Continue reading Serious Money: Don't overlook these regional banks!

Serious Money: Don't overlook these regional banks! originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:04:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

According to reports, In order to get the money people have to go to the 'Bailout Booth' in the heart of Manhattan's Times Square; to a small cubicle, where, depending on your story you can get a cash stipend to help out with a present financial dilemma.

Continue reading 'Bailout Bill' giving away money in Times Square -- big heart and wads of cash

'Bailout Bill' giving away money in Times Square -- big heart and wads of cash originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 04 Feb 2009 13:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

While he should be commended for opening up his tax records, Democratic Presidential front-runner Barack Obama and wife Michelle should be embarrassed at the negligible amount of money donated to charity. According to a report in Bloomberg.com, " Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent, according to tax returns for those years released today by his campaign."

To be fair to them they did up their giving a bit in '05-'06 after they cashed in on his book. Interesting to note that in that 2-year span they brought in $2.6 million. $2.6 million later and Michelle is still not proud to be an American. Humm???

For someone who believes that we need to change society and make things better, he sure sets a lousy example. After all, I thought he is all about giving back to the community. Well the community can't do very much with a couple of bucks.

Once again we find the hypocrisy of politicians. They know best how to make society better, and they have no problem taxing us to pay for it. But when it comes time for the politician to open up his own wallet, suddenly some excuse arises and they are unable to do so. Isn't that called a double standard?

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 3/25/08.

Obamas: Can you spare a dime? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:35:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Continue reading When running for President, Obama's gotta give to receive vs. Hillary

When running for President, Obama's gotta give to receive vs. Hillary originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:09:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Forbes columnists M. Todd Henderson and Anup Malani make a compelling case for corporate philanthropy:

There is a tax efficiency to corporate giving. Both Pfizer and its shareholders lower their taxable income when the company donates Diflucan to Africa. If Pfizer instead maximized its profits, paid corporate income tax and then let shareholders make charitable donations to treat AIDS-related diseases out of their dividend checks, the money available for charity would be reduced, given the current 35% corporate income tax.

That's certainly true. The tax code is, I would argue, one of the few compelling arguments for charitable giving on the part of public companies. Without the tax benefits, I would argue that companies should stick to their income-earning knitting, delivering strong returns to shareholders who can then use the money to support the causes important to them.

Until 2003, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) had an innovative giving program that I think was a model of good corporate governance: the company designated a chunk of earnings for philanthropy each year, and then allowed each shareholder to designate a charity for their prorated share.

I'm just concerned about companies donating money to causes that are objectionable to some of their shareholders. For instance, Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) is a leading supporter of the Salvation Army, which has a long track record of discriminatory treatment of the gay community.

The government should amend the tax code to make it more efficient for companies to give their shareholders a say in corporate philanthropy.

Is corporate philanthropy in the best interests of shareholders? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:10:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) has announced details of its philanthropic plan (Google.org) to combat climate change, poverty, and what the company called "emerging threats." In a press release, Google said that "Today's announcement includes more than $25 million in new grants and investments to initial partners. The resources come from a commitment by Google's founders to devote approximately 1 percent of the company's equity plus 1 percent of annual profits to philanthropy, as well as employee time."

While Google's founders should certainly be commended for their commitment to issues of social justice and making the world a better place, the donations do raise interesting questions about the purpose and goals of public companies.

Remember, Google's top executives are, in effect, using the capital of the company's shareholders to execute their own philanthropic aims. The "1% of equity and 1% of profits" doctrine certainly runs counter to Milton Friedman's assertion that the social responsibility of a corporation is to increase its profits.

As an investor, I'd rather see companies focus on generating profits, and then letting the shareholders -- the rightful owners of the company's income and equity -- decide what to do with it.

But as long as Google's stock is a strong performer, no one's likely to complain. Plus, you'll make very few friends arguing that corporate philanthropy at public companies is inappropriate.

Google to donate up to $175 million over next 3 years originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:02:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Since launching Salesforce.com (NYSE: CRM) in the late 1990s, Marc Benioff has built a multi-billion dollar operation, which is still growing at a break-neck pace. Interestingly enough, Benioff thinks that a big key to success has been his company's philanthropic efforts - that has helped with employee morale, community involvement and even customer loyalty.

To this end, Benioff used the 1-1-1 model. When Salesforce.com was founded, 1% of the stock went into a foundation. After that, 1% of the profits were put into the foundation and employees have spent 1% of their time on philanthropic activities.

Last year, Benioff wrote a book on the topic, called The Business of Changing the World. He interviews a variety of companies, such as Cisco (NASDAQ: CSCO), UPS (NYSE: UPS), Dell (NASDAQ: DELL), Intel (NASDAQ: INTC) and Timberland.

So what can your business do?

Continue reading Entrepreneur's Journal: How your business can change the world

Entrepreneur's Journal: How your business can change the world originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Wal-Mart donates millions of meals to America's Second Harvest originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:34:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Charitable giving: The other good investment originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Americans gave almost $300 billion to charity in 2006, setting a new all-time record for generosity. The showing was particularly impressive given that 2005's results benefited from a surge in donations related to Hurricane Katrina and the tsunami in Asia. 2006's results were effected by Warren Buffett's record setting pledge to the Gates Foundation.

While this is obviously something that our country should be proud of, it may also be a good sign for the economy. That Americans are feeling secure enough to donate shows that the economy might be in better shape than other studies suggest. If Americans are struggling so much, why would they donate a record amount to charity? According to the Associated Press:

Giving historically tracks the health of the overall economy, with the rise amounting to about one-third the rise in the stock market, according to Giving USA. Last year was right on target, with a 3.2 percent rise as stocks rose more than 10 percent on an inflation-adjusted basis.

Corporate donations plunged 10.5%, but that was largely a result of the generosity American companies showed in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.

Let's set a new record in 2007!

Americans set record for generosity originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:20:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Intel (NASDAQ: INTC) and motherboard company Asustek Computer will build a notebook PC that will cost as little as $200. The unit is targeted at children in developing countries.

The new PC will compete with computers being offered by the One Laptop Per Child Foundation.

But, it is an open question about how community-minded Intel is being. Depending on the price point of the chip, the company could still be making money on the machines. It is interesting that Intel did not mention this as part of its announcement.

The One Laptop Per Child machine uses a chip from Intel rival AMD (NYSE: AMD).

Skeptics may view Intel's move as a way to make money in the ultra-low-end chip market which has been over-shadowed by more expensive, faster processors used in developed countries.

A do-good project that makes money? Intel is not saying.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

Intel (INTC): The $200 Computer originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

While Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT) is a high-profile target of critics of corporate greed, the Walton family has, without great media attention, done very little for charity. But with the death Helen Walton, the widow of founder Sam Walton, that could change. With her stake in the company making her a billionaire several times over, the Walton Family Foundation could become one of the three biggest charities in the country, if Ms. Walton's shares go to it.

It remains to be seen what will happen, but Wal-Mart's PR executives have to be praying that the Waltons will finally become a major force in philanthropy. They'll be able to say "Look, the money that we're making paying low wages with poor benefits ends up going to charity anyway."

But until that happens, the stinginess of the Waltons is bad PR for the Wal-Mart company, although it's something they obviously have no control over. But if the Walton Family Foundation grows rapidly from Helen Walton's estate, I would expect them to make some public relations hay out of it.

Walton fortune headed for charity? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sun, 13 May 2007 16:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE:WMT) bid to strengthen its public image continues, as the company announced a 10% increase in its charitable giving in 2006, donating a total 272.9 million dollars to various causes. The 10% increase represents a slow in growth, as the company increased its giving 19% in 2005 in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Needless to say, the move did nothing to assuage the concerns of the company's critics. "Charity is always good, but what is not good is Wal-Mart forcing poorly paid and uninsured workers to depend on charity," WakeUpWalMart.com spokesman Chris Kofinis said.

I'm critical of the charitable contributions, but for a different reason. Leaving decisions about where to donate shareholder money up to management is wrong. I would like to see Wal-Mart adopt the charitable giving model once employed by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, (NYSE:BRK.A)which allocated a sum of money each year for charity, and allows each shareholder to distribute it as they wish. As Buffett has said, "[These] representatives of the owners direct funds to their favourite charities, and never consult the owners as to their charitable preference. (I wonder how they would feel if the process were reversed and shareholders could invade the directors' pockets for charities favoured by the shareholders."

To read more about how Berkshire's shareholder-designated contributions program, and why it was terminated, visit BuffettSecrets.com.

Wal-Mart increases its charitable giving originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:43:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

The Motley Fool ran an excellent piece the other day about the National Council for Economic Education, one of the featured "Foolanthropy" charities for 2006. According to the Council's website, their mission is to "help students develop the real-life skills they need to succeed: to be able to think and choose responsibly as consumers, savers, investors, citizens, members of the workforce, and effective participants in a global economy."

In addition to its programs to teach entrepreneurship and financial skills to young people, the organization also conducts research on the state of America's financial literacy. And the results are, well, pathetic. In a quiz designed to test adults on economic concepts, adults got an average grade of 70% -- C, and students' average score was 53% -- F. "Six in 10 high school students and more than one-quarter of adults get a failing grade on the Economics Quiz."

Continue reading Supporting financial literacy this holiday season

Supporting financial literacy this holiday season originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 27 Dec 2006 14:09:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Will you 'pay it forward' with Oprah or rely on good ol' consumption? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

I've probably been unjustly hard on Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE:WMT) in the past. It's not that I don't like them, it's more a case of not liking some of the moves they've made as a corporation. The one thing that really set me off was when on September 14, 2006, Wal-mart announced the phasing out of their layaway program. Without knowing the true reasons why they elected to do that, I thought that made things tougher for their potential customers who have limited buying power. I still feel that way somewhat, but I admit I failed to get Wal-mart's side of the story. The reasons Wal-Mart cited were declining use and increasing expense. They did state that they were examining other financing options for their customer's large ticket purchases. It seems like sound logic to me. Perhaps I overreacted.

In any case, I thought that now would be a good time to get Wal-mart's side of the story. I've been looking at news articles and press releases on their web site and I must say that I am impressed. I never realized just how much Wal-mart actually does for the communities they serve. When you step back from the obvious "hype" issues and take a big picture view, Wal-mart actually takes on quite a nice warm glow. I found a multitude of admirable projects that Wal-mart leads or is involved in. I'd like to share some of those with you.

The $4.00 prescription drug program: Yes, it's a marketing strategy but let's be realistic. This move by Wal-mart will save American consumers millions of dollars in prescription drug costs. This is not a price rollback; this is a cost GIVE BACK. This program will put money directly back into the hands of hard working Americans.

Wal-Mart's Acres for America: Acres for America is a one-of-a-kind partnership between Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to conserve critical wildlife habitats for future generations. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. has committed $35 million over 10 years to permanently conserve at least one acre of priority wildlife habitat for every developed acre of Wal-Mart Store's retail campuses.

Continue reading Think Wal-Mart is just an evil corporation? Consider Wal-Mart's side of the story

Think Wal-Mart is just an evil corporation? Consider Wal-Mart's side of the story originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:48:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

We all know that you don't have money like Warren Buffett does (unless you is Bill Gates, and then you're probably not wondering about this, now are you?). But that shouldn't prevent you from giving money the same way he does. Even if it's a lot less money, it's still fun to use the same buzzwords.

And this buzz phrase, from the Wall Street Journal today [subscription required]: "giving while living." Often called "charitable gift annuities" after one of the most popular forms of high-dollar charity, the sort of thing Warren Buffett has done with his substantial fortune is really quite common. Other than the value of seeing the reaction to your largess while you're still alive to have an ego, there are tax and control benefits to giving while living (one: "you can keep an eye on how your legacy is fulfilled," according to NYU professor Jan T. Vilcek).

We non-billionaires can get more satisfaction, too, from getting involved in the charities who receive our substantial living gift. "It's the opposite of just saying, 'Here's the check, good luck,'" says one charitable advisor. Think of it as the non-profit answer to a venture capitalist -- you can provide both funds and strategic assistance.

Warren Buffett's charity can be replicated (sort of) originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 05 Jul 2006 18:05:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.