Sunday, 31 July 2011

Finances Involved at the Start of a Business




There are many aspects that you will encounter when starting up a new business, from
needing to get professional indemnity insurance to hiring staff, but all small businesses require personal finances from the owner. The business could be considered as a separate unit, as, mostly likely, the owner is not going to have any source of income in the set-up phase of the business. With this knowledge, there should be an implemented strategy that will cover budgeting for this situation prior to the start-up of the business so that there is a pool of finance that can be used.


An initial step would be to, on a daily basis, keep very close attention to any expenditure for the first few months so that the owner can get a good overview of any expenses. This will then cover any surprises that are unforeseen at the stage in the process. Once this is clear where the money will go, a budget can be created for when your income will be affected. A good idea would then be to pay off any outstanding loans such as your house, your car, or any credit debts you may have.


It is essential to make sure you have enough money to continue with your business, which many new businesses may neglect, and in turn, return to employment due to lack of funds.


Other than personal finances, if, as a new business, you are in need of a business loan, the bank will use your credit rating in order to evaluate whether or not you can have then loan. Since there is no history of the company, it is a lot more difficult for the bank to give out a loan, hence, the best option that they have is to look at the credit history of the owner of the business.


What will this mean for your business? It means that the best way for your business to be accepted for a loan is for you personally to check your own credit reports for any flaws or errors in it. Due to errors in the system, there have been actual cases where it has taken extra months to correct them, and the required loan need for the business to begin trading properly have been postponed.personal finances


The conclusion to all of this is that the business is considered separate when registered as a private limited company. If there is only a single owner of the small business, they may not be regarded as separate from the business; therefore, the owners should be as well-informed as possible in the areas that will require more focus.



Tuesday, 26 July 2011

Amy Winehouse: Condolences

                                                                    Amy Winehouse



We are here for a short time on this earth.  So, unfortunately we must sometimes say: “good bye”.  The topic is never easy but here are two common language styles.

Language Style

 Demi Moore: "Truly sad news about Amy Winehouse. My heart goes out to her family.”

Usher:  "I'm so sad to hear the horrible news of Amy Winehouse's death. I'm so happy I knew you Amy...we'll miss you!!"

The first sentences of Demi and Usher are common expressions for beginning to express sympathy. 

It is truly sad news about Amy Winehouse.

I’m so sad to hear the horrible news of Amy Winehouse’s death. 


The word ‘truly’ can be interchanged with ‘so’.  These words simply emphasize the person’s feeling of sadness.  For example:

I’m truly sad to hear the horrible news of Amy Winehouse’s death. 

However, ‘so’ can’t be interchanged with ‘truly’ despite the same meaning. (Native English speaking patterns can be tricky)

The easiest word to use that can be interchanged in both cases is ‘very’.  ‘Very’ has the same meaning as ‘truly’ and ‘so’.  
For example:

It is very sad news about Amy Winehouse.

I’m very sad to hear the horrible news of Amy Winehouse’s death. 

Use the word you like best.  Most native speakers don’t think about it.  However, in American English ‘truly’ has more of a formal feeling because it is found more in writing than speaking.  But in the case of someone’s death, people often use more formal words to express their feelings.

The second sentences of Demi and Usher are where they personalize their message.

Demi: My heart goes out to her family.

Usher: I'm so happy I knew you Amy...we'll miss you!!

Although both sentence are more personal in nature, the ideas are quite common in condolences.

Condolences Speaking Pattern

 Examples:
________ sad news about ________. My heart goes out to her family.

1.Truly sad news about (person’s name). My heart goes out to her/his family.
2.Very sad new about (person’s name). My heart goes out to his/her family and friends.

I'm ________ sad to hear the horrible news of ________ death. I'm so happy I knew you ________....we'll miss you!!

3.  I’m so sad to hear the horrible news of (person’s name) death. I'm so happy I knew you (person’s name)...we'll miss you!!
4. I’m truly sad to hear the horrible news of (person’s name) death. I'm so happy I knew you (person’s name)...we'll miss you!!
5.  I’m very sad to hear the horrible news of (person’s name) death. I'm so happy I knew you (person’s name)...we'll miss you!!

For the last part of this blog, I have included two of Amy’s favorite singers/influences.  Please enjoy the videos and think of all the good things Emy Winehouse brought to the world in such a short time.  She was definitely up there with the greats! Goodbye song bird!

Videos
 Sarah Vaughan

 Billie Holiday


To Amy’s family and friends ~ I am truly sorry for your loss,
                                                                                                      Alex

Sunday, 24 July 2011

How to get free credit score without credit card

Why would you need to have credit score?

If you want to go anywhere in life, it is important to have a good credit score. A good credit score can help you get a loan for buying a new home or continuing your education. It also can encourage banks to invest in your company when it is time for your small business to start expanding. With good credit scores being so important, many people are afraid to give out their credit card number online. All it would take is for one scammer to get a hold of that precious number and the precious credit score may be ruined forever! So, how do you get your free credit score without giving out your credit card number?

Does every company ask for a Credit card?

Many companies do not do credit scores without a credit card number. This is not because they are planning to charge you, but because the credit card number serves as a personal identification that will help the company find your credit score. Without your credit card number, the company running the credit check will need to have other personal information to be able to do your credit check.

Social security number-A Credit card Substitute?

Typically, a social security number is a good substitute for a credit card number when running a credit check. Your social security number, when coupled with your full name and birth date, should help the company be able to identify you and find your credit score. Some companies feel this is not enough, however. After all, identity thieves steal names and social security numbers all the time! In these cases, the company running the credit check may ask for a scan of your driver's license or photo ID to help prove you are who you say you are. Typically, these will have to be emailed to customer support for your personal safety.

Is all this Hassle worth it?

If all of this sounds like a pain and as if you are actually giving the company far more information by not giving out your credit card number, you are right! Most credit check companies ask for your credit card number so they will not have to ask for your social security number, a scan of your driver's license and other personal information. However, if you do not have a credit card number or really do not want to give it out, giving the credit check company all of this alternate information instead for your free credit score will be worth it.

What can u benefit from a free credit check?

With a free credit check you can keep an eye on how your credit is doing. You can make improvements on your credit if you need to or you can continue to maintain it as you have been. It is not necessary to use a credit card to request a free credit check so you don't have to apply for a card in order to do so. This can actually save you time if you don't have one because you simply use the documentation that you already have, plus you don't need to put yourself in the situation of having one with all of the temptation of increasing debt load.

Author Bio: Jane is a Finance blogger and an investment enthusiast. He has a blog on credit reports from where you can get info on stuff like How to get Free credit report.





Saturday, 23 July 2011

The Origin of the [crisis in the] European Union – 2: Where is Europe?

Sometimes you can tell a book by its cover – or what’s written on it.

Early this year, I got the 2011 edition of Best European Fiction. The idea of the best European fiction is inherently idiotic, like the best city, the best university or the best food.

A few stories I read were sophomoric and just plain bad. So out went the book. But I remember the struggle of the editor to define Europe in the introductory chapter; I suppose you have to do it if you are editing a book of European fiction.

He got nowhere. Anyone setting out to define Europe through the commonality of themes in fiction is setting himself up for failure because there is no such commonality.

Europe, first and foremost, is an economic entity and must be understood as such. Even in the midst of an economic crisis which points to that fact – can you imagine a linguistic crisis in Europe, or a moral or cultural crisis? – that obvious fact is overlooked – or not understood at all.

Hegel showed that we think in names. “Given the name lion, we need neither the actual vision of the animal, nor its image even. The name alone, if we understand it, is the unimaged simple representation. We think in names“, he wrote in Philosophy of Mind.

What do we think of when we think Europe?

We think of Beethoven’s symphonies, Newton’s mechanics, Italian architecture, French cuisine, the Dutch masters. We think Mozart, Hegel, Faraday, French Revolution.

These names resonate with us because our lives in some way are impacted by them. The nature of that impact does not concern us here. But note that all the names are clustered in a region that is geographically Western Europe. That is no coincidence. The countries in Western Europe were the first to emerge from a feudal society into a capitalist state. It is that socio-economic transformation that defines Europe and its place in the world. Europe is the Capitalist Europe; note how the names are also clustered around a specific time – roughly the 18th century – which corresponds to the rise of Capitalism.

The degree of the Europeanness of the countries in the continent is measured with that yardstick. Unsurprisingly, that measure correlates with the geography and the physical proximity of the countries to the Western European center. Using the parlance of the current crisis, we can say that there are “core” and “periphery” countries in Europe.

Correlation, though, is not causation. It does not contain the element of necessity. We cannot always infer a country’s stage of economic development from its position on the map. Art and literature are better indicators. They more accurately reflect the economic and social relations in a country because they are born out of those relations.

Take Spain and Portugal which both began the road to Capitalism early but then fell behind their northern rivals.

To date, they are less Europe. If you do not live in Portugal, you would be hard pressed to think of a universally recognized European icon that is Portuguese.

As for Spain, the example of Picasso will suffice. His success is precisely due to the fact that he is Spanish, a lifetime spent in France notwithstanding. John Berger, in his masterly exposition of Picasso in The Success and Failure of Picasso hits on this very point: Picasso being a “vertical invader” of the European stage from the trapdoor that was Barcelona:
Poverty is not surprising to any Spaniard. But the poverty Picasso witnessed in Paris was of a different kind. In the Paris self-portrait of 1901 we see the face of a man who not only is cold and hasn’t eaten much, but who is also silent and to whom nobody talks.



Nor is this loneliness just a question of being a foreigner. It is fundamental to the poverty of outcasts in a modern city. It is the subjective feeling in the victim that corresponds exactly to the objective and absolute ruthlessness that surrounds him. This is not poverty as a result of primitive conditions. This is poverty as the result of man-made laws; poverty which, legally accepted, must be dismissed from the mind as unworthy of any consideration.



Many peasants in Andalusia must have been hungrier than the couple at the table in the etching of The Frugal Meal. But no couple would have been so demonized, no couple would have felt themselves to be so worthless.
Hungary is not Europe. As a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, it came in touch with the European core and was set on its way to Capitalism. It is all there in Musil’s masterpiece, The Man Without Qualities. He describes a country in which “there was some show of luxury, but by no means as in such overrefined ways as the French. People went in for sport, but not as fanatically as the English. Ruinous sums of money were spent on the army, but only just enough to secure its position as the second-weakest among the great powers.”

WWI aborted the transformation and later, under socialism, semi-feudal relations survived. Socialism did not destroy them with the vehemence that capitalism would have. You can see that in the beautiful novels of Sandor Marai, in Casanova in Bolzano or Embers.

In Embers, a man’s sense of honor prevents him from opening the diary of his long-dead wife, although it would answer a question which has been tormenting him for 40 years.

Imagine Rupert Murdoch – the hacker of dead schoolgirls’ cell phones – being restrained by a sense of honor. Or Tony ‘Yo’ Blair. Or David Cameron. Sarkozy. Berlusconi.

Berlusconi!

I am not talking about the leaders and outstanding citizens only. Western European writers in general could not think of the idea of leaving a dead wife’s diary unopened. Nor would their readers believe such a plot; it would make no sense to them. That is because sense of honor is not only internal, but also external: it springs from a concern and respect for the others. It is ultimately the recognition of others as one’s equals. A “rational” Western man who is conditioned to view maximizing one’s profit at the expense of others as the natural order of the universe would reject that equality even if his life depended on it.

It is in that sense that Hungary is not Europe: a strong sense of honor is still conceivable there.

And Greece is not Europe. Greece most definitely is not Europe.

Geographically, Greece is attached to Turkey. It was a part of Turkey for 400 years. But it is not geography alone; if Turkey could qualify as a North Atlantic country in NATO, then Greece could qualify as a European country. I am talking about economic and social relations.

In both respects, Greece is closer to Turkey and Iran than France and Germany. The commonality goes beyond baklava and stuffed grape leaves. It pertains to the balance of power between business and the government from which, ultimately, the country’s social relations and the tempo of its daily life originates. You can see that in the disorganization of the social institutions perfectly reflected in traffic. It is the hallmark of a society which has not internalized the discipline of the assembly line – or the call centers, as the case may be.

Because business – Capitalism – in Greece is relatively underdeveloped, the government has assumed the economic functions that in more developed economies are left to the businesses. That further accentuates the relaxed mood of the country and acts as a brake against the “entrepreneurial drive” that is so evident in the West and, especially, in the U.S.

Until the new reforms kicked in, for example, the Greek government paid the full pension of deceased pensioners to the surviving spouse. And if the couple had children under 18, they too, were paid until they turned 18. Turkey and Iran have similar laws.

To the advocates of family values in the West, that is a scandal, a paternalistic restraining of the free people’s spirit which had to change if Greece was going to join the ranks of civilized nations.

That is precisely what the EU and euro are all about. The issue is not the core countries. They are already European. The plan is make the periphery core. Why? Because in less developed periphery countries labor is cheap. Given a common currency, the core countries can exploit that advantage to raise the rate of return of capital.

For that to happen, the government in the periphery countries must get out of the way and make room for business – after making the conditions right for the business to come in.

That is what the racist professor whom I quoted in Part I was saying about Greece. Let us hear him one more time:
A European country without a land registry, without proper tax enforcement and without a responsible political process to control spending and borrowing needs all the outside pressure it can get to increase state capacity ... Pressure to improve state capacity and become a grown-up country is what Germany and European Union are currently providing, free of charge.
Exactly. The Greek government must establish a land registry so that property rights could be unquestionably asserted. It must establish proper tax collection to enforce tax payment from small businesses and the middle class and, most important of all, reign in the spending. What a scandal, paying for the living expenses of a child just because his parents are dead.

This is what has been happening in all periphery countries.

As for the governments getting out of the way, they have no alternatives. Just listen to Jacob Funk Kierkegaard, at the Peterson Institute of International Economics in Washington. He was quoted in the Financial Times of July 22:
Absent a dramatic improvement in the business climate or Greece raising money by selling off its islands, I still think it is going to be a struggle to get investors to have confidence in Greece with such a high level of debt burden.
Greece raising money by selling its islands!

But I am getting ahead of myself.

Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Angelina Jolie: A long-term Relationship Partner

Angelina Jolie Relationship Talk
                                                                       Angelina Jolie

Question: And if you get another love, what will he be like?

Angelina Jolie:  The kind of man I could be with one day would 
                             have to be an amazing father, a compassionate, 
                             strong, independent individual. I want somebody
                             who demands I be better than what I am today.

                        (*to note: this interview was taken before Brad Pitt became her partner*)

Speaking Style

Today’s theme continues from last week’s Blog about the type of guy or girl we would date; or wouldn’t date.  Last week was about dating preferences.  This week’s language focus is similar but used when we are talking about being with someone more permanently. To refresh your memory here is last week’s conversational speaking pattern:

Avril: Boys with guitars  they’re really fucking hot.  I could never date a preppy guy

Avril gives us her ‘likes’ and ‘dislikes’ regarding guys.  This gives us lots of information to continue talking to her. For example we might answer, “Yeah, I love guys with guitars too.  There awesome!” or “ No way.  I love preppy guys.  I think they are more mature.”

In today’s natural language focus, Angelina shares with us the type of man she would like to be with in a future long-term relationship.  The language she uses is very subtle and casual:

Angelina: The kind of man I could be with one day would have to be __________.

The expression ‘the kind of man’ is common and casual.  The sentence: “ I could be with one day would have to be…” is a possible future that almost has a fairy tale feeling to it.   The next part of her language emphasizes her ideal man for a long-term relationship:

"… an amazing father, a compassionate, strong, independent individual.  I want somebody who demands I be better than what I am today."

As you can see, Angelina’s passion comes out in the use of several adjectives and then the secondary sentence. The adjectives are descriptive but precise and the secondary sentence shows how she wants to be affected by her next partner in a direct way.  Angelina wants a great father for her son, and a compassionate, strong, independent man in her life.  Moreover, this person must be all of these things in order to affect her to become a better person. 

Angelina’s language pattern flows so nicely.  Her passion and ideas are propelled clearly without sounding arrogant.  She allows us to see past the outside beauty and into the sensitive but intelligent, beautiful person inside her.  This is the type of language that attracts a great partner to the beginning of a wonderful relationship.  Angelina’s language has that female X-factor or irresistible magnetism that parallels her physical traits. 

Now, to bring out your own personal magnetism…or catch guys like Brad Pitt or anybody else you want!

Angelina’s Conversational Speaking Pattern

The kind of man I could be with one day would have to be __________.  I want somebody who ___________.

Some examples to get you started:

1. The kind of man I could be with one day would have to be strong but sensitiveI want somebody who demands I be better than what I am today.
2. The kind of man I could be with one day would have to be intelligent, funny, and love dogs.  I want somebody who understands me.
3. The kind of woman I could be with one day would have to be strong, independent, and loving.  I want somebody who demands I be better than what I am today.
4. The kind of woman I could be with one day would have to be intelligent, warm, and a cat lover.  I want someone who is also my best friend.


I hope you will enjoy trying out these speaking patterns in your daily love life!  

Take care and I hope you catch the partner you want,
Alex - Celebrity English
Celebrity English Language and Culture

Saturday, 16 July 2011

Compare Equity Release Schemes To Ensure Utmost Benefits






Are you planning for equity release? Do you know about all the schemes properly? Which scheme will suit your financial requirements the most?
It will be beneficial for you to compare equity release schemes. It will enable you to understand the pros and cons different equity release schemes.
Firstly, do you know how many types of equity release schemes are available?


  • Lifetime mortgages,
  • Home-reversion plans,
  • Interest-only plans,
  • Shared appreciation mortgages,
  • Home income plan.


To compare equity release schemes, you must know all its spheres properly.
Life-time mortgages and home-reversion plans are the most common of all; here I will compare equity release based on these two plans.


  • Income procedure: Both of these plans offer you to enjoy a lump sum and tax-free income. But, home-reversion plans allow you to drawdown smaller amounts as per your requirements. Here, you get the privilege to withdraw smaller amounts according to your needs. But, in lifetime mortgages you cannot apply the same method to withdraw the amount you release through equity. One thing to add here that in mortgage plans you can change your payment into monthly installments.

  • Future security: In home reversion plans, you can secure a pot full of cash for your future but in lifetime mortgages, you will not get this opportunity.

  • Property owner: In lifetime mortgage scheme, you remain the owner of your property until your death. Whereas in home-reversion plans you start selling smaller parts of your property. When you finish selling the whole part of the property, you lost the owner-ship of your property.

  • Repayment procedure: In lifetime mortgages you can repay the monthly installments with some plans. In the other hand, home reversion plans do not allow you to make monthly repayments.

It is better to compare equity release schemes before you go for any of the plan.



Thursday, 14 July 2011

... And Conforms to the Theory

In the same article, there was this:
Increasingly, they [HFT firms] are investing in technology that enables them to to try to predict where markets will move. Cameron Smith, general counsel at Quantlab, a proprietary trading firm says: “The reality is you need to have some sort of model that sees something that other don't”.
You have heard ad nauseam how technology revolutionized finance. The statement is repeated so often that it is now an article of faith.

But that is getting the cause and effect exactly backwards. It was finance, in the form of speculative capital that, in search of profits, revolutionized technology. I had a front row seat to the revolution in the early 1980s, being paid exorbitant sums to develop trading systems. Cause and effect was there for everyone willing to look.

Capital has no reason to move from one place to another without the possibility of realizing a profit. Long before there was any trading system, there was Western Union. In the U.S., you could send money anywhere in the country in 15 minutes. If you are over 40, you probably remember the ads.

But there must a be a reason for sending $10,000,000 from New York to say, Boston. Without it, the exercise borders on madness.

When speculative capital rises and discovers the arbitrage opportunities in different locations then — and only then — does the need arise for “getting there” fast before the others. Hence, capital is poured in and technology is revolutionized.

In Critique of Dialectical Reasoning, Jean Paul Sartre asks: “Are there regions of reality where [dialectics] is the norm?”. He does not answer the question. My answer is, Yes Mr. Sartre, the realm of economics/finance is one such region. Observe:

Having destroyed the arbitrage opportunities on sight, speculative capital fancies that it can somehow “replace” them with sheer speed; it moves to substitute the speed for arbitrage opportunities. Hence the rise of HFT.

But that is a fantasy. It is the finance equivalent of fancying that you can generate profits without production. So, back to square one and the need for something that could detect a profit opportunity.

But the point that we are in now, looking for a model, is not the same point we were in during the 1980s, looking for a model. That phase created the quants, hedge funds and derivatives.

Today, quants are discredited, hedge funds are institutionalized and derivatives are the indispensable part of the capital markets landscape.

That is dialectics par excellence. A better example of “immediate” going out of itself, becoming “intermediate” and returning to become “immediate” again, but on a qualitatively different level, could not be found.

Come to think of it, I know things about options and options trading that are not common knowledge; if you have read Vol. 3 you know what I mean. Maybe I should take up again what I left decades ago. Imagine a predictive engine for the HFT guys. Imagine the potential. Imagine the riches!

The Contour Becomes Visible ...

I formulated the Theory of Speculative Capital in 1998. An Internet search — I think even Google was around then — registered zero hits for the phrase “speculative capital”. There were several “speculative capital flows”, in which the flows were described as speculative, but nothing for speculative capital as a noun.

The gist of the theory is that speculative capital is a self-destructive force which rises to dominate the financial markets and, in doing so, sows the seeds of their destruction. If you get that, you too, could be a man with a crystal ball.
 
Like all forces, speculative capital assumes many forms; hedge funds (organizational/legal form), derivatives(functional form) and, lately, capital engaged in high-frequency trading, are its various manifestations.  If you read the 9-part series on the subject, you know how this latest form came about.

Each new form of speculative capital is more aggressive and thus, more intense and extreme than the previous forms. It has to be: with the low hanging fruits taken, only the progressively more difficult-to-spot-and-exploit opportunities remain. Gradually, the tension and the prevalence of tension gets noticed, noticed being a different matter from understood.
 
Today, the Financial Times had a relatively long article on how HFT is “hitting headwinds”. The article’s “pull quote”, presumably the most insightful thought in it, was the comment of a Karim Taleb that: “HFT is cannibalizing itself, since it is driving out the very traders it needs to feed off”.
 
Exactly. But then, either Karim or the paper added that “In response, most traders are already turning to other strategies less dependent on speed.”
 
I am afraid that will not work. Even in strategies less dependent on speed, it is important to get there first. Being first counts for something!

What will happen, I think, is that the strategies less dependent on speed will gradually become more dependent on it until they all become totally dependent on speed, just like the equities markets are now. That is how speculative capital changes the markets and sets them up for destruction: by radically altering their structure, i.e., the way they operate.

A system’s modus operandi, the way it works, is designed around its purpose - what it is for. The two are inseparable. Destroying one destroys the other.

When speculative capital destroys, there is no malice or conspiracy. It is just the way it works, the way it is, which is why the destruction goes not only unrecognized but is applauded as continued advancement towards some financial/economic promised land.

Tuesday, 12 July 2011

Avril Lavigne: Dating

Avril Lavigne Maxim
                                                               

Question: What type of boys are you into?

Avril Lavigne:  Boys with guitars…they’re really fucking hot. I 
                          could never date a preppy guy. 

Speaking Style

In conversation, with friends, the type of person you like to date often occurs.  Guys and girls often spend hours talking about the type of person they like or don’t like.  Today, we will look at how to start talking naturally about dating.

Avril has a young, vibrant style of casual conversation.  In this case, she is asked about the type of guys she likes.  She gives a good strong answer with her ideal type and what she doesn’t like.  In some cultures, we might avoid the part about what we ‘don’t like’ but in English it comes across naturally.

Avril also uses common expressions to make her feelings vibrant or passionate.  Speaking with passion makes people want to listen to you.  Let’s change the question and answer expressions into direct English with the same meanings. 

Question: What type of boys are you 'into'?
                   = What type of boys do you 'like'? (same meaning)

Avril: Boys with guitars they’re really 'fucking hot'.  I could     
           never date a 'preppy guy'.    
           = Avril: Boys with guitars they’re really, 'really 
              attractive and sexy'.  
              I could never date a guy who wears 'neat, classic
              clothing with a preparatory school style'. 
              (same meaning)
  
Casual Slang Word Summary

1. 'fucking' = very

2. 'hot' = really attractive and sexy

3. 'preppy guy' = a guy who wears young but classic clothing that is neat and well put together.  The clothing is usually expensive.  This fashion style comes from clothing designed after expensive preparatory school uniforms.  Modern preppy fashion can be seen in the clothing line by ‘Tommy Hilfiger’.

Now let’s put these ideas into practice.  Below is the main speaking pattern to try out in your next English encounter with a native speaker. Also, don’t forget the slang!

Conversational Speaking Pattern


Boys with ________...they're really fucking hot.  I could never date a ________.

1. Boys with snowboards …they're really fucking hot.  I could never date a guy who doesn’t like the mountains in winter.
2. Boys with muscles …they're really fucking hot.  I could never date a skinny guy.

Girls with ________...they're really fucking hot. I could never date a ________.

3. Girls with tattoos   …they're really fucking hot.  I could never date a boring girl.
4. Girls with long hair …they're really fucking hot.  I could never date a girl with short hair.


I hope you enjoy challenging these speaking patterns in your daily life!
Take care,
Alex
                                                   

More Stuff!


Avril Lavigne's official website

Tommy Hilfiger's official website
LINK: http://usa.tommy.com/tommy/

Avril's video about how a guy can make her feel!

                                                          
Celebrity English Language and Culture




Celebrity English
http://celebrityenglish-alex.blogspot.com/

Facebook
Twitter

Saturday, 9 July 2011

The Origin of the [crisis in the] European Union – 1: When Tendency Becomes Actuality

A comprehensive analysis of what is taking place in the EU requires a book-length treatise; a blog is not a suitable venue for it. What is more, in Vol. 4, I discuss the subject in some detail. That is why except for a few relatively short posts here and there, I have not written about the events in Europe. Then, last night I read Serge Halimi’s editorial in the July issue of Le Monde Diplomatique.

Halimi is a journalist in the best sense of the word and a competent writer, as befitting the editor of LMD. Let me quote excerpts from the editorial, but I urge you to read the piece in its entirety here:
The economic, and democratic, crisis in Europe raises questions. Why were policies that were bound to fail adopted and applied with exceptional ferocity in Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece? Are those responsible for pursuing these policies mad, doubling the dose every time their medicine predictably fails to work? How is it that in a democratic system, the people are forced to accept cuts and austerity simply replace one failed government with another just as dedicated to the same shock treatment? Is there any alternative?

The answer to the first two questions is clear, once we forget the propaganda about the “public interest”, Europe’s “shared values” and being “all in this together”. The policies are rational and on the whole are achieving their objective. But that objective is not to end the economic and financial crisis but to reap its rich rewards.
Halimi correctly observes that what we face is not a “technical and financial debate but a political and social battle”. (Dialectics of finance is dialectics of politics, and vice versa.) He then goes on to explain the reason for the policies that seem to be at once insane and rational, because “indignation is powerless without some understanding of the mechanisms that caused it.”

But he does not go to the heart of the matter, which is the intellectual equivalent of asking for the moon. That is a problem, because some understanding would not do. It could not answer, for example, why draconian policies were applied with “exceptional ferocity” in “Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece”?

In fairness, the heart of the matter is technical and can hardly be discussed in an editorial. But it must at least be laid down, because it alone can answer the questions, resolve the contradictions and show the way. That is the power and the empowering effect of theory that I have written about in several place – here and here, for example, which delivers us from the submissive acceptance of events just because they occur. Without it, the powerlessness that Halimi mentions is bound to reign. The “market place” of ideas in democracies sees to that.

In democracies, you see, what often stands in the way of people’s grasp of the issues and renders them powerless is not the death of information but its stupefying plenty. The Greek pensioners, French union organizers, British “Open Europers”, the World Bank bureaucrats, the IMF experts, traders, politicians, college professors, think tankers and ordinary citizens have all opined about the crisis in EU. The opinions are often contradictory; how could traders and union organizers not disagree? That creates the “messiness” of the democracy that Rumsfeld himself cautioned us about.

Messiness muddies the waters. Who is one to believe, especially as everyone seems to be at least partially right? Since everybody is partially right – and thus, partially wrong – maybe what afflicts us transcends the individuals and touches upon something more fundamental like human nature. Yessir, that must be it. Surely it is man who is wicked, as the Good Book says. Just look at the Greeks. They do not work hard, do not pay taxes and retire early. No wonder they are broke. As for the larger crisis in the EU? It is the fault of the European “elites” who came up with the idea.

In this way, the degradation of the life styles of 500 million people in the EU is blamed on themselves.

Examples abound.

Here is one Hans-Joachim Voth, Professor of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain, writing to the editor of the Financial Times on June 24 to opine about Greece:
A European country without a land registry, without proper tax enforcement and without a responsible political process to control spending and borrowing needs all the outside pressure it can get to increase state capacity. The economic evidence is unambiguous – the larger and more effective a country’s state apparatus, the higher output per capita. Pressure to improve state capacity and become a grown-up country is what Germany and European Union are currently providing, free of charge.
And here is Gideon Rachman, an FT commentator, explaining the cause of the EU crisis in his June 21 column:
It is important to understand that the origins of the current crisis lie precisely in the dream of political union in Europe. For the true believers, currency union was always just a means to that greater end ... Helmut Kohl, the chancellor of Germany in the early 1990s, was so convinced of the need to bind a united Germany into the European Union that he was prepared to press ahead with the euro, in the face of 80 per cent opposition from the German public.

At a seminar in London last week, Joschka Fischer, a former German foreign minister ... was unrepentant in defending this elitist model of politics. He insisted that most important foreign policy decisions in postwar Germany had been made in the teeth of public opposition. “It’s called leadership,” he explained.
Yet, does any of this make sense?

If the economic evidence were “unambiguous” that the larger a country’s state apparatus, the higher its output per capita, would the Republicans in the U.S. and the Tories in the UK consistently, insistently and vehemently push for shrinking the government?

More fundamentally, who are the European elites? What is their common interest? Why would they be interested in uniting a country without a land registry or tax enforcement or a “responsible political process” [sic] with an industrial country like Germany? How could they influence the government to carry out unpopular decision, even in the face of 80% opposition?

As all the issues and controversies pertaining to the crisis in the EU stem from the crisis, they reflect the heart of it and, to that extent, contain an element of truth, no matter how contradictory and even nonsensical. If we reach the heart of the crisis, the contradictions will disappear. Newtonian mechanics offers a good analogy. It shows that the same force that makes an apple fall from a tree is the same force that keeps the moon in orbit. There is no contradiction. It also explains the apparent movement of the heavenly bodies as seen from the earth.

At the heart of the EU crisis is the fall in the rate of profit of capital in Western Europe and the U.S.

Why and how does the rate of profit fall is beyond the subject of this post. You could research it yourself or await the publication of Vol. 4. There, I delve into the subject in some depth.

The point to emphasize is that the fall is real – what philosophers call objective reality. And as the rate of profit is the source of the newly created wealth, its fall means that the amount of the total wealth created in the “developed world” is reduced.

This fall and reduction is the result of a process that originally exists as a mere tendency. In the mid 1970s, after the breakdown of the Bretton Woods regime of fixed exchange rates, the tendency exerted itself forcefully and gradually became a real phenomenon. The process continues to date and is behind all the stories about the U.S. losing its preeminence and economic might that you have been hearing for some time.

The “total wealth” is defined expansively, what is crudely and inaccurately captured in GDP. I will return to this subject later. Here I merely note that total wealth is an altogether different concept from the profit of an individual firm, or even a group of firms, say the ones comprising Fortune 500. Likewise, it has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth. The total wealth created in a country could decrease, but the absolute size of the share of that wealth that goes to a particular segment of society could rise. It is a simple matter of ratios. The overall size of a pizza pie could shrink but the amount of pizza you eat could actually increase if you raid others’ shares.

So, there is no inconsistency in saying that the rate of profit and, with that, the absolute value of the total wealth in the U.S., has fallen and yet, at the same time, the number of the billionaires in the country and their total wealth has increased. This state of affairs can come about if billionaires, when they were mere millionaires, could appropriate proportionately more share of the country’s newly created wealth.

There are many ways that an economic class could appropriate proportionally larger share of the newly created wealth. But they all boil down to paying less and thus, keeping more. In the U.S., this was done at both the public and private level, by pushing for tax cuts and reducing wages.

If you live in the U.S., both are familiar stories. The push for tax cuts led the Proposition 13 in California, which limited property taxes and set the stage for subsequent crises, from the 1994 bankruptcy of Orange County to the current, ongoing one. It also created Ronald Reagan and his “philosophy” which was adopted by both Republican and Democratic parties: constant tax cuts, tax breaks and tax loopholes for businesses and the wealthy, “small government” and “starving the beast”, the latter being code for destroying government agencies by cutting their budget on the grounds of lack of funds because the government revenues were reduced due to tax cuts.

In the U.K., Margaret Thatcher played a similar role.

In the private arena, the wages were reduced – either directly or by not keeping up with inflation. Wage reduction is a twofer. First, you pay less for labor. That is one saving/appropriation. Second, because of low wages, the labors’ productivity rises which further increases your profit. The follows from the definition of productivity, which is the value of output (wealth) created by unit labor (measured by the wages).

Here is not so much the proof – as proof only belittles the obvious – but everything you need to know on the subject, from the Financial Times of April 21, 2010, under the heading Biden urges actions on stagnant wages:
Mr Biden, who is in charge of Barack Obama’s “middle class task force” said the last US economic cycle, which began in 2001 and ended in 2007, was the first in history that left median incomes where they were at the start.

Yet, over the same period, the growth in productivity, which had traditionally fed through into wage growth, hit record levels … Mr Biden admitted that the administration did not yet have clear answers on how to address what many economists believe is a long-term structural problem in the US economy.
Note the “long-term structural problems in the US economy” which economists concede and for which Vice President Biden admits he has no clear answer. It is the diminished rate of profit and thus, wealth. It could only be remedied at the expense of sacrificing efficiency, which is another way of saying that it would not happen.

Also, Biden’s reference to 2001-07 period is strictly contextual; he happened to be talking about that specific period. The wage stagnation goes back to the mid 1970s. Financial Times, June 28, 2011:
Fork-lift truck drivers in Britain could expect to earn £19,068 in 2010, about 5 per cent lower than in 1978, after adjusting for inflation. Median male real US earnings have not risen since 1975.
The wage cuts in the U.S. were especially savage. They could not be replicated in Europe with its tradition of strong labor unions. What would you do if you were “European” capital and wanted to increase your share of wealth in the face of falling rate of profit?

What would you do if you had to build a riverfront property and there was no more land?

Why, you would “claim” land from the river. You would dig the mud and sand from the river bed and add to the river bank to create new riverfront land. Ask any major New York developer.

Similarly, if you wanted to bring wages down in Germany, for example, you would bring in cheap labor, non-union labor, Turkish labor.

But there was always a limit to that importation. Not all Germans could be replaced by Turks in German factories.

Could something more fundamental be done, then?

Yes, one could create the European Union. Its main purpose? To inject cheap labor from less developed countries into the Union so that the wealth of the more developed ones could somewhat be maintained.

That’s the EU in a nutshell.

Thursday, 7 July 2011

Asking For A Lot Of Money


Most people dream of creating a lot of money. The question is: what does it mean? 

The truth is that money is very subjective. Certainly billions of pounds is a lot of money, and there are only a handful of billionaires in the world. Millions of pounds – is that a lot? Of total wealth, no; a significant minority of the population are millionaires when considering total assets they leave to their heirs, largely due to the revaluation of real property. However, if one was to make a million pounds a year, that person who would be one of the highest paid in the world. 

Personal opinion plays an important role in determining the money a person can expect to make. The reason for this is that the two factors that most affect earnings - level of skill demonstrated, and the payment received by an employer - is highly dependent on the individual. While skill is partly based on individual trust and partially dependent on innate ability, the sum of money that a person requires an employer to give is only based on the individual. 

Of course, the two are related. We cannot have a minimum level of skill and have a high salary. However, many people still have an excellent skill level will pay relatively little compared to their peers. Why? 

The truth is that probably they did not ask - or if they did ask, they did so in a way that implied they didn't deserve what they wanted. In many cases, the boss knows what he or she can afford, but will be happy to pay less, if an employee agrees. 

Of course, the boss does not tell the employee what he or she can afford to pay. But dealing with that is relatively easy in the Information Age: salary guidelines for pay for a given location and position are online. The real challenge is not to ask for a high degree of work compensation, but feel that you deserve the high compensation that you may have. 

To do this, one must understand the relative value of money. We have established that being a billionaire is really remarkable, and the accumulation of a million pounds over a lifetime is not, but making a million pounds a year is a great achievement.



Tuesday, 5 July 2011

Natural English from Aretha Franklin and Bono: 'Growing Up'

Natural English from Aretha Franklin
                  Aretha Franklin 'The Queen of Soul'
Natural English from Bono: 'Growing Up'
Bono of U2

















In casual conversation, the simple question: “Where are you from?” often occurs. Let’s take a look at how Bono (Irish musician) and Aretha Franklin (American musician) answer the question.

Question:  “Where are you from?”

Bono: I grew up in a lower-middle-class neighborhood.

Aretha Franklin: I was brought up in Detroit, and most of my 
                           family's here.

Speaking Style

People often ask me:  “Which style is better?”

I grew up…
        OR
I was brought up…

I think if you ask your native speaker friends, they will say they use either style without thinking.  Both answers are natural in a casual/informal conversation.  Also, you can notice that Aretha Franklin shortened her sentence by dropping the object.

I was brought up by my grandmother in Detroit.  (according to Aretha’s biography)

In conversation you can do this too!

Common Mistake

However, language learners often want to add an object to the verb ‘grew up’ because the ideas seem similar or interchangeable to the verb 'to be brought up'.

For example:

I grew up by my parents in New York.       incorrect
My parents grew me up in New York.        incorrect

Unfortunately, both sentences are incorrect because the verb ‘grew up’ doesn’t take an object.  The verb ‘brought up’ can take an object. 

I was brought up by my parents in New York.      correct
My parents brought me up in New York.              correct

Now the sentences are “OK”!

Anyhow, don’t think too much about grammar.  You can use either phrase in casual conversation quite easily by following Bono and Aretha’s answer styles.  Here are some examples if you need some extra practice.  Please try them out at your next social gathering.  

Conversational Speaking Patterns


I grew up in __________.

1. I grew up in New York.                                  
2. I grew up in a middle-class neighborhood.   

I was brought up in __________.

3. I was brought up in Detroit.                    
4. I was brought up in the countryside.      


More Stuff!

Check out the tourist links of Bono and Aretha’s hometowns:

Bono-Dublin, Ireland

Aretha-Detroit, Michigan, United States
LINK http://www.visitdetroit.com/

Celebrity English Language and Culture
Take Care Alex! See you next week!

Saturday, 2 July 2011

How To Make Money Online :)


We know, Internet is very useful for us as we can see all the details in Internet. Everything we can Google and find details in Internet. You can also earn from Internet as there are many ways you can earn money on  Internet. There are many tips about how to make money on Internet and people are very interested to make money online.
Either you can say it's easy task or you can also say its hard one. You just beware of online money making scam. Online money scam can dissolve your online money making plan.


There are some ways by which you can earn money on Internet and you may not know.


Photography is one of the good option where you need to take digital photographs and upload your quality shots to stock photo sites. From this site, members can download your photos for a fee and you will receive a percentage of that fee from the hosting site. In this you can earn a passive income by your digital photos.


In free-lance, you can earn by your writing on online. There are many opportunity available for writer as a freelance writing job on online. You nee to write articles and blog posts for content sites. You should have good writing skills and if you have such a writing quality skills then definitely you will earn money on online.

If you are knowledgeable and good consultants then share your knowledge and experience on online site. There are many members offer to pay the experts to answer their questions on a different topics, including medical problems and relationships.

If you are a teacher or tutor then apply your knowledge and become a online tutor. There are many good websites dedicated to offering tutoring assistance to students.

These above are just basic examples by which you can ear money on online. Similarly, if you will search on online then you won't imagine that there are so many ways by which you can earn money just by sitting on the chair with you most helpful machine i.e, computer on online.
Keep searching ! Good luck :)