<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[DailyFinance today: should we fire CEOs and liquidate their banks, Toyota trounces Chrysler in consumer IQ, February wholesale inventory drop another green shoot, and cash for clunkers institutionalizing planned obsolescence]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/tm/" rel="tag">Toyota Motor Corp. (TM)</a></p><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="border-width: 0pt;">
    <tbody>
        <tr>
            <td valign="top" align="left"><a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/cash-for-clunkers-programs-institutionalizing-planned-obsolesc/"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/04/mercedes_for_sale_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" /></a></td>
            <td><a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/cash-for-clunkers-programs-institutionalizing-planned-obsolesc/">'Cash for clunkers' programs institutionalizing planned obsolescence</a> </td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
            <td valign="top" align="left"><a href="hhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/february-wholesale-inventory-drop-may-be-another-green-shoot/"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/03/warming-global-tend-warmist-winter-200cs0104_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" /></a></td>
            <td><a rel="bookmark" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/february-wholesale-inventory-drop-may-be-another-green-shoot/">February wholesale inventory drop may be another 'green shoot'</a> </td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
            <td valign="top" align="left"><a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/04/toyota_iq.jpg"><img width="77" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="63" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/04/toyota_iq.jpg" alt="" /></a></td>
            <td> <a rel="bookmark" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/04/toyota_iq_thumbnail.jpg">Toyota trounces Chrysler in test of consumer 'iQ'</a> </td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
            <td valign="top" align="right">
            <div align="right"><a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-banks/"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/02/roundtable200x150_thumbnail.jpg" /></a></div>
            </td>
            <td> <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/08/should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-banks/">Should we fire CEOs and liquidate their banks?</a></td>
        </tr>
    </tbody>
</table><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/">DailyFinance today: should we fire CEOs and liquidate their banks, Toyota trounces Chrysler in consumer IQ, February wholesale inventory drop another green shoot, and cash for clunkers institutionalizing planned obsolescence</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1512193/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/dailyfinance-today-should-we-fire-ceos-and-liquidate-their-bank/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>ceos</category><category>chrysler</category><category>iq</category><category>toyota</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tobias Buckell]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[A fool and his money -- not necessarily parted]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/personalfinance/" rel="tag">Personal Finance</a></p><p>Stupidity is no barrier to wealth: That's the conclusion of a study by Jay Zagorsky, a research scientist at Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research. Based on a study of 7,403 Americans who participated in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, Mr. Zagorsky found <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117832429177792912.html?mod=todays_us_money_and_investing">no correlation between IQ and wealth</a>: "Those with low intelligence should not believe they are handicapped, and those with high intelligence should not believe they have an advantage."</p>
<p>But here's what really interesting: Smart people do earn more money. They just aren't particularly likely to save and invest it, which is a recipe for creating wealth. According to the data, each extra IQ-point coincided with an extra $202 to $616 of income a year</p>
<p>So smart people earn more money but apparently fritter it away (Mensa memberships perhaps?). So does that mean that saving money is stupid? Or, are smart people just not very smart when it comes to money?</p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/">A fool and his money -- not necessarily parted</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sun, 06 May 2007 14:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/889707/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/06/a-fool-and-his-money-not-necessarily-parted/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Education</category><category>income</category><category>Intelligence</category><category>IQ</category><category>Jay Zagorsky</category><category>JayZagorsky</category><category>savings</category><category>Wealth</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2007 14:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[You don't have to be smart to be rich]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/other-issues/" rel="tag">Other Issues</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/personalfinance/" rel="tag">Personal Finance</a></p>This comes as no surprise: A national survey found that individuals <a href="http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/070424_rich_smart.html">don't actually have to be smart to be rich</a>. In fact, people with below-average IQ test scores can be just as wealthy as brainiacs. According to the study, it's more about attitude than smarts.<br /><br />The study's author Jay Zagorsky, an economist at Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research, says that it's up to each person to have a positive attitude and want to save up money and build up his or her wealth, and each and every one of us can do it regardless of our IQ.<br /><br />Indeed, intelligence positively affects income as people with higher IQ tend to have higher education leading to higher paying careers. Basically, individuals with higher IQ scores earned higher incomes with each additional IQ point associated with an income boost of $202 to $616 each year. <br /><br />But, the higher income didn't make them more wealthy as IQ score had no impact on wealth. In fact, highly intelligent people actually have financial difficulties, maxing out credit cards and missing bill payments, making them less wealthy. The lowest financial distress was found around the average IQ score.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/">You don't have to be smart to be rich</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:55:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/070424_rich_smart.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/882347/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/25/you-dont-have-to-be-smart-to-be-rich/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>finance</category><category>income</category><category>iq</category><category>Jay Zagorsky</category><category>JayZagorsky</category><category>Ohio State University</category><category>OhioStateUniversity</category><category>smart</category><category>wealth</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Melly Alazraki]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:55:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Sex, jokes, dividends  and no surprises]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/from-the-boards/" rel="tag">From the Boards</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/blogs/" rel="tag">Blogs</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rants-and-raves/" rel="tag">Rants and Raves</a></p><p>This is a brief follow-up to an article I wrote on the importance of including dividends&nbsp;in your investing&nbsp;perspective.&nbsp;I called the post, "<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/04/dividends-are-very-sexy-no-joke/">Dividends are very sexy -- no joke</a>." The article received a large readership. </p>
<p>I did an experiment to find out what, if any, impact the title might have had on the hit rate. A few days after the original post was published I sent out three separate blog entries with either <em>Sex, Jokes,&nbsp;or dividends</em>&nbsp;highlighted in the headline.&nbsp;It should not surprise anyone that the hit rate favored 1) sex, then 2) jokes, and then 3) dividends.&nbsp;</p>
<p>So, while my experiment was highly unscientific, my conclusion is that adding sex to an article does pay a dividend.</p>
<p>Furthermore I'm glad my readers have a sense of humor.&nbsp;If you want to read a great joke with some&nbsp;VALUE and have not yet read the joke blog, go to: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/06/assessing-your-investing-iq-more-on-jokes/" title="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/06/assessing-your-investing-iq-more-on-jokes/"><font color="#0b497a">Assessing your investing IQ: More on Jokes - Blogging Stocks</font></a></p>
<p><strong>And if you have not read my post&nbsp;on dividends go read it! : </strong><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/04/dividends-are-very-sexy-no-joke/">my&nbsp;original post</a><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/04/dividends-are-very-sexy-no-joke/"><font color="#000000"> </font></a></p>
<p>Good luck with all your investments! Your comments are always welcome. </p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/">Sex, jokes, dividends  and no surprises</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:25:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/06/assessing-your-investing-iq-more-on-jokes/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/631999/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/06/12/sex-jokes-and-dividends-no-suprises/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>dividends</category><category>experiment</category><category>investing</category><category>IQ</category><category>jokes</category><category>Liber</category><category>money</category><category>sex</category><category>value</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Sheldon Liber]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:25:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
