text:
Delicious Library may regain iPhone support... sort of
Once upon a time, Delicious Library was available for the iPhone, and it was quickly yanked from the App Store due to infringing upon Amazon's API TOS. I learned all of this after recently purchasing the fantastic OS X application, and then wondering why it didn't have an accompanying iPhone app. So, over a year since the app was pulled, I had to ask the folks at Delicious Monster what was up -- would it be coming back, somehow?
The answer I got back wasn't all that promising. Since Delicious Library still makes use of the Amazon API, it's still infringing upon Amazon's API rules if it goes on a mobile device. However, there's nothing stopping the OS X application from doing what it does. So, I asked, why not marry the two together?
Delicious Library has the ability to make use of Bluetooth-enabled scanners to read barcodes, and since the iPhone's camera is perfectly capable of reading the same barcodes, couldn't it be used as a scanner interface to Delicious Library? Heck, Apple seems to be loosening their restrictions regarding Bluetooth.
"That's an idea we're actively exploring, as it wouldn't upset Amazon's terms of service, and it'd be cool," Chief Delicious Monster Wil Shipley told me last month. "But we have nothing to announce at this time, except our next product is not going to be this."
The next product he was talking about was most likely the recently announced Google Googles client, Noogle Noggles. So, could a scanner-centric Delicious Library iPhone app be next? It certainly seems plausible.
Subscribe to Newsletter
Software Updatesmore updates
- Dropbox adds support for TouchID
- YouTube for iOS gets updated with full support for iPhone 6 and 6 Plus
- iOS 8.0.1 update now available (Updated -- Don't update!)
- NFL Mobile updated for 2014 Season with new Fantasy Football features, NFL Now integration
- Yahoo Mail improves email inbox searching with new filtering options
- Ember for Mac gains 'hugely-requested' screen recording feature


text: Every bit attractive as it is rugged, the 4x4 is offered in three distinct stock configurations, including an eye-catching, space-age polymer, a distinctive gray laminate, or a handsome, select American black walnut model; each featuring Monte Carlo style cheek pieces, slim-line grips, forend barrel vents, and soft, recoil absorbing buttpads. The new 4x4's are available in six of the most popular standard long-action and magnum hunting calibers to cover the gamut of North American big game, from the all-around .25-06 Rem. to the punishing .338 Win. Mag.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I am looking for fellow homebrewers in the Brownwood Texas or Stephenville area (Early, Comanche, Rising Star, Blanket etc.) If you are out there please let me know. I am moving to the area and I would like to join or form a local homebrew club.
Sorry I didn't see this a year ago.. I'm back in the Stephenville area as of last week!
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotamy.
Check out The Bearded Bean! :-)


text:
Ubisoft released a new video today inviting you to checko ut the Midlands and Himalaya areas of the game. You will get "...a visual tour of Kyrat's dangerous midland and Himalayan regions. The trailer provides a glimpse into Kyrat's vast forests, where its booming drug trade, exotic animals, brutal blood sports and the deadly Arena competition is prevalent. Viewers will also get a look into Kyrat's snow covered Himalayan peaks. From the Royal Army's elites, ravenous wolves and tigers, and avalanches, every moment is a near-death experience."
Assassin's Creed Unity is on it's way to you very soon and Ubisoft wants you to know that this is going to be a fantastically pretty game. "...all of Paris will be at your fingertips. Creative Director, Alex Amancio, introduces the huge and detailed city full of opportunities and exciting side missions. Whether you're solving murder mysteries or exploring the different and unique districts of the city, Paris and the entire world of Assassin's Creed Unity are yours to explore.
Additionally, the Assassin's Creed Unity Phantom Blade replica will be available on October 28.
Assassin's Creed Unity will be released on November 11 for Xbox One, the all-in-one games and entertainment system from Microsoft, PlayStation®4 computer entertainment system and Windows PC. Set in a once-magnificent Paris, Assassin's Creed Unity plunges into the terror of the 1789 French Revolution and features the most dense and immersive Assassin's Creed city ever created. Through the streets of Paris, the starving inhabitants are set to take up arms for freedom and equality. In this time of chaos and brutality, a young man named Arno, wounded by the loss of those he loved, sets out on a deadly path of redemption. Arno's pursuit throws him into the middle of a ruthless struggle for the fate of a nation and transforms him into a true Master Assassin"
The Evolve Big Alpha date is coming in close for everyone to try out on their Xbox One (10/30), PC and PlayStation 4 (10/31).
"In addition to guaranteed access to the Big Alpha, fans who pre-order Evolve will also receive the Monster Expansion Pack for free. The Monster Expansion Pack includes the Savage Goliath skin, as well as the yet-to-be announced fourth playable monster for free. The fourth playable monster will be available sometime after Evolve releases, but in the meantime, get the world's first look at the fierce Savage Goliath in the all-new trailer released today. "
Ubisoft released a new video today giving you an idea on the plethera of characters you will encounter as Arno. "...from the French Revolution, including historical figures Napoléon Bonaparte, the Marquis de Sade, and Robespierre, alongside all-new characters such as the mysterious Elise. Discover how they fit into the world of Assassin's Creed Unity, and get a special sneak peek at the backstory of these vibrant characters, from the actors who brought them to life."
"2K today unveiled the Official Civilization: Beyond Earth Intro Cinematic – "The Chosen" trailer, the full intro cinematic to the new science-fiction-themed entry into the award-winning Civilization series from Firaxis Games. The full-length trailer provides an in-depth peek into the upcoming release, in which you will lead your people into a new frontier, explore and colonize an alien planet and create a new civilization in space."


text:
Gassin House Rental Photos and Description
Property details
building and outdoor:
Gassin: Beautiful house Les Restanques de Gassin, 2 storeys. In the resort, 400 m from the centre, on a slope, 5 km from the sea, 5 km from the beach, south-east facing position. Private: children's playground, parking on the premises, public parking on the road. Shop, grocery 200 m, supermarket 5 km, restaurant 300 m. Nearby attractions: Plage de Pampelonne 10 km, Plage de Gigaro 10 km. Please note: car recommended.
4-room house 100 m2 on 2 levels, comfortable and beautiful furnishings: living/dining room with TV (flat screen), hi-fi system and DVD. Exit to the garden. Kitchen (4 hot plates, oven, dishwasher, 4 ceramic glass hob hotplates, microwave). Sep. WC. Upper floor: 1 room with 1 double bed (1 x 160 cm). Exit to the balcony. 1 room with 1 double bed (160 cm). Exit to the balcony. 1 room with 1 pull-out bed (2 x 80 cm). Bathroom, shower/WC. Electric heating. Balcony 4 m2, garden 400 m2. Terrace furniture, balcony furniture, barbecue, deck chairs. Facilities: washing machine. Internet (WiFi). 2 pets/ dogs allowed.
- Suitability:
- pets considered


text:
We're sorry, we need more information to run your search. Please enter a last name (adding more details will improve your results).
Detect the Vicki Slacum you are trying to locate with our people search tools. PeopleFinders.com has an extensive database to assist you check for people based on age, past residences, relatives, aliases, and more. Vicki Slacum was born in 1969 and is 45 years old. Known relatives include Joanne A Slacum, Carrie J Reed, John W Reed, John W Reed, Rhonda A Willey, Steven R Smith, Joann Slacum, Elwood B Reed, Christi L Reed.
We assist you in your search for the precise Vicki Slacum with the help of any information we have with us. Track the exact Vicki utilizing details, including prior residences and known aliases. Refer more personal info, like background checks, criminal profiles, and email addresses on PeopleFinders.com. If this Vicki is not the person you're in search of, check the list of people with the last name Slacum above. This list could include name, age, location, and relatives.
Furnish more info into the search fields above to narrow down your results. A first name, middle name, last name, city, state and/or age can be the answer to finding Vicki Slacum. Once you trace the Vicki Slacum you are searching for, you can then check the complete public records details that we have on Vicki Slacum by utilizing our comprehensive database, which makes gathering details about anyone quick and easy.


text:
The Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra
Related News
Arts & Culture / October 7, 2014
Indy Artist Makes Peace From Instruments of War
For the last few weeks, a small-scale replica of "The Peace Dove" – a sculpture made from the parts of confiscated guns – has been making its way around to library branches. On Tuesday, the full-size sculpture, created by artist Ryan Feeney, was released into public view.Read More
Arts & Culture / October 31, 2014
Video Arcade Enthusiasts Hope To Create Indy's First Retro Arcade Bar
What do you get when you cross craft beer and vintage video games? WFYI's Melissa Davis spoke with a group of enthusiasts working to make that dream a reality with Tappers Arcade Bar..Read More
Arts & Culture / October 30, 2014
Michael Feinstein Talks With WFYI's Jill Ditmire About His New PBS Special
WFYI's Jill Ditmire talks with the award-winning pianist, entertainer, host of NPR's "Song Travels" and the Artistic Director of The Center for the Performing Arts in Carmel, Michael Feinstein.Read More


text:
Q: I don't understand the difference between "sizes/voices" and "tunings"?
A: Use this analogy to buying a shirt: you could think of tuning as the
color and pitch range as the size. You can get a shirt in pink, blue and yellow;
and you can also choose small, medium and large. You may also think of our
tunings as songs. Each of them is available in various pitch ranges (sizes). A
musical instrument must be made larger to create lower pitches (For example, a
higher pitched violin is smaller than its cousin, the lower pitched cello. Each
can play the same melody, but in different pitch ranges.) Please go to the "Hear Our
Chimes" section of the
website to hear the different tunings in the different pitch ranges.
Q: Can I hang my Music of the Spheres windchimes outside?
A: Yes, they are designed for lasting outdoor durability. Please refer to
our "Materials &
section of the website for descriptions of our durable materials and method of
construction. If you want to appreciate the beauty and ambience of your Music of
the Spheres windchime indoors you can "power" the chime with an oscillating fan
or a pull cord. Children have also been taught to gently "play" the chime for
their parents. One customer even positioned the windcatcher in the path of the
cat door!
Q: Are my Music of the Spheres windchimes covered by a warranty?
A: Yes, our Soprano, Mezzo-Soprano, Alto and Westminster chimes are
warranted for 7 years from the date of purchase against defects in materials and
workmanship. Tenor, Bass and Basso Profundo chimes are similarly warranted for
15 years.
Q: What are the specifications and prices for your windchimes?
A: Please refer to the specification chart for this information.
Q: Can I get my chimes repaired if they should be damaged?
A: Yes, please call or email for a return or repair authorization. If a
repair is covered by warranty, there will be no charge. If not, a $25 charge
plus the cost of any additional components and return freight will apply. If you
have a non-Music of the Spheres chime and would like it repaired, the policy is
the same as for a non-warranted chimes.
Q: How can I increase (or decrease) the activity of my Music of the
Spheres windchime?
A: 1. Hang the chime in a different location, either more or less exposed
to wind. 2. Hang the chime from the first knot above the ring for greater
activity and from the second knot for lower activity. 3. Adjust the size of
the windcatcher. To identify your windcatcher you may refer to the diagram on
the "How They're
Made" page. The wind catcher at the bottom of your
chime is the "motor" that makes it work. Windcatchers harness the power of
the wind and transfer it to the clapper, which moves to strike the tubes
and play the music. The larger the windcatcher surface area for any given
size chime, the less wind is needed to activate it. We design our chimes
to play in eight to ten mile-per-hour breezes. If your chimes hang in an
extraordinarily enclosed or exposed area, they will require a
correspondingly larger or smaller wind catcher than the standard one, to
achieve a "standard" activity level. If you feel you need a different size
windcatcher, return yours, asking for either the next size up or down and
we will send a replacement at no charge. If you would like to keep yours
and buy an extra,
here .
Q: How should I hang my chime?
A: There are a number of safe ways to hang your chime. The "best" for a
particular circumstance will depend on which chime size you're hanging and where
it is you would like it to hang. In all cases, simply using some basic common
sense is a great start. In many cases, hanging a chime "properly" is not a
complicated matter. Some chime hanging basics are:
�Now from Music of the Spheres TM
When we receive your order, we will contact you to work out the
shipping arrangements.
The Basso Profundo.
The Ultimate Wind Chime From�The Ultimate Wind Chime
HEAR IT HERE If you have an MP3 player, hear it here.� Or, if you don't have
an MPS player, yoou can download a .wav file here.� But please note, the Basso.wav
file is over 10MB.� You'll need a high speed connection and a fast computer
to handle this file.� The resounding bass tone of these chimes is
incredible, and you will need SERIOUS
bass speakers to hear it
Page |
Product Review Page | Help
All About Purple Martins
Visit The Registry of Nature Habitats and apply to admit your property. Receive many benefits in addition to 10% discount on all products offered by A Bird's Home.
All About Purple Martins
Visit Our Partners:
Natural Gardens | Reigning Cats & Dogs | A Pond's Home | A Plant's Home |An Instrument's Home


text:
"This story keeps you guessing until the end."
This Chalk Girl tells the story by weaving in and out of the past and present in a smooth compelling way. So many of the characters have so much to tell you about the events of the story, and the author allows them to do so in a beautiful way. I did not want the story to end it was fascinating
The plot included compelling characters with interesting stories that all came together to form a story that made me want to learn more and more.
Barbara Rosenblat's voices that she gives the characters makes you feel as though you are there listening to them confide their inner thoughts. It is powerful, she is very good.
I can not think of a tag line.
I would look for more books from this author and reader.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
Recently I highlighted problems with the FTC's enforcement actions targeting companies' data security protection policies, and recommended that the FTC adopt a cost-benefit approach to regulation in this area. Yesterday the Heritage Foundation released a more detailed paper by me on this topic, replete with recommendations for new FTC guidance and specific reforms aimed at maintaining appropriate FTC oversight while reducing excessive burdens. Happy reading!
Archives For cost-benefit analysis
The Federal Trade Commission's recent enforcement actions against Amazon and Apple raise important questions about the FTC's consumer protection practices, especially its use of economics. How does the Commission weigh the costs and benefits of its enforcement decisions? How does the agency employ economic analysis in digital consumer protection cases generally?
Join the International Center for Law and Economics and TechFreedom on Thursday, July 31 at the Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company for a lunch and panel discussion on these important issues, featuring FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Economics Martin Gaynor, and several former FTC officials. RSVP here.
Commissioner Wright will present a keynote address discussing his dissent in Apple and his approach to applying economics in consumer protection cases generally.
Geoffrey Manne, Executive Director of ICLE, will briefly discuss his recent paper on the role of economics in the FTC's consumer protection enforcement. Berin Szoka, TechFreedom President, will moderate a panel discussion featuring:
- Martin Gaynor, Director, FTC Bureau of Economics
- David Balto, Fmr. Deputy Assistant Director for Policy & Coordination, FTC Bureau of Competition
- Howard Beales, Fmr. Director, FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection
- James Cooper, Fmr. Acting Director & Fmr. Deputy Director, FTC Office of Policy Planning
- Pauline Ippolito, Fmr. Acting Director & Fmr. Deputy Director, FTC Bureau of Economics
The FTC recently issued a complaint and consent order against Apple, alleging its in-app purchasing design doesn't meet the Commission's standards of fairness. The action and resulting settlement drew a forceful dissent from Commissioner Wright, and sparked a discussion among the Commissioners about balancing economic harms and benefits in Section 5 unfairness jurisprudence. More recently, the FTC brought a similar action against Amazon, which is now pending in federal district court because Amazon refused to settle.
Event Info
The "FTC: Technology and Reform" project brings together a unique collection of experts on the law, economics, and technology of competition and consumer protection to consider challenges facing the FTC in general, and especially regarding its regulation of technology. The Project's initial report, released in December 2013, identified critical questions facing the agency, Congress, and the courts about the FTC's future, and proposed a framework for addressing them.
The event will be live streamed here beginning at 12:15pm. Join the conversation on Twitter with the #FTCReform hashtag.
Thursday, July 31
11:45 am – 12:15 pm — Lunch and registration
12:15 pm – 2:00 pm — Keynote address, paper presentation & panel discussion
Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company – Rehearsal Hall
641 D St NW
Washington, DC 20004
Questions? – Email firstname.lastname@example.com. RSVP here.
See ICLE's and TechFreedom's other work on FTC reform, including:
- Geoffrey Manne's Congressional testimony on the the FTC@100
- Op-ed by Berin Szoka and Geoffrey Manne, "The Second Century of the Federal Trade Commission"
- Two posts by Geoffrey Manne on the FTC's Amazon Complaint, here and here.
About The International Center for Law and Economics:
The International Center for Law and Economics is a non-profit, non-partisan research center aimed at fostering rigorous policy analysis and evidence-based regulation.
About TechFreedom:
TechFreedom is a non-profit, non-partisan technology policy think tank. We work to chart a path forward for policymakers towards a bright future where technology enhances freedom, and freedom enhances technology.
UPDATE: I've been reliably informed that Vint Cerf coined the term "permissionless innovation," and, thus, that he did so with the sorts of private impediments discussed below in mind rather than government regulation. So consider the title of this post changed to "Permissionless innovation SHOULD not mean 'no contracts required,'" and I'll happily accept that my version is the "bastardized" version of the term. Which just means that the original conception was wrong and thank god for disruptive innovation in policy memes!
Can we dispense with the bastardization of the "permissionless innovation" concept (best developed by Adam Thierer) to mean "no contracts required"? I've been seeing this more and more, but it's been around for a while. Some examples from among the innumerable ones out there:
Vint Cerf on net neutrality in 2009:
We believe that the vast numbers of innovative Internet applications over the last decade are a direct consequence of an open and freely accessible Internet. Many now-successful companies have deployed their services on the Internet without the need to negotiate special arrangements with Internet Service Providers, and it's crucial that future innovators have the same opportunity. We are advocates for "permissionless innovation" that does not impede entrepreneurial enterprise.
Net neutrality is replete with this sort of idea — that any impediment to edge providers (not networks, of course) doing whatever they want to do at a zero price is a threat to innovation.
Chet Kanojia (Aereo CEO) following the Aereo decision:
It is troubling that the Court states in its decision that, 'to the extent commercial actors or other interested entities may be concerned with the relationship between the development and use of such technologies and the Copyright Act, they are of course free to seek action from Congress.' (Majority, page 17)That begs the question: Are we moving towards a permission-based system for technology innovation?
At least he puts it in the context of the Court's suggestion that Congress pass a law, but what he really wants is to not have to ask "permission" of content providers to use their content.
Mike Masnick on copyright in 2010:
But, of course, the problem with all of this is that it goes back to creating permission culture, rather than a culture where people freely create. You won't be able to use these popular or useful tools to build on the works of others — which, contrary to the claims of today's copyright defenders, is a key component in almost all creativity you see out there — without first getting permission.
Fair use is, by definition, supposed to be "permissionless." But the concept is hardly limited to fair use, is used to justify unlimited expansion of fair use, and is extended by advocates to nearly all of copyright (see, e.g., Mike Masnick again), which otherwise requires those pernicious licenses (i.e., permission) from others.
The point is, when we talk about permissionless innovation for Tesla, Uber, Airbnb, commercial drones, online data and the like, we're talking (or should be) about ex ante government restrictions on these things — the "permission" at issue is permission from the government, it's the "permission" required to get around regulatory roadblocks imposed via rent-seeking and baseless paternalism. As Gordon Crovitz writes, quoting Thierer:
"The central fault line in technology policy debates today can be thought of as 'the permission question,'" Mr. Thierer writes. "Must the creators of new technologies seek the blessing of public officials before they develop and deploy their innovations?"
But it isn't (or shouldn't be) about private contracts.
Just about all human (commercial) activity requires interaction with others, and that means contracts and licenses. You don't see anyone complaining about the "permission" required to rent space from a landlord. But that some form of "permission" may be required to use someone else's creative works or other property (including broadband networks) is no different. And, in fact, it is these sorts of contracts (and, yes, the revenue that may come with them) that facilitates people engaging with other commercial actors to produce things of value in the first place. The same can't be said of government permission.
Don't get me wrong – there may be some net welfare-enhancing regulatory limits that might require forms of government permission. But the real concern is the pervasive abuse of these limits, imposed without anything approaching a rigorous welfare determination. There might even be instances where private permission, imposed, say, by a true monopolist, might be problematic.
But this idea that any contractual obligation amounts to a problematic impediment to innovation is absurd, and, in fact, precisely backward. Which is why net neutrality is so misguided. Instead of identifying actual, problematic impediments to innovation, it simply assumes that networks threaten edge innovation, without any corresponding benefit and with such certainty (although no actual evidence) that ex ante common carrier regulations are required.
"Permissionless innovation" is a great phrase and, well developed (as Adam Thierer has done), a useful concept. But its bastardization to justify interference with private contracts is unsupported and pernicious.
The world of economics and public policy has lost yet another giant. Joining Ronald Coase, James Buchanan, Armen Alchian, and Robert Bork is a man whose name may be less familiar to TOTM readers but whose ideas have been hugely influential, particularly on me.
As the first chairman of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers, Murray Weidenbaum lay much of the blame for the anemic economy President Reagan "inherited" (my, how I've come to hate that word!) on the then-existing regulatory state. Command and control dominated in those days, and there was virtually no consideration of such mundane matters as the costs and benefits of regulatory interventions and the degree to which regulations were tailored to fit the market failures they purported to correct. Murray understood that such an unmoored regulatory state strangled innovation and would inevitably become co-opted by regulatees, who would use the machinery of the state to squelch competition and gain other advantages. He counseled the President to do something about it.
The result was Executive Order 12291, which subjected major federal regulations to cost-benefit analysis and stated that "[r]egulatory action shall not be undertaken unless the potential benefits to society from the regulation outweigh the potential costs to society." Such basic cost-benefit balancing seems like nothing more than common sense these days, but when Murray was pushing the idea at Washington University back in the late 1970s, it was considered pretty radical. Many of the Nixon era environmental statutes, for example, proudly eschewed consideration of costs. Murray helped us see how silly that was.
I distinctly remember a conversation we had in 1993. I had just been hired as a research fellow at Wash U's Center for the Study of American Business, and Murray, the Center director, was taking me and the other research fellow to lunch. The faculty dining club at Wash U is across a busy-ish street from the main campus. There's a tunnel a block or so west of the dining club, but hardly anybody would use it when walking to lunch. As we waited for an opening in traffic and crossed the street, Murray remarked, "See fellows, this is what I'm talking about. Crossing this busy street is risky. All these lunch-goers could eliminate the risk of an accident by walking two blocks out of their way. But nobody ever does that. The risk reduction just isn't worth the cost."
That was classic Murray. He was a plain-talking purveyor of common sense. He was firm in his beliefs but always kind and never doctrinaire. By presenting his ideas calmly and rationally, he earned the respect of differently minded folks, like Democratic Senator Thomas Eagleton, with whom he co-taught a popular course at Wash U. Our country is a better place because of Murray's service, and I am where I am because he took me under his wing.
Rest in peace, Murray.
Last week, over Commissioner Wright's dissent, the FTC approved amendments to its HSR rules (final text here) that, as Josh summarizes in his dissent,
establish, among other things, a procedure for the automatic withdrawal of an HSR filing upon the submission of a filing to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announcing that the notified transaction has been terminated.
I discussed the proposed amendments and Josh's concurring statement on their publication in February.
At the time, Josh pointed out that:
The proposed rulemaking appears to be a solution in search of a problem. The Federal Register notice states that the proposed rules are necessary to prevent the FTC and DOJ from "expend[ing] scarce resources on hypothetical transactions." Yet, I have not to date been presented with evidence that any of the over 68,000 transactions notified under the HSR rules have required Commission resources to be allocated to a truly hypothetical transaction. Indeed, it would be surprising to see firms incurring the costs and devoting the time and effort associated with antitrust review in the absence of a good faith intent to proceed with their transaction.
The proposed rules, if adopted, could increase the costs of corporate takeovers and thus distort the market for corporate control. Some companies that had complied with or were attempting to comply with a Second Request, for example, could be forced to restart their antitrust review, leading to significant delays and added expenses. The proposed rules could also create incentives for firms to structure their transactions less efficiently and discourage the use of tender offers. Finally, the proposed new rules will disproportionately burden U.S. public companies; the Federal Register notice acknowledges that the new rules will not apply to tender offers for many non-public and foreign companies.
Given these concerns, I hope that interested parties will avail themselves of the opportunity to submit public comments so that the Commission can make an informed decision at the conclusion of this process.
Apparently none of the other commissioners shared his concerns. But they remain valid. Most importantly, the amendments were adopted without a shred of evidence to suggest they were needed or would be helpful in any way. As Josh says in his dissent:
It has long been accepted as a principle of good governance that federal agencies should issue new regulations only if their benefits exceed their costs….However, I have not seen evidence that any of the over 68,000 transactions that have been notified under the HSR Rules has resulted in the allocation of resources to a truly hypothetical transaction.
In the absence of evidence that the automatic withdrawal rule would remedy a problem that exists under the current HSR regime, and thus benefit the public, I believe we should refrain from creating new regulations.
For what it's worth. the single comment received by the Commission on the proposed rule supported Josh's views:
Although the rule may prevent such inefficiency in the future, it would also require companies to incur substantial costs in premerger negotiations and resource allocation while waiting for FTC approval during the HSR period. Currently, firms can avoid such costs by temporarily withdrawing offers or agreements until they are assured of FTC approval. Under the proposed rule, however, doing so would automatically withdraw a company's HSR filing, subjecting it to another HSR filing and filing fee.
Presumably the absence of other comments means the business community isn't too concerned about the amendments. But that doesn't mean they should have been adopted without any evidence to support the claim that they were needed. I commend Josh for sticking to his principles and going down swinging.
Earlier this month, Representatives Peter DeFazio and Jason Chaffetz picked up the gauntlet from President Obama's comments on February 14 at a Google-sponsored Internet Q&A on Google+ that "our efforts at patent reform only went about halfway to where we need to go" and that he would like "to see if we can build some additional consensus on smarter patent laws." So, Reps. DeFazio and Chaffetz introduced on March 1 the Saving High-tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act, which creates a "losing plaintiff patent-owner pays" litigation system for a single type of patent owner—patent licensing companies that purchase and license patents in the marketplace (and who sue infringers when infringers refuse their requests to license). To Google, to Representative DeFazio, and to others, these patent licensing companies are "patent trolls" who are destroyers of all things good—and the SHIELD Act will save us all from these dastardly "trolls" (is a troll anything but dastardly?).
As I and other scholars have pointed out, the "patent troll" moniker is really just a rhetorical epithet that lacks even an agreed-upon definition. The term is used loosely enough that it sometimes covers and sometimes excludes universities, Thomas Edison, Elias Howe (the inventor of the lockstitch in 1843), Charles Goodyear (the inventor of vulcanized rubber in 1839), and even companies like IBM. How can we be expected to have a reasonable discussion about patent policy when our basic terms of public discourse shift in meaning from blog to blog, article to article, speaker to speaker? The same is true of the new term, "Patent Assertion Entities," which sounds more neutral, but has the same problem in that it also lacks any objective definition or usage.
Setting aside this basic problem of terminology for the moment, the SHIELD Act is anything but a "smarter patent law" (to quote President Obama). Some patent scholars, like Michael Risch, have begun to point out some of the serious problems with the SHIELD Act, such as its selectively discriminatory treatment of certain types of patent-owners. Moreover, as Professor Risch ably identifies, this legislation was so cleverly drafted to cover only a limited set of a specific type of patent-owner that it ended up being too clever. Unlike the previous version introduced last year, the 2013 SHIELD Act does not even apply to the flavor-of-the-day outrage over patent licensing companies—the owner of the podcast patent. (Although you wouldn't know this if you read the supporters of the SHIELD Act like the EFF who falsely claim that this law will stop patent-owners like the podcast patent-owning company.)
There are many things wrong with the SHIELD Act, but one thing that I want to highlight here is that it based on a falsehood: the oft-repeated claim that two Boston University researchers have proven in a study that "patent troll suits cost American technology companies over $29 billion in 2011 alone." This is what Rep. DeFazio said when he introduced the SHIELD Act on March 1. This claim was repeated yesterday by House Members during a hearing on "Abusive Patent Litigation." The claim that patent licensing companies cost American tech companies $29 billion in a single year (2011) has become gospel since this study, The Direct Costs from NPE Disputes, was released last summer on the Internet. (Another name of patent licensing companies is "Non Practicing Entity" or "NPE.") A Google search of "patent troll 29 billion" produces 191,000 hits. A Google search of "NPE 29 billion" produces 605,000 hits. Such is the making of conventional wisdom.
The problem with conventional wisdom is that it is usually incorrect, and the study that produced the claim of "$29 billion imposed by patent trolls" is no different. The $29 billion cost study is deeply and fundamentally flawed, as explained by two noted professors, David Schwartz and Jay Kesan, who are also highly regarded for their empirical and economic work in patent law. In their essay, Analyzing the Role of Non-Practicing Entities in the Patent System, also released late last summer, they detailed at great length serious methodological and substantive flaws in The Direct Costs from NPE Disputes. Unfortunately, the Schwartz and Kesan essay has gone virtually unnoticed in the patent policy debates, while the $29 billion cost claim has through repetition become truth.
In the hope that at least a few more people might discover the Schwartz and Kesan essay, I will briefly summarize some of their concerns about the study that produced the $29 billion cost figure. This is not merely an academic exercise. Since Rep. DeFazio explicitly relied on the $29 billion cost claim to justify the SHIELD Act, and he and others keep repeating it, it's important to know if it is true, because it's being used to drive proposed legislation in the real world. If patent legislation is supposed to secure innovation, then it behooves us to know if this legislation is based on actual facts. Yet, as Schwartz and Kesan explain in their essay, the $29 billion cost claim is based on a study that is fundamentally flawed in both substance and methodology.
In terms of its methodological flaws, the study supporting the $29 billion cost claim employs an incredibly broad definition of "patent troll" that covers almost every person, corporation or university that sues someone for infringing a patent that it is not currently being used to manufacture a product at that moment. While the meaning of the "patent troll" epithet shifts depending on the commentator, reporter, blogger, or scholar who is using it, one would be extremely hard pressed to find anyone embracing this expansive usage in patent scholarship or similar commentary today.
There are several reasons why the extremely broad definition of "NPE" or "patent troll" in the study is unusual even compared to uses of this term in other commentary or studies. First, and most absurdly, this definition, by necessity, includes every university in the world that sues someone for infringing one of its patents, as universities don't manufacture goods. Second, it includes every individual and start-up company who plans to manufacture a patented invention, but is forced to sue an infringer-competitor who thwarted these business plans by its infringing sales in the marketplace. Third, it includes commercial firms throughout the wide-ranging innovation industries—from high tech to biotech to traditional manufacturing—that have at least one patent among a portfolio of thousands that is not being used at the moment to manufacture a product because it may be "well outside the area in which they make products" and yet they sue infringers of this patent (the quoted language is from the study). So, according to this study, every manufacturer becomes an "NPE" or "patent troll" if it strays too far from what somebody subjectively defines as its rightful "area" of manufacturing. What company is not branded an "NPE" or "patent troll" under this definition, or will necessarily become one in the future given inevitable changes in one's business plans or commercial activities? This is particularly true for every person or company whose only current opportunity to reap the benefit of their patented invention is to license the technology or to litigate against the infringers who refuse license offers.
So, when almost every possible patent-owning person, university, or corporation is defined as a "NPE" or "patent troll," why are we surprised that a study that employs this virtually boundless definition concludes that they create $29 billion in litigation costs per year? The only thing surprising is that the number isn't even higher!
There are many other methodological flaws in the $29 billion cost study, such as its explicit assumption that patent litigation costs are "too high" without providing any comparative baseline for this conclusion. What are the costs in other areas of litigation, such as standard commercial litigation, tort claims, or disputes over complex regulations? We are not told. What are the historical costs of patent litigation? We are not told. On what basis then can we conclude that $29 billion is "too high" or even "too low"? We're supposed to be impressed by a number that exists in a vacuum and that lacks any empirical context by which to evaluate it.
The $29 billion cost study also assumes that all litigation transaction costs are deadweight losses, which would mean that the entire U.S. court system is a deadweight loss according to the terms of this study. Every lawsuit, whether a contract, tort, property, regulatory or constitutional dispute is, according to the assumption of the $29 billion cost study, a deadweight loss. The entire U.S. court system is an inefficient cost imposed on everyone who uses it. Really? That's an assumption that reduces itself to absurdity—it's a self-imposed reductio ad absurdum!
In addition to the methodological problems, there are also serious concerns about the trustworthiness and quality of the actual data used to reach the $29 billion claim in the study. All studies rely on data, and in this case, the $29 billion study used data from a secret survey done by RPX of its customers. For those who don't know, RPX's business model is to defend companies against these so-called "patent trolls." So, a company whose business model is predicated on hyping the threat of "patent trolls" does a secret survey of its paying customers, and it is now known that RPX informed its customers in the survey that their answers would be used to lobby for changes in the patent laws.
As every reputable economist or statistician will tell you, such conditions encourage exaggeration and bias in a data sample by motivating participation among those who support changes to the patent law. Such a problem even has a formal name in economic studies: self-selection bias. But one doesn't need to be an economist or statistician to be able to see the problems in relying on the RPX data to conclude that NPEs cost $29 billion per year. As the classic adage goes, "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."
Even worse, as I noted above, the RPX survey was confidential. RPX has continued to invoke "client confidences" in refusing to disclose its actual customer survey or the resulting data, which means that the data underlying the $29 billion claim is completely unknown and unverifiable for anyone who reads the study. Don't worry, the researchers have told us in a footnote in the study, they looked at the data and confirmed it is good. Again, it doesn't take economic or statistical training to know that something is not right here. Another classic cliché comes to mind at this point: "it's not the crime, it's the cover-up."
In fact, keeping data secret in a published study violates well-established and longstanding norms in all scientific research that data should always be made available for testing and verification by third parties. No peer-reviewed medical or scientific journal would publish a study based on a secret data set in which the researchers have told us that we should simply trust them that the data is accurate. Its use of secret data probably explains why the $29 billion study has not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal, and, if economics has any claim to being an actual science, this study never will. If a study does not meet basic scientific standards for verifying data, then why are Reps. DeFazio and Chaffetz relying on it to propose national legislation that directly impacts the patent system and future innovation? If heads-in-the-clouds academics would know to reject such a study as based on unverifiable, likely biased claptrap, then why are our elected officials embracing it to create real-world legal rules?
And, to continue our running theme of classic clichés, there's the rub. The more one looks at the actual legal requirements of the SHIELD Act, the more, in the words of Professor Risch, one is left "scratching one's head" in bewilderment. The more one looks at the supporting studies and arguments in favor of the SHIELD Act, the more one is left, in the words of Professor Risch, "scratching one's head." The more and more one thinks about the SHIELD Act, the more one realizes what it is—legislation that has been crafted at the behest of the politically powerful (such as an Internet company who can get the President to do a special appearance on its own social media website) to have the government eliminate a smaller, publicly reviled, and less politically-connected group.
In short, people may have legitimate complaints about the ways in which the court system in the U.S. generally has problems. Commentators and Congresspersons could even consider revising the general legal rules governing patent ligtiation for all plaintiffs and defendants to make the ligitation system work better or more efficiently (by some established metric). Professor Risch has done exactly this in a recent Wired op-ed. But it's time to call a spade a spade: the SHIELD Act is a classic example of rent-seeking, discriminatory legislation.
Although it probably flew under almost everyone's radar, last week Josh issued his first Concurring Statement as an FTC Commissioner. The statement came in response to a seemingly arcane Notice of Proposed Rulemaking relating to Hart-Scott-Rodino Premerger Notification Rules:
The proposed rules also establish a procedure for the automatic withdrawal of an HSR filing when filings are made with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announcing that a transaction has been terminated.
The proposed rulemaking itself isn't enormously significant, but Josh's statement lays down a marker that indicates (as anyone could have predicted) that he intends to do everything he can to improve the agency and its process.
The rule, as suggested above, would automatically withdraw an HSR filing whenever transacting parties filed certain notices with the SEC announcing the termination of a deal. You may recall that the Hertz/Dollar Thrifty deal had been in the works for at least five years when it finally closed. When Hertz withdrew its tender offer in October 2011, it did not withdraw its HSR filing. As reported at the time, Hertz withdrew its bid over difficulty securing FTC approval, which had plagued other offers for Thrifty:
In a sign of frustration, Mr. Thompson said that the company had spent some $30 million over the last few years dealing with the barrage of takeover offers.
Obviously, given the difficulty of securing FTC approval and the costs imposed by the uncertainty it created, there was real benefit to Hertz (and perhaps Thrifty, for that matter) from receiving a decision from the FTC without meanwhile tying up the company's resources, restraining its decision- and deal-making abilities, complicating negotiations and weakening its credit by maintaining a stalled-but-pending merger. So the deal was withdrawn, but the HSR filing was not.
In August 2012 the parties re-initiated the merger following ongoing consultations by Hertz with the FTC, and, in November 2012 — a full year after the deal was withdrawn (and a year and a half after the HSR filing) — the FTC approved the deal.
But, understandably, FTC staff don't want to be wasting resources reviewing hypothetical transactions, and so, following on the heels of the Hertz/Dollar Thrifty deal, wrote the proposed rule to ensure that it never happens again.
Except it didn't happen in Hertz because, after all, the deal was eventually made. According to Josh, in fact, the situation intended to be avoided by the rule has never arisen:
The proposed rulemaking appears to be a solution in search of a problem. The Federal Register notice states that the proposed rules are necessary to prevent the FTC and DOJ from "expend[ing] scarce resources on hypothetical transactions." Yet, I have not to date been presented with evidence that any of the over 68,000 transactions notified under the HSR rules have required Commission resources to be allocated to a truly hypothetical transaction. Indeed, it would be surprising to see firms incurring the costs and devoting the time and effort associated with antitrust review in the absence of a good faith intent to proceed with their transaction.
This isn't to say (and Josh doesn't say) that the proposed rule is a bad idea, just that, given the apparently negligible benefits of the rule, the costs could easily outweigh the benefits.
Which is why Josh's Statement is important. What Josh is asking for is not that the rule be scrapped, but simply that, before adopting the rule, the FTC weigh its costs and benefits. And as Josh points out, there could indeed be some costs:
The proposed rules, if adopted, could increase the costs of corporate takeovers and thus distort the market for corporate control. Some companies that had complied with or were attempting to comply with a Second Request, for example, could be forced to restart their antitrust review, leading to significant delays and added expenses. The proposed rules could also create incentives for firms to structure their transactions less efficiently and discourage the use of tender offers. Finally, the proposed new rules will disproportionately burden U.S. public companies; the Federal Register notice acknowledges that the new rules will not apply to tender offers for many non-public and foreign companies.
Given these concerns, I hope that interested parties will avail themselves of the opportunity to submit public comments so that the Commission can make an informed decision at the conclusion of this process.
What is surprising is not that Josh suggested that there might be unanticipated costs to such a rule, nor that cost-benefit analysis be applied. Rather, what's surprising is that the rest of the Commission didn't sign on. Why is that surprising? Well, because cost-benefit analysis is not only sensible, it's consistent with the Obama Administration's stated regulatory approach. Executive Order 13563 requires that:
Each agency must, among other things: (1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify) . . . In applying these principles, each agency is directed to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.
Unfortunately, as Berin Szoka has pointed out,
The FCC, FTC and many other regulatory agencies aren't required to do cost-benefit analysis at all. Because these are "independent agencies"—creatures of Congress rather than part of the Executive Branch (like the Department of Justice)—only Congress can impose cost-benefit analysis on agencies. A bipartisan bill, the Independent Agency Regulatory Analysis Act (S. 3486), would have allowed the President to impose the same kind of cost-benefit analysis on independent regulatory agencies as on Executive Branch agencies, including review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for "significant" rulemakings (those with $100 million or more in economic impact, that adversely affect sectors of the economy in a material way, or that create "serious inconsistency" with other agencies' actions). . . . yet the bill has apparently died . . . .
Legislation or not, it is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules it enacts will actually be beneficial (it is a consumer protection agency, after all). The staff, presumably, did a perfectly fine job writing the rule they were asked to write. Josh's point is simply that it isn't clear the rule should be adopted because it isn't clear that the benefits of doing so would outweigh the costs.
It may have happened before, but I can't recall an FTC Commissioner laying down the cost-benefit-analysis gauntlet and publicly calling for consistent cost-benefit review at the Commission, even of seemingly innocuous (but often not actually innocuous), technical rules.
This is exactly the sort of thing that those of us who extolled Josh's appointment hoped for, and I'm delighted to see him pushing this kind of approach right out of the gate. No doubt he rocked some boats and took some heat for it. Good. That means he's on the right track.
The semester is off to a bang. I arrived at Stanford Monday to start teaching in the Law School and begin a research fellowship at the Hoover Institution. Yesterday I hiked in the mountains overlooking the SF Bay. Today I am flying back to DC (and blogging in flight, how cool is that) to testify Thursday before the House Committee on Financial Services alongside SEC Chairman Schapiro, former Chairman Pitt, and former Commissioner Paul Atkins on proposed legislation from Congressman Scott Garrett and Chairman Spencer Bachus to reform and reshape the SEC.
Part of the hearing, titled "Fixing the Watchdog: Legislative Proposals to Improve and Enhance the Securities and Exchange Commission" will deal with the study on SEC organizational reform mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act and conducted by the Boston Consulting Group. Frankly, I found it full of quotes from the consultant's desk manual, with references to "no-regrets implementation," "business process optimization" and "multi-faceted transformation." I believe the technical term is gobbledy-gook.
The remainder of the hearing will involve a discussion of the SEC Organizational Reform Act (or "Bachus Bill") and the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act (or "Garrett Bill"). The Bachus Bill proposes a number of organizational reforms, like breaking up the new Division of Risk, Strategy, and Financial Innovation to embed the economists there back in to the various functional divisions. The Garrett Bill seeks to strengthen the guiding principles originally formulated in the NSMIA amendments by elaborating on how the agency can meet its economic analysis burden in rule-making.
I thought I would give TOTM readers a sneak peak at my testimony. I aim to make two key points. First, sincere economic analysis is important. SEC rules have consistently done a poor job of meeting the mandate of the NSMIA to consider the effect of new rules on efficiency, competition, and capital formation, and they will continue to do a poor job until they hire more economists and give them increased authority in the enforcement and the rule-making process. Second, the SEC's mission should include an explicit requirement that it consider the effect of new rules on the state based system of business entity formation.
Here's a sneak peak at my testimony for TOTM readers:
Chairman Bachus, Ranking Member Frank, and distinguished members of the Committee, it is a privilege to testify today. My name is J.W. Verret. I am an Assistant Professor of Law at Stanford Law School where I teach corporate and securities law. I also serve as a Fellow at the Hoover Institution and as a Senior Scholar at the Mercatus
Center at George Mason University. I am currently on leave from the George Mason Law School.
My testimony today will focus on two important and necessary reforms.
First, I will argue that clarifying the SEC's legislative mandate to conduct economic analysis and a commitment of authority to economists on staff at the SEC are both vital to ensure that new rules work for investors rather than against them. Second, I will urge that the SEC be required to consider the impact of new rules on the state-based system of business incorporation.
Every President since Ronald Reagan has requested that independent agencies like the SEC commit to sincere economic cost-benefit analysis of new rules. Further, unlike many other independent agencies the SEC is subject to a legislative mandate that it consider the effect of most new rules on investor protection, efficiency, competition and capital formation.
The latter three principles have been interpreted as requiring a form of cost-benefit economic analysis using empirical evidence, economic theory, and compliance cost data. These tools help to determine rule impact on stock prices and stock exchange competitiveness and measure compliance costs that are passed on to investors.
Three times in the last ten years private parties have successfully challenged SEC rules for failure to meet these requirements. Over the three cases, no less than five distinguished jurists on the DC Circuit, appointed during administrations of both Republican and Democratic Presidents, found the SEC's economic analysis wanting. One
failure might have been an aberation, three failures out of three total challenges is a dangerous pattern.
Many SEC rules have treated the economic analysis requirements as an afterthought. This is in part a consequence of the low priority the Commission places on economic analysis, evidenced by the fact that economists have no significant authority in the rule-making process or the enforcement process.
As an example of the level of analysis typically given to significant rule-making, consider the SEC's final release of its implementation of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The SEC estimated that the rule would impose an annual cost of $91,000 per publicly traded company. In fact a subsequent SEC study five years later found average implementation costs for 404(b) of $2.87 million per company.
That error in judgment only applies to estimates of direct costs. The SEC gave no consideration whatsoever to the more important category of indirect costs, like the impact of the rule on the volume of new offerings or IPOs on US exchanges.
In Business Roundtable v. SEC alone the SEC estimates it dedicated over $2.5 million in staff hours to a rule that was struck down. An honest commitment by the SEC to empower economists in the rule-making process will be a vital first step to ensure the mistakes of the proxy access rule are not replicated in future rules.
I also support the goal in H.R. 2308 to further elaborate on the economic analysis requirements. I would suggest, in light of the importance and pervasiveness of the state-based system of corporate governance, that the bill include a provision requiring the SEC to consider the impact of new rules on the states when rule-making touches on issues of corporate governance.
The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that "No principle of corporation law and practice is more firmly established than a state's authority to regulate domestic corporations."
Delaware is one prominent example, serving as the state of incorporation for half of all publicly traded companies. Its corporate code is so highly valued among shareholders that the mere fact of Delaware incorporation typically earns a publicly traded company a 2-8% increase in value. Many other states also compete for incorporations, particularly New York, Massachusetts, California and Texas.
In order to fully appreciate this fundamental characteristic of our system, I would urge adding the following language to H.R. 2308:
"The Commission shall consider the impact of new rules on the traditional role of states in governing the internal affairs of business entities and whether it can achieve its stated objective without preempting state law."
The SEC can comply by taking into account commentary from state governors and state secretaries of state during the open comment period. It can minimize the preemptive effect of new rules by including references to state law where appropriate similar to one
already found in Section 14a-8. It can also commit to a process for seeking guidance on state corporate law by creating a mandatory state court certification procedure similar to that used by the SEC in the AFSCME v. AIG case in 2008.
I thank you again for the opportunity to testify and I look forward to answering your questions.
[Cross-posted at PYMNTS.COM]
Richard Cordray's nomination hearing provided an opportunity to learn something new about the substantive policies of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Unfortunately, that opportunity came and went without answering many of the key questions that remain concerning the impact of the CFPB's enforcement and regulatory agenda on the availability of consumer credit, economic growth, and jobs.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's critics, including myself, [1] have expressed concerns that the CFPB— through enforcement and regulation—could harm consumers and small businesses by reducing the availability of credit. The intellectual blueprint for the CFPB is founded on the insight, from behavioral economics, that "[m]any consumers are uninformed and irrational," that "consumers make systematic mistakes in their choice of credit products," and that the CFPB should play a central role in determining which and to what extent these products are used. [2] The CFPB's recent appointment of Sendhil Mullainathan as its Assistant Director for Research confirms its commitment to the behaviorist approach to regulation of consumer credit. Mullainathan, in work co-authored with Professor Michael S. Barr, provided the intellectual basis for the much debated "plain vanilla" provision in the original legislation and advocated a whole host of new consumer credit regulations ranging from improved disclosures to "harder" forms of paternalism. The concern, in short, is that the CFPB is hard-wired to take a myopic view of the tried-and-true benefits of consumer credit markets and runs the risk of harming many (and especially the socially and economically disadvantaged groups in the greatest need of access to consumer credit) in the name of protecting the few.
To be sure, there is absolutely no doubt that there are unscrupulous and unsavory characters in lending markets engaging in bad acts ranging from fraud to preying upon vulnerable borrowers. Nonetheless, it is critical to recognize the positive role that lending markets and the availability of consumer credit has played in the American economy, especially in facilitating entrepreneurial activity and small business growth. Taking into account these important benefits is fundamental to developing sound consumer credit policy. I had hoped that the hearings might focus upon Mr. Cordray's underlying philosophical approach to weighing the costs and benefits of credit regulation and how that balance might be struck at his CFPB. They did not, instead focusing largely upon another important issue: the precise contours of CFPB authority and oversight.
Currently, the unemployment rate is over 9 percent and all of the available evidence suggests the CFPB's approach will run a significant risk of overregulation that will reduce the availability of consumer credit to small businesses and thus further depress the economy. Therefore, getting hard answers concerning how the CFPB views and will account for these risks in its enforcement and regulatory decisions is critical. Certainly, the nomination hearing offered small hints toward this end. We learned that under Mr. Cordray's watch, CFPB enforcement will involve not only lawsuits but also a "more flexible toolbox" that includes "research reports, rulemaking guidance, consumer education and empowerment, and the ability to supervise and examine both large banks and many nonbank institutions."
The job of protecting consumers in financial products markets—the domain of the new CFPB—extends to all such consumers. The benefits of healthy markets and competition in consumer credit products has generated tremendous economic benefits to the most disadvantaged as well as to small businesses. If the CFPB agenda were limited to educating consumers about the costs and benefits of various products and improving disclosures, there would be far less need for concern that it will be a drag on consumers, entrepreneurial activity, and economic growth. However, the CFPB's intellectual blueprint suggests a more aggressive and dangerous agenda, and the authority it has been granted renders that agenda feasible. The CFPB must account for the benefits from lending markets and balance them against its laudable objective of preventing deceptive practices when crafting its enforcement and regulatory agenda. Unfortunately, after Tuesday's nomination hearing, the CFPB's approach to this complex and delicate balance remains an open question.
[1] David S. Evans & Joshua D. Wright, The Effect of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009 on Consumer Credit, 22(3) Loyola Consumer L. Rev. 277 (2010).
[2] Oren Bar-Gill & Elizabeth Warren, Making Credit Safer, 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1, 39 (2008).


text:
Celebrity News
Movie News
TV News
Music News
September 24, 2012
Celebrity Gossip
Jimmy Fallon Pokes Fun at Amanda Bynes on Emmys Red Carpet
September 24, 2012 09:17:53 GMT
The 64th annual Primetime Emmy Awards has already been wrapped with plenty of memorable moments taking place on its red carpet. Among those which was highlighted was when
Jimmy Fallon
jokingly poked fun at troubled actress
Amanda Bynes
when interviewed by E! News' correspondent
Ryan Seacrest
Upon his arrival at the Nokia Theatre, Los Angeles, the "
Late Night with Jimmy Fallon
" host jokingly said that he felt glad to arrive safely because it was Bynes who drove him to the venue. "I'm just happy to be alive, I just gotta be honest - Amanda Bynes gave me a ride over," he joked, making fun of the starlet's recent runs-ins with the law. "I am just happy to be here."
Read Full Story
TV News
Video: Julia Louis-Dreyfus Reads Amy Poehler's Acceptance Speech at 2012 Emmy Awards
September 24, 2012 09:02:47 GMT
Jimmy Kimmel
wasn't the only one who set up a stunt at the recently held Primetime Emmy Awards. Though competing for the Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy prize,
Julia Louis-Dreyfus
Amy Poehler
teamed up to generate laughs as they pretended to have accidentally switched speech notes.
When Louis-Dreyfus was announced as the winner in the aforementioned category, she shared a hug with Poehler before heading to the stage. The "
" star then read from a piece of paper she held, "First of all, I would like to thank NBC, 'Parks and Rec'," before she realized that she read the wrong acceptance speech.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Lindsay Lohan Plans to Sue Alleged Hit-and-Run Victim
September 24, 2012 08:43:27 GMT
Lindsay Lohan
is reportedly taking legal action against Jose Rodriguez who accused her of clipping him with her car and reeking of booze when he confronted her. "I'm tired of people lying just to score a quick paycheck," she said as quoted by TMZ.
Jose who worked as a cook in a nearby restaurant claimed he "fell to the side" and felt "so much pain," after LiLo hit him when she drove down the ramp at The Dream hotel in New York. However,
a surveillance tape
that captured the alleged incident contradicted his story.
Read Full Story
TV News
New Promo of 'Fringe' Season 5: Astrid Is Wanted by the Observers
September 24, 2012 08:20:35 GMT
Hyping up the upcoming premiere of "
" last season, FOX releases a promo for the show. The video contains a message made by the Observers, who want Astrid Farnsworth to be questioned as they claim she poses national security threat.
When the J. J. Abrams, Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci-created series returns for its fifth and final season on Friday, September 28 at 9/8c on FOX, the story is set in 2036 and the overpowering Observers rule. The Fringe team, preserved in amber for 20 years, is now a rebel resistance team fighting for freedom.
Read Full Story
Music News
One Direction's Next Single Could Be Written by Ed Sheeran
September 24, 2012 08:19:36 GMT
One Direction
might release an
Ed Sheeran
-written song as their next single. Teasing the possibility was none other than Sheeran himself, who revealed that he has contributed two songs in 1D's upcoming album "
Take Me Home
". The "Lego House" singer said that one of his written songs could end up being a follow-up to "Live While We're Young".
"One of them is kind of a getting-back together song. One of them is an appreciation song," Sheeran told MTV News about the upcoming songs, but refused to reveal their titles. "I can't say the titles. The song that I think will be the single, one of the singles, is kind of a very sweet song," he teased.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Natalie Portman Turns Into Blonde, Hangs Out With Robert Pattinson
September 24, 2012 08:10:08 GMT
Natalie Portman
ditched her brown locks for honey-colored hair. The "
No Strings Attached
" actress showed off her new look when attending the opening night of her husband Benjamin Millepied's L.A. Dance Project at Walt Disney Concert Hall.
Natalie took time to pose with other guests including
Robert Pattinson
Dita Von Teese
. The new mom opted for a strapless Christian Dior white gown with full skirt, Rob suited up in a dark number, and Dita showed off her cleavage in a brown plunging dress.
Read Full Story
TV News
Eric Stonestreet to Return to 'American Horror Story' Season 2
September 24, 2012 07:44:48 GMT
Hot on heels of
Eric Stonestreet
's Emmy Award win, it's revealed that he would join the cast of "
American Horror Story
: Asylum". While he appeared as a psych patient named Derek in the first season, the former "
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
" star would not reprise the role in the upcoming installment.
To TVLine, "AHS" creator Ryan Murphy spilled the beans that the Cameron Tucker of "
Modern Family
" would guest star in an episode as a killer. The writer went on teasing that Stonestreet would be featured alongside
Sarah Paulson
, who takes a role of a lesbian journalist named Lana.
Read Full Story
Movie News
'New Girl' Star Max Greenfield Ready to Go Full Frontal for 'Fifty Shades of Grey'
September 24, 2012 07:42:40 GMT
Another hunky actor gets linked to the "
Fifty Shades of Grey
" casting. After the likes of
Ian Somerhalder
Ryan Gosling
Robert Pattinson
were previously named the contenders to play Christian Grey, this time around it is
Max Greenfield
who is said to be a favorite choice to tackle the sex-driven character.
Asked to comment on the report when attending 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards, the "
New Girl
" actor admitted that he's ready to give his best, including going full frontal, should he get cast in the film. "Yeah, that's not a problem," he told E!'s
Giuliana Rancic
on the red carpet. "That's not the issue. It's the issue of whether they wanna see that much intensity on screen, because that's what I plan to bring."
Read Full Story
Music News
Artist of the Week: PSY
September 24, 2012 07:12:18 GMT
's popularity was rocketing within just two months following the release of "Gangnam Style" music video. Through the clip that has spawned a bunch of parodies, he introduced his horse dance, which drew the attention of people worldwide, including some top-notch stars in the U.S. such as
Tom Cruise
Britney Spears
Boasted by his appearances on American TV shows namely "
The Ellen Degeneres Show
", "
" and "Extra", the song has peaked at No. 11 on Billboard Hot 100 and topped Billboard Social 50. It additionally ranked first on iTunes chart.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Video: Jon Stewart Tackled to the Ground at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards
September 24, 2012 07:11:01 GMT
Jon Stewart
had to fight his way to the stage at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards at the Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles. He was tackled to the ground by
Stephen Colbert
Jimmy Fallon
after he was announced by
Ricky Gervais
as the winner of Outstanding Variety, Music or Comedy Series.
Colbert and Fallon were "upset" for losing the prize to "
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
" host, so they tried to prevent the winner from collecting the award at the September 23 event. Other nominees were "
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
", "
Real Time With Bill Maher
" and "
Saturday Night Live
Read Full Story
Movie News
New 'Pitch Perfect' Clip Features Cover of Flo Rida's 'Right Round'
September 24, 2012 07:09:36 GMT
Flo Rida
's hit song "Right Round" gets covered in a new clip for "
Pitch Perfect
". Presenting a "
"-esque musical performance, the snippet focuses on
Adam DeVine
and co. who deliver a rendition of the
-assisted hit in front of
Anna Kendrick
and her girl gang. The boys look dazzling with their powerful a capella performance, while the girls pretend as if they underestimate it.
"Pitch Perfect" is a musical comedy which focuses on Kendrick's Beca, who's just arrived at her new college. She finds herself not right for any clique, but somehow is muscled into one that she never would have picked on her own: alongside mean girls, sweet girls and weird girls whose only thing in common is how good they sound when they sing together.
Read Full Story
Music News
Video: Josh Groban Covers One Direction at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards
September 24, 2012 06:22:13 GMT
Josh Groban
made a surprise performance at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards for an unconventional tribute segment. The operatic pop singer played a piano while delivering a rendition of
One Direction
's bubble hit single "What Makes You Beautiful" to help
Jimmy Kimmel
pay homage to himself.
"I think it's a shame that we wait to do this (in-memoriam tribute) until after our legends pass. It's important to celebrate the living too, so tonight I'd like you to join me in paying tribute to the life and work of someone all of us, someone every person in this room admires, respects and loves," the host said before Josh belted out the song.
Read Full Story
Music News
Video: Taylor Swift Suffers Wardrobe Malfunction During iHeart Performance
September 24, 2012 05:58:20 GMT
Taylor Swift
's well-prepared stint at the iHeartRadio Music Festival was a bit ruined by a wardrobe malfunction. Opening her nearly 30-minute set with "Sparks Fly", the country music beauty had the right shoulder strap of her dress undone and falling down when she made her way onto the stage. She, however, was saved from further embarrassment since she donned a sequined shirt underneath.
It appeared that a fan tugged her glittery dress too hard when she greeted the audience, but the "Love Story" hitmaker herself didn't realize the mishap until around 15 seconds later. She finished the song without putting the strap back on. When she returned on the stage to perform "You Belong With Me", she has removed the gown and revealed the glittery gold top and black shorts.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Jimmy Kimmel Has Bathroom Meltdown, Disses Mitt Romney in Emmy Monologue
September 24, 2012 04:56:00 GMT
Jimmy Kimmel
kicked off 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards with a pre-recorded bathroom sketch and then cracked political jokes in his monologue. The host was supported by all-girl stars in the former and dissed GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney in the latter.
In the skit, Kimmel burst into a bathroom cubicle crying over a Botox job gone wrong.
Christina Hendricks
Mindy Kaling
Zooey Deschanel
and a naked
Lena Dunham
helped him fix his face in an unconventional way before
Ellen DeGeneres
saved him from lack of pants.
Read Full Story
Movie News
Report: Michael Bay Might Direct 'Transformers 5' After All
September 24, 2012 04:43:31 GMT
Though he has confirmed his return to the directing seat of "Transformers 4", Michael Bay once hinted that "T4" would be his last work in the successful autobot war film franchise. However, latest update suggested that Bay might still reprise his directing role once again as producer Steven Spielberg reportedly planned a possible fifth "
" film.
The report was sparked by actor Glenn Morshower, who appeared as General Morshower in the last three "Transformers" films, when discussing the franchise at the Con X KC in Kansas City, Missouri. He revealed to Examiner that Bay and Spielberg were not only working on "Transformers 4", but more than likely "Transformers 5" as well.
Read Full Story
Movie News
First Trailer for Kellan Lutz and Amber Heard's 'Syrup'
September 24, 2012 04:13:23 GMT
The first trailer for "
" has been debuted. Presenting a romantic plot that is wrapped in a humorous way, the video focuses on
Shiloh Fernandez
who is crazy about sexy blond beauty
Amber Heard
. He is seen following her everywhere, but she doesn't seem to be interested in him at all. "
" star
Kellan Lutz
is also featured in the video, playing Fernandez's supportive best friend.
An adaptation of Max Barry's 1999 novel, "Syrup" follows Fernandez as a young marketing grad who pursues a million dollar idea with his new product. However, in order to make his dream come true, he has to learn to trust his attractive corporate counterpart (Heard). The trailer doesn't give away too many details of the plot other than scenes that show Fernandez's character being madly in love with Heard's.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Video: Tracy Morgan Faking Faint on Live Emmy Show
September 24, 2012 04:03:28 GMT
Tracy Morgan
caused a frenzy on Twitterverse during the live telecast of 2012 Primetime Emmy. The comedian was passing out after being called to join host
Jimmy Kimmel
on stage of the Sunday, September 23 ceremony.
It was actually a prank pulled by none other than Kimmel to attract more viewers to watch the show. "Just lie there for about 10 minutes or so. And when people tune in they will see this on the stage," the "
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
" host told Morgan, who obediently followed the instruction.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Video: Seth MacFarlane Laughs Off Microphone Gaffe at 2012 Emmys
September 24, 2012 03:55:08 GMT
Seth MacFarlane
couldn't help making fun of himself after he realized that he used a wrong microphone at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards. "This is what happens when you don't come to rehearsal," he said to loud laughs from the crowd.
He took the stage at Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles on September 23 to present the winner of Outstanding Host in a Reality or Reality-Competition Program. He realized he stood in front of a wrong mic when his voice could hardly be heard.
Read Full Story
TV News
Primetime Emmys 2012: 'Homeland' and 'Modern Family' Lead Full Winner List
September 24, 2012 03:31:28 GMT
", "
Modern Family
" and "
Game Change
" were big winners at the 64th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards. As the event wrapped up on Sunday, September 23 night, each of these shows bagged four kudos.
"Homeland" snatched the coveted Outstanding Drama, winning over "
Boardwalk Empire
", "
Breaking Bad
", "
Downton Abbey
", "
Mad Men
" and "
Game of Thrones
". The thriller series also paired up the Outstanding Actor and Actress in a Drama prizes, which were given to
Damian Lewis
Claire Danes
Read Full Story
Music News
Rihanna Launches New Website, May Hint at Titles of New Songs
September 24, 2012 03:13:23 GMT
has a newly-designed website,
, launched ahead of her new single release. The front page of the site boasts her signature "R" letter made up of words, some of which may give hints at titles of the new songs in the upcoming effort. "Diamonds", the confirmed lead single, is among the words.
Other catchphrases, like "Navy," "Roc" and "Jah" that are closely linked to Riri, and "Isis," the goddess tattoo inked under her breasts to pay tribute to her late grandmother, are included as well. There is also "Red Lipstick" which happens to be the title of one of the tracks in her previous CD "
Talk That Talk
Read Full Story
TV News
Primetime Emmys 2012: 'Game Change' Wins Best Miniseries or Movie
1 comment(s)
September 24, 2012 03:00:06 GMT
Game Change
" dominated the Miniseries or Movie field at the Primetime Emmy Awards. It has grabbed four gongs at the show, including the coveted Outstanding Movie or Miniseries. The political drama beat out "
American Horror Story
", "
Hemingway & Gellhorn
", "
: A Scandal in Belgravia", "Luther" and "
Hatfields & McCoys
The show also led
Julianne Moore
to win the Outstanding Lead Actress in a Miniseries or a Movie. The Sarah Palin depicter won over
Connie Britton
Nicole Kidman
Emma Thompson
Ashley Judd
for her first Primetime Emmy kudo. "I feel so validated because Sarah Palin gave me a big thumbs down," the 51-year-old beauty said of her win.
Read Full Story
Music News
Miley Cyrus to Release 'Sick' Album in Early 2013, New Single to Come Out Soon
September 24, 2012 02:23:42 GMT
Fans of
Miley Cyrus
who have been waiting for her to release a new record should be happy now because the former "
Hannah Montana
" star herself has confirmed that she would drop her new album in a foreseeable future. Speaking to Billboard when attending the iHeartRadio Music Festival in Las Vegas, the former Disney darling dished that her latest studio set was due in early 2013.
Without revealing the title of her forthcoming album, Miley gushed that she "wanna make a sick record," adding that she would introduce a new single by the end of this year. The fiancee of
Liam Hemsworth
went on dishing that her next album would feature collaborations with
Pharrell Williams
and producers Da Internz, who were also responsible for hit songs like
's "Birthday Cake" and
Big Sean
's "A$$".
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Kat Dennings Slouches on Emmys' Red Carpet to Avoid Wardrobe Malfunction
1 comment(s)
September 24, 2012 02:22:15 GMT
Kat Dennings
admitted she's afraid that she might show off more than she intended when walking down the red carpet at 2012 Primetime Emmy Awards. "Very nervous," the 26-year-old star told E! News about her red gown that had a dangerously low-cut neckline.
"If I stand up too straight, there's a possibility," said the "
2 Broke Girls
" actress. So, how did she prevent herself from falling victim to yet another fashion faux pas? "So if I hunch, that's why. It's not because I have terrible posture, it's from fear of things coming out," she explained.
Read Full Story
TV News
Primetime Emmys 2012: Damian Lewis and Claire Danes Are Best Actor and Actress in Drama
September 24, 2012 01:56:26 GMT
" paired up the awards for Outstanding Actor and Actress in a Drama at this year's Emmy Awards. It marked the first Emmy win for
Damian Lewis
who portrays Nicholas Brody. "I don't really believe in judging art," the British actor said on stage, "but I thought I'd show up just in case." For the coveted prize, he edged out such strong contenders as
Bryan Cranston
Steve Buscemi
Jon Hamm
Claire Danes
' case, her Emmy win was quite predictable since her portrayal of Carrie Mathison had led her to get honored at Golden Globe and other award events earlier this year. It was her second Emmy kudo after snatching the Outstanding Lead Actress in a Miniseries or Movie through her role in "
Temple Grandin
" in 2011.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Green Day's Billie Joe Armstrong Enters Rehab After Onstage Rants
September 24, 2012 01:30:11 GMT
Billie Joe Armstrong
has checked himself into rehab after throwing
expletive rants
Green Day
's live performance in Las Vegas. "Billie Joe is seeking treatment for substance abuse," the band announced in a statement.
"We would like everyone to know that our set was not cut short by Clear Channel and to apologize to those we offended at the iHeartRadio Festival in Las Vegas. We regretfully must postpone some of our upcoming promotional appearances."
Read Full Story
Movie News
'End of Watch' and 'House at the End of the Street' Rule Box Office on Slow Weekend
September 24, 2012 01:29:27 GMT
Another box office slow weekend in September continues as four newcomers enter the chart with none of them surpassing the $20 million gross.
Jake Gyllenhaal
's gritty cop drama "
End of Watch
" and
Jennifer Lawrence
's thriller "
House at the End of the Street
" are collecting $13.1 million and $12.2 million respectively on their first weekend.
Receiving an "A-" CinemaScore, "End of Watch" attracts to Hispanic moviegoers who make up 32% of the ticket buyers. 64% of the moviegoers are dominated by audience over the age of 25. "We always knew we were going to outperform expectations, and I believe the film will have long legs," Open Road's Tom Ortenberg says of the film's opening result.
Read Full Story
TV News
Primetime Emmys 2012: Eric Stonestreet, Julie Bowen and Jon Cryer Among Early Winners
September 24, 2012 01:09:34 GMT
Modern Family
" was triumphant as soon as the 64th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards was kicked off Sunday, September 23. The ABC series claimed three of the first kudos presented that night with a win for
Eric Stonestreet
Julie Bowen
and Steven Levitan each.
Stonestreet nabbed the Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy for the second year in a row, beating out his own co-stars
Ed O'Neill
Jesse Tyler Ferguson
Ty Burrell
in addition to
Bill Hader
Saturday Night Live
") and
Max Greenfield
New Girl
"). The Cameron depicter gave a shout-out to his on-screen husband, Ferguson, in his speech, "There would be no Cam without Mitch."
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Primetime Emmys 2012: Sofia Vergara and Heidi Klum Stun on Red Carpet
September 24, 2012 00:54:44 GMT
A number of stars glittered the red carpet rolled out outside Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles on Sunday night, September 23 to attend the 64th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards. Among the bunch,
Sofia Vergara
Heidi Klum
stole attention by showing off their assets in their designer outfits.
Vergara flaunted her curves in turquoise Zuhair Murad gown with halter neckline and open back. She finished off her prime look with Neil Lane jewels. Klum showed off her leg in a pale-blue plunging Alexandre Vauthier Couture gown. She matched it with Lorraine Schwartz jewels and heeled sandals.
Read Full Story
TV News
Joseph Gordon-Levitt Strips to His Pants for 'SNL' Monologue
1 comment(s)
September 23, 2012 17:47:58 GMT
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
delivered the blow on "
Saturday Night Live
" right from the very beginning. Instead of going on and on about one joke to another in the opening monologue, the "
The Dark Knight
" actor cut the chase and stripped off to his pants to perform a strip dance ala "
Magic Mike
Gordon-Levitt began his monologue by announcing that "Magic Mike" was one of the biggest movies of 2012. He suddenly ripped off his suit and danced with umbrella to the tune of "It's Raining Men".
Kenan Thompson
and Nasim Pedrad were in the audience seats, being affected by the actor's performance.
Read Full Story
Celebrity Gossip
Fiona Apple Made Bizarre Speech About Her Drug Arrest
September 23, 2012 17:22:59 GMT
Fiona Apple
took some minutes off her Friday, September 21 concert in Houston, Texas to address her recent arrest for drug possession. In a bizarre speech, the singer mentioned several people who were involved when she was busted in the border checkpoint and jailed in Sierra Blanca, Texas on Wednesday.
"There are four of you out there, and I want you to know that I heard everything you did, I wrote it all down with your names and everything you did and said, stupidly thinking that I couldn't hear or see you. I then ripped the paper up, but not before I encoded it," Apple told the audience.
Read Full Story
Older Posts
Newer Posts
Jim Carrey Makes Dating Announcement in 'Saturday Night Live' Promo
Novak Djokovic and Wife Welcome Son
Mac Miller Joins Warner Bros.
'Avengers 2' Trailer to Debut on 'Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.'
Renee Zellweger Comments on Her New Look
Selena Gomez Fuels Dating Rumors With Orlando Bloom
Gwen Stefani's 'Baby Don't Lie' Music Video
Cobie Smulders Expecting Second Baby
Hannibal Buress Calls Bill Cosby a Rapist
Lorde Unveils Tracklist of 'Mockingjay' Soundtrack
Kesha Denied Date Rape by Dr. Luke in 2011 Deposition
Winner of 'The Voice Italy' Covers Madonna's 'Like a Virgin'
FX Cancels 'The Bridge' After Two Seasons
James Wan to Direct 'The Conjuring 2'
Alan Cumming Recalls Shia LaBeouf 'Cabaret' Incident
Pitbull to Host 2014 AMAs
October 2014
Amanda Bynes
Brad Pitt
Bruce Jenner
Casey Wilson
Chrissy Teigen
Emma Watson
Howard Stern
Jay Leno
Jennifer Lopez
Jessica Simpson
Kaley Cuoco
Kevin Hart
Keyshia Cole
Matthew McConaughey
Meagan Good
Missy Elliott
Nina Dobrev
Renee Zellweger
Rich Homie Quan
Robin Williams
Rod Stewart
Tim McGraw
Vanessa Williams
Viola Davis
Whoopi Goldberg
Back to Top
Terms of Use, Copyright, and Privacy Policy © 2005-2014 ACESHOWBIZ.com


text:
In our language we have the word 'friend', and the word 'soul mate' which is essentially romantic by nature. But how would you describe someone that falls in between? Someone who is more than just a 'best friend' but doesn't have the romantic and sexual attraction of a 'soul mate'? We need to create new words to express these relationships we have with others. Here are a few words that help to distinguish these deep connections we have in life: soul friend, soul teacher, soul companion, soul twin.
Have you ever wondered if there is such a thing as true love, like in the good old movies of Casablanca or The Notebook? Maybe you've found your true love. Or perhaps you're still searching.
If you aren't experiencing healthy and loving partnerships, take this as a sign that it is time to get to know yourself. Commit to YOU and in no time you will get back on the path of peace once and for all.
Sometimes an initially healthy, energizing friendship turns weighty and oppressive; the needy scale begins tipping in one direction and never balances back out. Being together is no longer fun—nearly every encounter becomes downright depressing. But your friend was there for you in the past and you feel obligated to be there for them now. The problem is that your debt never seems to get paid off.
"What is love?" is perhaps one of the most pondered about questions of our existence. Is it a feeling? An emotion? Is it who we are? Is it something we all feel? Love can make us feel and do many different things in our lives and today we're going to explore the idea that there may be two types of love: healthy love and unhealthy love.
Forgiveness is a hard concept for many of us to grasp. Some think forgiveness is about letting someone who has wronged us off the hook or reinforcing their bad behavior. Forgiveness does not justify a wrongdoing. We can sincerely forgive someone without excusing their actions. It actually has very little to do with the other person. It is all about letting the burden of our own resentments go.
Do you get in arguments, drama, angry disagreements? Regularly? With the same people over and over again? If so, please take some time to see if it's because of anything you've been keeping in your Secret Box! What do I mean by Secret Box? Sometimes in life, for many different reasons we may hide things. We may hide things from our friends, family, lovers and others. We may even hide things from ourselves!
Emotional freedom means learning how to stay centered in a stressful, highly emotionally charged world. Since emotions such as fear, anger, and frustration are energies, you can potentially "catch" them from people without realizing it. If you tend to be an emotional sponge, it's vital to know how to avoid taking on an individual's negative emotions or the free-floating kind in crowds. Here are some strategies from Emotional Freedom to practice. They will help you to stop absorbing other people's emotions.
How do you feeling complete and connected to the Earth and others? It takes effort, but it is worth it. We must bring our focus outside of ourselves to allow us to reach out to people and to the world around us in positive ways. Loving, laughing, giving ourselves to others, spending time with friends and those in need to taking care of the environment or a companion animal, all promote positive interaction. Here are 10 steps to help you get connected.
Relationships are a beautiful part of life. Whether they are romantic or just friendly, connecting with another human being is undoubtedly one of the best experiences that life has to offer. Within relationships, as is the case with so many other things in life, change is inevitable. I doubt that there are very many of us, if any, that have maintained the exact same partner and/or core group of friends throughout the vast majority of our lives.
Love makes the world go round. It's the glue that hold everything together. Love is what we are made of. We are made of love and made to love. Our true nature is love and by trying to move away from love, by saying that we want to give up on love, we slowly but surely move away from who we truly are. We move away from our true nature, drifting away and feeling more and more disoriented, disconnected and confused. The biggest mistake anyone can make is to give up on love.
Are We Really Meant To Be Monogamous? Why We Cheat On People We Love & How To Make Any Relationship Work
With the way divorce rates are climbing, it is safe to say that above all else, any relationship should at least offer each individual freedom. This is most crucial. Letting go of the idea that we own our partners or that they owe us something will change the way we experience relationships. With freedom, honesty, and unconditional love, we offer any person the chance to grow and become the best version of themselves, and what is more important than that?
In my book "Guide to Intuitive Healing" I discuss the difference between lust and love as well as techniques to enhance sexual wellness. Pure lust is based solely on physical attraction and fantasyit often dissipates when the "real person" surfaces. It's the stage of wearing rose colored glasses when he or she "can do no wrong." Being in love doesn't exclude lust. In fact, lust can lead to love. However, real love, not based on idealization or projection, requires time to get to know each other. Here are some signs to watch for to differentiate pure lust from love.
"It was Valentine's Day and I just found out that my husband of 10 years had purchased a gift for another woman. All day I was numb. Surreally, I drifted through my day with heaviness in my heart. I hung onto denial like it was my last friend in the world. I couldn't bear the […]
Have you ever had a friend, co-worker, teammate or even someone in your family that just seems to put a damper on things all the time? Whether it be with their habits, character traits or the need to be negative, sometimes people in our lives can provide some interesting challenges. But that in and of itself is already a huge thing to realize: although some people may feel "toxic" to us at times, they are actually playing a great role for us. When you look at it, no one is actually "toxic" or "bad," they are simply having an experience and in our eyes, we are perceiving them in a certain way.


text:
- Text Size:
- ASmall Text
- AMedium Text
- ALarge Text
After having little for which to smile to begin their eight-game road trip, the Toronto Blue Jays could take a major step in reversing their fortunes on Sunday as they vie for the series victory against the host Chicago White Sox. Melky Cabrera isn't to blame for Toronto's troubles as he drove in two runs for the second straight outing in Saturday's 6-3 win. The Dominican has collected 16 hits in his last 11 contests for the Blue Jays, who improved to 1-4 on their road trip and 4-10 in August to move 3 1/2 games behind Detroit in the race for the second wild card in the American League.Chicago isn't doing much smiling after dropping nine of its last 13, but did receive some positive news as Avisail Garcia (shoulder) went 2-for-4 with an RBI single in his return from the 60-day disabled list. With the White Sox comfortably out of contention, slugger Adam Dunn admitted to MLB.com that this season could be his last. "I would say there's probably a really good chance actually," the 34-year-old said. "But again, I'm not making any decisions or anything yet."TV: 2:10 p.m. ET, RSN (Toronto), WGN (Chicago)PITCHING MATCHUP: Blue Jays RH Drew Hutchison (8-10, 4.60 ERA) vs. White Sox RH Scott Carroll (4-7, 4.81)Hutchison allowed six runs for the third time in six outings to suffer the loss against Seattle on Monday. The 23-year-old has also been taken deep in each of his last five starts after serving up just 11 homers in his previous 19 outings. Hutchison, who has yet to face the White Sox in his brief career, is 1-3 in his last five road starts to even his mark at 5-5 away from home.After having his previous outing skipped due to a blister on his throwing hand, Carroll vies for his first win since July 12 when he takes the mound Sunday. The 29-year-old struggled mightily in his last game, allowing three homers and seven runs total in five innings en route to a 13-3 setback to the Mariners on Aug. 7. Carroll was also tagged for five runs in as many innings to take the loss in a 7-0 decision versus Toronto on June 26.WALK-OFFS1. Toronto SS Jose Reyes has hit safely in eight straight and 14 of his last 16.2. Chicago rookie 1B Jose Abreu is 5-for-9 with three RBIs and three runs scored in the series.3. Blue Jays 1B/DH Edwin Encarnacion is 1-for-9 in two games since returning from the disabled list with a strained right quadriceps muscle.PREDICTION: Blue Jays 6, White Sox 2


text:
Hamilton Beach, the small appliance business of NACCO Industries, had fourth quarter 2012 net income of $12.7 million, up from $12.0 million in 4Q 2011. Income was helped by better sales of higher-margin products. Hamilton Beach 4Q 2012 revenues were $181.2 million, up 12% from $161.4 million in 4Q 2011. The increase came from stronger unit sales volumes of higher-priced products, primarily in the U.S. consumer retail market.
For full-year 2012, Hamilton Beach net income was $21.2 million on revenues of $521.6 million. Net income in full-year 2011 was $18.4 million on revenues of $493.0 million in 2011.
NACCO Industries as a whole reported fourth quarter 2012 consolidated income from continuing operations of $23.7 million on revenues of $318.2 million. This compares to 4Q 2011 consolidated income from continuing operations of $29.9 million and revenues of $273.9 million.
In addition to Hamilton Beach and retail chain Kitchen Collection, NACCO's other business segment is North American Coal. A fourth business segment, Material Handling, was spun off in September of 2012.
Hamilton Beach sees its target customer, the middle-market mass consumer, continuing to have financial and economic concerns. It expects sales volumes in the middle-market of the U.S. small kitchen appliance market to show only moderate growth in 2013. The company expects its international and commercial product markets to grow reasonably in 2013.
to Daily News
Daily News
Aug 28, 2014: LG Heat Pump Clothes Dryer Earns Emerging Technology Award
Aug 28, 2014: Early Snowthrower Demand Boosts Toro Sales
Aug 27, 2014: Sustainability Standard Launched for Household Portable and Floor Care Appliances
Aug 27, 2014: Electrolux Joins AllSeen Alliance to Develop Seamlessly Connected Appliances
Aug 27, 2014: HRAI Awards Industry Leaders at 46th Annual Meeting
Daily News>>
September 2014: Appliance Industry Focus: HVAC
June 2014: Appliance Magazine Market Insight: April 2014
May 2014: Appliance Magazine Market Insight: March 2014
April 2014: Appliance Magazine Market Insight: February 2014