Missouri posts

Feed

Recession harder on singles -- go get hitched!

If you're single, you're 50% more likely to lose your job, according to a study published Friday by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. This is no different from most recessions, but neither the stat nor the trend loses its shock value with each downturn. Now that the unemployment rate has edged higher, to 9.8% last month, the plight of singles is worsening.

Single employment fell 4.8% from December 2007 through June, with the married folks losing their jobs at a rate of only 3.1%. In August, the single jobless rate reached 13.5%, while those encumbered with spouses fared much better at 6.3%.

Continue reading Recession harder on singles -- go get hitched!

Media World: Why Forbes needs a geography lesson

Forbes magazine needs a good map or two.

The business magazine's article "America's Wildest Weather Cities" lists two places that don't exist. Blue Hill, Mass, dubbed the windiest city, is incorrectly described as a Boston suburb. Actually, there is a place called Blue Hill, The Blue Hill Reservation, a 7,000-acre state park that seems lovely. The Web site lists its address in Milton, Mass. There is no town named Blue Hill in the Boston area, according to the Greater Boston Convention and Vistors Bureau.

More embarrassing is the description of Springfield, Mississippi. I could find no town by that name in Mississippi although there is a Springfield Plantation near Natchez which reviewers on Yahoo Travel seemed to like. Even odder, though, was that Forbes describes Springfield as "a slightly elevated city in the Ozarks at 1,266 feet." As this helpful map on Wikipedia shows, the Ozarks don't go into Mississippi. Interestingly, there is a city in Missouri named Springfield that happens to be located at an elevation of 1,266 feet and is known as Queen of the Ozarks. Perhaps, Forbes was thinking of that Springfield or the one where the Simpsons reside.

Though I hate to spoil today's company holiday at Forbes, there is a bigger issue at stake here. In today's age of instant communication, readers need to be more skeptical now than they ever have been. Wrong information can be spread with an alarming speed.

Should Forbes have caught these errors before the story was published? Of course. But the news gathering and writing process isn't fool proof. Mistakes, though unfortunate, are unavoidable. No one is perfect.

But what separates journalists from people who just post stuff is how they deal with errors when they are pointed out. I've contacted the reporter who wrote the story and will let you know if I get a response.

Update: Forbes has corrected the errors.


Missouri state treasurer wants terror-free pension funds

Missouri's state treasurer, Sarah Steelman doesn't think pension funds should invest in companies doing business in terror-sponsoring nations. While her state has decided against agreeing to that,12 states have passed laws that in some way restrict pension funds from investing in companies with questionable practices. Here's the most interesting part about Steelman's campaign, from the Wall Street Journal:

Last summer, Ms. Steelman unveiled what she calls a "terror free" fund -- a small fund, intended as a model, designed to avoid investments in nations considered terror sponsors. In its first eight months of existence, her fund has returned 27%, she says. "People said fund performance was going to suffer. We've shown that's just not true."

While a strong track record over such a short period of time managing an amount of money far smaller than most pension funds isn't proof of anything, there is a substantial body of evidence to indicate that socially responsible investing and investment policies excluding companies with poor ethics do not inhibit returns. Consider the performance of Domini 400 Social Index: Since its inception in 1990, that index has averaged an annual return of 12.28% versus 11.71% for the S&P 500.

I like Ms. Steelman's idea, and public pension funds can make a powerful statement by divesting not just companies dealing with Iranian, but any company that is engaging in questionable business practices. I've seen no evidence that ethics inhibits returns. As Alan Greenspan once said "Material success is possible in this world and far more satisfying when it comes without exploiting others."

Symbol Lookup
IndexesChangePrice
DJIA+72.8112,874.04
NASDAQ+27.512,931.39
S&P 500+9.131,351.77

Last updated: February 13, 2012: 06:50 PM

Hot Stocks

General Electric

19.07+0.195(+1.03)

Alcoa

10.33+0.04(+0.39)

Apple Inc

502.60+9.18(+1.86)

Google Inc 'A'

612.20+6.29(+1.04)

Bank of America

8.25+0.18(+2.23)

Wal-Mart Stores

61.79-0.11(-0.18)

Exxon Mobil Corp

84.42+0.62(+0.74)

Ford

12.54+0.10(+0.80)

Citigroup

32.88-0.045(-0.14)

IBM

192.62+0.20(+0.10)

Yahoo

16.12-0.02(-0.12)

Starbucks

49.25+0.43(+0.88)

Microsoft

30.58+0.085(+0.28)

Home Depot

45.93+0.60(+1.32)

DailyFinance Headlines

AOL Business News

BioHealth Investor Headlines

Sponsored Links

My Portfolios

Track your stocks here!

Find out why more people track their portfolios on AOL Money & Finance then anywhere else.

BloggingStocks Partners

More from AOL Money & Finance

Page Loaded in 1329177051990 ms.