and we can readily see that even we had some rather strange ways of dressing by today's standards.

The issue is 'why?' Why are we asking our kids to dress in certain ways?

Here is a possible discussion:

'But Dad, why can't I dye my hair blue (wear spandex shorts to church, wear this provocative Jennifer Lopez top, use four letter words at the mall like the other kids, etc.)?'

'Well, my child, you probably could do that and in a perfect world it really wouldn't matter. But, we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a world that has a few flaws: one of them being that most people in this world make a ton of snap judgments based upon some rather narrow preconceived ideas. It is a fact that most of the people you meet will not be able to see beyond the blue hair (or loud dress, etc.) to get to know you. Many of those same people are in a position to control the circumstances of your life or pass judgments about you that have a huge impact upon your life. For the same reason that it would be a bad idea to wear a ball cap to a funeral, it is a bad idea to dye your hair blue... most people would interpret it wrongly. A ball cap at a funeral would be viewed by most as being extremely disrespectful of the person being honored by the funeral. Blue hair would likewise be interpreted by most people as a sign of disrespect for others.'

'But dad, that's just the point, I'm trying to show my individuality. I don't want to just be like everyone else.'

'Great son, I am all in favor of you being a one-of-a-kind individual, but anyone can dye their hair. Why not distinguish yourself by being truly excellent at something? Or why not try to undo some terrible wrong done by society? Why not distinguish yourself by making the world a better place? I'd love to help you. What is the cause that you would like to choose? If the only way that you can come up with to make yourself different is dying your hair, I would be disappointed in you because you are such a unique person with so much to offer.'

Let us, as parents, become their teachers and give them some good solid reasons to choose to adjust their behavior in positive and productive ways simply because it makes sense to them.

Mac Bledsoe, founder and President of Parenting With Dignity?, lectures to parents organizations, youth groups, in schools and churches across America. Mr. Bledsoe and PWD have been featured on the TODAY Show, ABC's 20/20 show, and on numerous national and local radio and television programs. Visit PWD at: http://www.parentingwithdignity.com/

Article Source: Back When I Was A Kid...

http://www.7paradise.net
http://www.bestfreecode.com
http://www.googgoo.co.cc

How To Make A Cheap Guitar Sound Great by John Hilbert

Most beginning guitar players start with a rather inexpensive instrument. They usually have a mass production clone of a Fender Stratocaster or a Gibson Les Paul. The most popular clones are made overseas by Gibson and Fender themselves through the Epiphone and Squier lines. These are built to the same specs as the American made models. They are decent instruments in their own right but they can be improved greatly with just a pickup replacement. As long as the neck is straight and the tuning pegs are fairly tight, this is often all you need to upgrade to a pro sound.

Iv'e modified several Mexican made Stratocasters and I'll take you through the process. The first thing you want to decide on is what kind of sound you're looking for. Replacement pickups are available with a lot of variety in sound output. I like to use Seymour Duncan pickups because they have proven to be of high quality and reliability. They also have a good selection and have a CD of sound samples you can listen to. Most dealers have the CD's and you can also listen to the samples online. Choose your replacement pickups and you're ready to upgrade.

You'll need several things for the job. A good stable workbench or table, with plenty of room to lay your tools out, makes things much easier. Here's a list of what you need: 1.screwdriver set, both flat head and philips 2.soldering iron 3.solder 4.new set of strings 5.wire cutters/strippers

The first thing you need to do is remove your guitar strings. I usually leave the low E-string on to keep a little tension on the neck. Next remove the pickguard cover. Make sure you save all the screws in a cup as they are small and get lost easily. After you remove the screws you should be able to lift up on it and slide it off under the E-string. You should now see your three pickups and the wiring thats attached to them.

The new pickups come with a wiring diagram that is color coded but take a good look at each pickup before you replace it in case something isn't quite right with the color code. It's important that you replace one pickup at a time so as not to mix up the bridge, middle and neck pickups.

Heat up your soldering iron. Remove the first pickup. I usually start with the neck pickup. Cut and strip the wires according to the instructions and solder the wires to the new ones. Repeat the process for the other two. Not too bad, huh?

When you replace the cover/pickguard, be careful not to overtighten the screws or they might get stripped. Now would be a good time to clean the guitar before you put the new strings on.

Replace and tune the strings and plug in. You'll be pleased with the results. I have several of these upgraded strats for the price of one expensive one and more versatilty with different pickup sounds. You can do the same thing with an Epiphone Les Paul to produce a sound that rivals the Gibson for about a third of the price. Now you can spend more money on all the cool effects gadgets. Have fun and keep practicing.

Guitar Emporium

John is one of the webmasters at: The Guitar Emporium Submitted with Article Distributor.

Article Source: How To Make A Cheap Guitar Sound Great

http://www.7paradise.net
http://www.bestfreecode.com
http://www.googgoo.co.cc

What Is Value Investing? by Geoff Gannon -

Different sources define value investing differently. Some say value investing is the investment philosophy that favors the purchase of stocks that are currently selling at low price-to-book ratios and have high dividend yields. Others say value investing is all about buying stocks with low P/E ratios. You will even sometimes hear that value investing has more to do with the balance sheet than the income statement.

In his 1992 letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, Warren Buffet wrote:

“We think the very term ‘value investing’ is redundant. What is ‘investing’ if it is not the act of seeking value at least sufficient to justify the amount paid? Consciously paying more for a stock than its calculated value - in the hope that it can soon be sold for a still-higher price - should be labeled speculation (which is neither illegal, immoral nor - in our view - financially fattening).”

“Whether appropriate or not, the term ‘value investing’ is widely used. Typically, it connotes the purchase of stocks having attributes such as a low ratio of price to book value, a low price-earnings ratio, or a high dividend yield. Unfortunately, such characteristics, even if they appear in combination, are far from determinative as to whether an investor is indeed buying something for what it is worth and is therefore truly operating on the principle of obtaining value in his investments. Correspondingly, opposite characteristics - a high ratio of price to book value, a high price-earnings ratio, and a low dividend yield - are in no way inconsistent with a ‘value’ purchase.” Buffett’s definition of “investing” is the best definition of value investing there is. Value investing is purchasing a stock for less than its calculated value.

Tenets of Value Investing

1) Each share of stock is an ownership interest in the underlying business. A stock is not simply a piece of paper that can be sold at a higher price on some future date. Stocks represent more than just the right to receive future cash distributions from the business. Economically, each share is an undivided interest in all corporate assets (both tangible and intangible) – and ought to be valued as such.

2) A stock has an intrinsic value. A stock’s intrinsic value is derived from the economic value of the underlying business.

3) The stock market is inefficient. Value investors do not subscribe to the Efficient Market Hypothesis. They believe shares frequently trade hands at prices above or below their intrinsic values. Occasionally, the difference between the market price of a share and the intrinsic value of that share is wide enough to permit profitable investments. Benjamin Graham, the father of value investing, explained the stock market’s inefficiency by employing a metaphor. His Mr. Market metaphor is still referenced by value investors today:

“Imagine that in some private business you own a small share that cost you $1,000. One of your partners, named Mr. Market, is very obliging indeed. Every day he tells you what he thinks your interest is worth and furthermore offers either to buy you out or sell you an additional interest on that basis. Sometimes his idea of value appears plausible and justified by business developments and prospects as you know them. Often, on the other hand, Mr. Market lets his enthusiasm or his fears run away with him, and the value he proposes seems to you a little short of silly.”

4) Investing is most intelligent when it is most businesslike. This is a quote from Benjamin Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor”. Warren Buffett believes it is the single most important investing lesson he was ever taught. Investors ought to treat investing with the seriousness and studiousness they treat their chosen profession. An investor should treat the shares he buys and sells as a shopkeeper would treat the merchandise he deals in. He must not make commitments where his knowledge of the “merchandise” is inadequate. Furthermore, he must not engage in any investment operation unless “a reliable calculation shows that it has a fair chance to yield a reasonable profit”.

5) A true investment requires a margin of safety. A margin of safety may be provided by a firm’s working capital position, past earnings performance, land assets, economic goodwill, or (most commonly) a combination of some or all of the above. The margin of safety is manifested in the difference between the quoted price and the intrinsic value of the business. It absorbs all the damage caused by the investor’s inevitable miscalculations. For this reason, the margin of safety must be as wide as we humans are stupid (which is to say it ought to be a veritable chasm). Buying dollar bills for ninety-five cents only works if you know what you’re doing; buying dollar bills for forty-five cents is likely to prove profitable even for mere mortals like us.

What Value Investing Is Not

Value investing is purchasing a stock for less than its calculated value. Surprisingly, this fact alone separates value investing from most other investment philosophies.

True (long-term) growth investors such as Phil Fisher focus solely on the value of the business. They do not concern themselves with the price paid, because they only wish to buy shares in businesses that are truly extraordinary. They believe that the phenomenal growth such businesses will experience over a great many years will allow them to benefit from the wonders of compounding. If the business’ value compounds fast enough, and the stock is held long enough, even a seemingly lofty price will eventually be justified.

Some so-called value investors do consider relative prices. They make decisions based on how the market is valuing other public companies in the same industry and how the market is valuing each dollar of earnings present in all businesses. In other words, they may choose to purchase a stock simply because it appears cheap relative to its peers, or because it is trading at a lower P/E ratio than the general market, even though the P/E ratio may not appear particularly low in absolute or historical terms. Should such an approach be called value investing? I don’t think so. It may be a perfectly valid investment philosophy, but it is a different investment philosophy.

Value investing requires the calculation of an intrinsic value that is independent of the market price. Techniques that are supported solely (or primarily) on an empirical basis are not part of value investing. The tenets set out by Graham and expanded by others (such as Warren Buffett) form the foundation of a logical edifice.

Although there may be empirical support for techniques within value investing, Graham founded a school of thought that is highly logical. Correct reasoning is stressed over verifiable hypotheses; and causal relationships are stressed over correlative relationships. Value investing may be quantitative; but, it is arithmetically quantitative.

There is a clear (and pervasive) distinction between quantitative fields of study that employ calculus and quantitative fields of study that remain purely arithmetical. Value investing treats security analysis as a purely arithmetical field of study. Graham and Buffett were both known for having stronger natural mathematical abilities than most security analysts, and yet both men stated that the use of higher math in security analysis was a mistake. True value investing requires no more than basic math skills.

Contrarian investing is sometimes thought of as a value investing sect. In practice, those who call themselves value investors and those who call themselves contrarian investors tend to buy very similar stocks.

Let’s consider the case of David Dreman, author of “The Contrarian Investor”. David Dreman is known as a contrarian investor. In his case, it is an appropriate label, because of his keen interest in behavioral finance. However, in most cases, the line separating the value investor from the contrarian investor is fuzzy at best. Dreman’s contrarian investing strategies are derived from three measures: price to earnings, price to cash flow, and price to book value. These same measures are closely associated with value investing and especially so-called Graham and Dodd investing (a form of value investing named for Benjamin Graham and David Dodd, the co-authors of “Security Analysis”).

Conclusions

Ultimately, value investing can only be defined as paying less for a stock than its calculated value, where the method used to calculate the value of the stock is truly independent of the stock market. Where the intrinsic value is calculated using an analysis of discounted future cash flows or of asset values, the resulting intrinsic value estimate is independent of the stock market. But, a strategy that is based on simply buying stocks that trade at low price-to-earnings, price-to-book, and price-to-cash flow multiples relative to other stocks is not value investing. Of course, these very strategies have proven quite effective in the past, and will likely continue to work well in the future.

The magic formula devised by Joel Greenblatt is an example of one such effective technique that will often result in portfolios that resemble those constructed by true value investors. However, Joel Greenblatt’s magic formula does not attempt to calculate the value of the stocks purchased.

So, while the magic formula may be effective, it isn’t true value investing. Joel Greenblatt is himself a value investor, because he does calculate the intrinsic value of the stocks he buys. Greenblatt wrote 'The Little Book That Beats The Market' for an audience of investors that lacked either the ability or the inclination to value businesses.

You can not be a value investor unless you are willing to calculate business values. To be a value investor, you don't have to value the business precisely - but, you do have to value the business.

Geoff Gannon writes a daily value investing blog and produces a twice weekly (half hour) value investing podcast at Gannon on Investing

Article Source: What Is Value Investing?

http://www.7paradise.net
http://www.bestfreecode.com
http://www.googgoo.co.cc

'A HOLY TERROR' - OUR FREEDOM IS AT STAKE by robert1704

Muslim terrorism is actually as well in the United States as in Europe and the
other states belonging to the “West”(Australia, New Zealand
and Israel), the main concern of the populations and
Governments. Radical Muslims make no attempt do disguise
that they want to destroy first Israel and then the rest of
the “West”. At the same time, China, India and the East
Asian countries are ready to play a dominant role in world
politics. In order to establish treaties, Muslim states are
already approaching China and China already delivers parts
of nuclear installations and missiles to these countries).

Are we heading towards a “Clash of civilizations” (as
Samuel P. Huntington calls it)? Our future doesn’t look
bright at the moment. Our countries are politically
divided. Europe shows a kind of anti-Americanism and
anti-Semitism flares up again. The writer’s website deals
comprehensively with these problems on the pages:
justification, information and bibliography.
http://www.westernfreedom.com

In Robert Maegh’s thriller “A Holy Terror”, a story as
up-to-date and frightening as tomorrow’s newspaper, several
terrorist organisations merge and begin to forge plans to
establish the multi-national supremacy of Islam. In Sydney,
Australia, John Friedmann and Siobhan Bergman stumble upon
a murdered man and obtain possession of a terrorist map
which gives vital information about future terrorist
actions. In their quest to regain the information, the
fundamentalists murder Friedmann’s wife. The Holy Terror is
set in motion around the world and there is an evil assault
on Paris while the drinking water in Sydney is poisoned.
Mossad and C.I.A. are involved. Siobhan and a Jewish
officer are abducted. Will they be in time to rescue
Siobhan? Can the extremists be stopped before they bring
terror to the rest of the world?

The extensive biography of the Belgian writer Robert Maegh,
who spent several years in the Middle East (especially
Iran) can be consulted on the website:
http://www.westernfreedom.com (page about the author)

Contact Robert Maegh for more insights into this topic.
Direct line: 32 (0)14620138, Email: degree@skynet.be Other
helpful information regarding the book can be found at:
http://www.westernfreedom.com.

For More Information Contact:

Robert Maegh
degree@skynet.be
http://www.westernfreedom.com

Robert Maegh is a Belgian engineer, born in Germany in 1945. He spent several years in Africa and the Middle East. 'A Holy Terror' is his first novel and a sequel can soon be expected.

Article Source: 'A HOLY TERROR' - OUR FREEDOM IS AT STAKE

http://www.7paradise.net
http://www.bestfreecode.com
http://www.googgoo.co.cc

Refinancing Your Mortgage After Bankruptcy by Lance Williams

It is a general conception that getting a refinance loan after filing a bankruptcy is quite difficult. But you can avail a home loan provided you pay the interest at a slightly higher rate. Generally, lenders do not prefer taking the risk of offering mortgages to someone who has filed bankruptcy. But there are the subprime lenders who can offer you loans at higher interest rates, sometimes even after six months of finalizing your bankruptcy.

Filing a bankruptcy case affects your credit status as it reflects your inability to pay down your debts. A Chapter 7 Bankruptcy stays in your credit report for at least 7 years whereas Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is featured in the report for 10 years. But this does not mean that you won’t be getting credit – the only thing is that you won’t qualify for a reasonable rate.

Generally, most lenders in the primary mortgage market will consider offering you the loan only after 2 years of filing for bankruptcy. But you need to be current on your bills during this period. You will be able to re-establish a better credit profile with a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, as it requires you to follow a repayment plan to become debt-free within 3 to 5 years. This isn’t easier with a Chapter 7 bankruptcy because it allows for the discharge of all your debts, and you don’t have to repay any part of your unpaid credit. But Chapter 13 bankruptcy helps you to prove your creditworthiness while you continue to pay for a certain percentage of your debts including the mortgage.

One way to establish good credit within 2 years of declaring bankruptcy is to open a credit card account and make payments regularly. This will enable you to improve your credit score. You should also try to build up a savings account, since the more cash you have at hand, the better. You may also look for a secondary source of income so that you can pay down the debts, which are not discharged by bankruptcy. Maintaining a good credit profile thus becomes a necessity if you wish to refinance after bankruptcy.

When you have build up a fair credit history, try to look for mortgage quotes that are affordable, although you may get a slightly higher interest rate on account of declaring bankruptcy. You should also consider the Annual Percentage Rate (APR) and the loan fees that come along with the refinance loan.

Refinancing after bankruptcy helps you to restore your credit profile. You can refinance your existing debts with a home equity loan that is often offered at a better rate than the other kinds of credit. Use of such credit for refinancing will help you to maintain a good payment history. With a refinance loan after bankruptcy you can thus rebuild your credit history and this helps you to qualify for loan programs with lower rates and payments.

Lance Williams is an accomplished writer with specific expertise in the Mortgage and Real Estate field and has been involved for quite some years with MortgageFit LLC as a content developer. His current work includes bankruptcy and refinance.

Article Source: Refinancing Your Mortgage After Bankruptcy

http://www.7paradise.net
http://www.bestfreecode.com
http://www.googgoo.co.cc

holiday

to holiday