Custom Search

Monday, July 13, 2009

Senator Sessions Attacks Sotomayor

WASHINGTON - JULY 13:  Supreme Court nominee J...Image by Getty Images via Daylife

From The Hoss's Mouth

Like many of you, Money Magazine Hoss sat down this morning to watch the beginning of the historic Senate Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor. I watched the opening statements of Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) and Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) Senate Judiciary Committee ranking Republican member.

Senator Sessions' opening statement was an outright attack on Judge Sotomayor. He stated it is not appropriate for a Supreme Court Judge to have empathy. His implication was that empathy equals prejudice. Sunday on the CBS TV show Face The Nation Sessions said, "When you show empathy toward one party ... you show bias toward another." This man, whose own nomination to the federal bench was rejected because of his well know racial bias, has the gall to attack Judge Sotomayor because she has empathy. Give me a break.

During his nomination hearings, Sessions was questioned about his statements attacking the NAACP as an “un-American” and “Communist-inspired” organization that “forced civil rights down the throats of people.” Those charges are not unlike recent Senator Sessions' statements concerning Judge Sotomayor’s past service on the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), a group Sessions calls “extreme” because it “brought several race discrimination lawsuits for minorities." Well, it's obvious Senator Sessions has no empathy; sounds more like racism.

In closing his opening statement, Senator Sessions asked the American public who they would rather have on the Supreme Court: a judge who applies the letter of the law or one who uses empathy in making her decisions.

I can tell you this, I would rather have Judge Sotomayor than Senator Sessions.

Stay on Track,

Money Magazine Hoss

Next Hoss Cents Free Financial Money Magazine Post: Interest Coverage Ratio
Return to previous post from Senator Sessions Attacks Sotomayor.

Related Posts:

Obama and McCain Health Care Plans

Obama and McCain Economic Plans

Obama or McCain

Financial Crisis Deppens: Obama

G20 Summit

President Obama Trims Budget by $17 Billion






Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, July 11, 2009

AIG Bonus Scandal Continues

American International Group, Inc.Image via Wikipedia

From The Hoss's Mouth

AIG has asked Kenneth Feinberg, the Obama administration's pay czar, to review a scheduled performance bonus payment of $2.4 million to 43 of its top-ranking executives. Money Magazine Hoss clearly recalls the public outrage that occurred in March when $165 million in retention bonuses was paid to top executives.

It is not clear that Feinberg, the person tasked by the Obama administration, with reviewing bonuses and retirement packages for the 100 highest paid executives at AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, General Motors, GMAC Financial Services, Chrysler, and the defunct Chrysler Financial, has the authority to halt these bonuses. Some believe his mandate is only for current and future payments, not those delayed from 2008 (as these payments are) and therefore not only has no obligation to offer his opinion, but also no authority in the matter.

This would leave the decision up to AIG, and any resulting uproar would be laid squarely where it belongs: in the lap of AIG.

Money Magazine Hoss is of the opinion that if AIG executives would spend as much effort towards making AIG a viable company as they do in obtaining their retention bonuses, the tax payers may then have some hope in recouping the loans they made to AIG.

This smoke screen by AIG will not work. When honest hard working people are losing their jobs and life savings in increasing numbers there is no place for retention bonuses for already high paid executives. If these executives are that great, let them seek employment elsewhere. After all , it is these very same executives who caused the AIG financial catastrophe.

Stay on Track,

Money Magazine Hoss

Next Hoss Cents Free Financial Money Magazine Post: Interest Coverage Ratio
Return to previous post from AIG Bonus Scandal Continues.

Related Posts:

AIG Retention Bonus Scandal

AIG Too Big To Fail

Has The Economic Recovery Started?

G20 Summit

President Obama Trims Budget by $17 Billion

General Motors Files For Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

Financial Year in Review

Financial Crisis Deppens: Obama

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, July 4, 2009

Calculating Operating Margin

From The Hoss's Mouth

Operating Margin

Money Magazine Hoss occasional will wager a dollar or two on the ponies (regular readers of the blog are well aware of this). Before investing a wager on a horse, he likes to measure the efficiency of each horse in the race using several different handicapping tools. For example, he will divide a horse's total wins by total races to obtain the horses win percentage and compare that figure to the other horses in the race. Wise investors also use several mathematical calculations to measure a company's efficiency before buying stock.
In his last post, Money Magazine Hoss showed you how to calculate Gross Profit Margin Percentage. This week, Operating Margin or Operating Profit Margin is explained. Companies with a high operating margin usually have lower fixed costs and better gross margins than their competitors. This gives them some flexibility in determining prices, which can be an advantage during economic down turns.

Operating Profit Margin is calculated as follows:

Operating Profit Margin = operating income (divided by) total revenue.

Money Magazine Hoss will again use the 2006, 2007 and 2008 income statements of Amazon, General Motors and Google.




Amazon's Operating Margin:

2006: $389,000/$10,711,000 = 3.6%

2007: $655,000/$14,835,000 = 4.4%

2008: $842,000/$19,166,000 = 4.4%





General Motors Operating Margin:

2006: $9,277,000/$207,349,000 = 4%

2007: $-4,390,000/$181,122,000 = -2%

2008: $-21,284,000/$148,979,000 = -14%





Google Operating Margin:

2006: $3,549,996/$10,604,917 = 33%

2007: $5,084,400/$16,593,986 = 30%

2008: $6,631,969/$21,795,550 = 30%


Now, Money Magazine Hoss is not a genius, but if this was a horse race, it wouldn't take a genius to figure out Google is the best bet, Amazon is worth a look, but General Motors should be put out to pasture.

Stay on Track,

Money Magazine Hoss

Next Hoss Cents Free Financial Money Magazine Post: Interest Coverage Ratio
Return to previous post from Calculating Operating Margin

Stock Ticker

Disclaimer

The Hoss is not a financial adviser. This blog is a reflection of his personal opinion, experience and financial choices. For financial assistance, please consult a licensed financial services professional.

The contents of http://free-financial-money-magazine.blogspot.com are provided for informational and entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as advice. This material is not intended to provide, and should not be construed as providing individual financial, investment, tax, legal or accounting advice.

While the information shared on this website is believed to be accurate and reliable, the owners/operators of this website specifically disclaim all warranties, express, implied or statutory, regarding the accuracy, timeliness, and/or completeness of the information contained herein. Individuals leaving comments on this site are solely responsible and liable for the contents of their comments. Because this website is intended to provide general information only, you should discuss your specific needs with a qualified licensed financial services professional.

Links to other websites are for convenience only, and are independent from http://free-financial-money-magazine.blogspot.com. No liability is assumed for any inaccuracies in the information or for the content of any linked websites. No endorsement or approval of any other products, services or information is expressed or implied by any information, material or content referred to or included on, or linked from or to this website. No liability is assumed for incompatibility, non-suitability, viruses or other destructive/disruptive components on or from such websites.