A recent report states that Facebook was mentioned in one-third of all divorce cases in 2011. Oddly, the story didnt say what was mentioned in the other two-thirds of divorces. I would guess drinking, drugs, cheating, gambling and violence popped up quite a bit, with an occasional mention of man caves, tattoos, topless bars, video games, secret second families, unemployment, child endangerment, immaturity, desertion and irreconcilable differences (as if all the other reasons are reconcilable).
So, obviously, Facebook is the No. 1 problem. Say you learn that your husband is cheating on you from a friend on Facebook. Is Facebook really the problem? Of course it is. Your husband wouldnt have cheated if he knew you would find out about it so soon. He was hoping you would find out years from now, after the affair was over, so he could say: Stop digging up the past. Its over; its time to move on. That was years ago. I have a completely new girlfriend now. Why is Facebook trying to wreck our happy home?
Trashing Facebook is a story that almost writes itself, whereas writing about people who should never have gotten married in the first place is a little more difficult. Married and pregnant at 16 and it didnt work out? Blame Facebook. Life didnt become a fairy tale after marrying the boss, who still treats you like an employee? Blame Facebook.
Writing about the evils of Facebook is easy, especially for those people who can see no earthly reason to be on Facebook. I already have plenty of friends, is an oft-heard comment.
I, too, have a problem with Facebook, even though I use it and even though I suffer from OCD (obsessive computer disorder), a malady that makes me check the balance of my IRA 10 times a day and my email 10 times an hour. But if my marriage ever goes south, it will be because I am a jerk and not because I started posting pictures of cute cats on Facebook.
Theres plenty to criticize FB for its huge invasion of privacy, for one. If your friends dont already know your birthday, are they really your friends? Or are they identity thieves? Why would you broadcast this kind of information to strangers on the Internet? If Facebook asked for mothers maiden names and Social Security numbers, there is no doubt most users would willingly provide them.
The hype over Facebooks initial public offering was also disturbing. Facebook already has 900 million members. Look how fast it has grown, my stock-buying friends say. But do you really think there is someone out there who wants to be on Facebook but just hasnt had time to sign up? Facebook has all the members (within a few hundred million) it is ever going to get. It is not going to grow. As a matter of fact, it is going to shrink as other, more discriminating social networks proliferate.
You may already have plenty of friends, but do you have the right friends? Even with the iffy IPO, Facebook will make scads of money. It has only 3,500 employees. Compare that to the 200,000 at General Motors or the 500,000 at the U.S. Post Office. Facebook lets its computers do all the work; its not the kind of business that needs a lot of hot bodies. It will make a ton of money on advertising, but that doesnt mean the Johnny-come-lately IPO investors will make any money. Its Apples and Googles.
So does Facebook cause divorce? The spouses who mention Facebook in their filings would have gotten divorced anyway, Im sure. But I wonder how many people have caught up with old flames on Facebook and gotten married? How many weddings have taken place because of Facebook and other social networks? Should there be two sides to this story?
No, of course not. Whatever was I thinking?
Jim Mullens newest book, How to Lose Money in Your Spare Time At Home, is available at amazon.com. You can follow him on Pinterest at pinterest.com/jimmullen.
Source: www.evesun.com
BP's Good Divorce Better Than a Bad Marriage - Moscow Times
BP surprised analysts Friday when it informed AAR, its Russian joint-venture partner in TNK-BP, that it would consider selling its 50 percent stake. Another surprise had come three days earlier when TNK-BP co-owner Mikhail Fridman announced his intention to resign from the joint venture. AAR, which has preferential rights to purchase BP's shares, has already announced its readiness to buy out the BP stake. The TNK-BP alliance has been plagued with serious troubles from its founding in 2003. In such cases, it is often said that a good divorce is better than a bad marriage.
Friday's announcement is just the latest chapter in a long history of internal conflicts between the two joint-venture partners. Today, TNK-BP does not even have a functioning board of directors, and the ongoing conflicts have made it difficult to agree on strategic plans for development.
At the same time, however, BP's investment in Russia has been its most lucrative in recent history. While BP invested about $8 billion to set up TNK-BP with AAR in 2003, it has reaped $19 billion in dividends since then, and the value of its stake has increased by more than four times. Moreover, after the disastrous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, it was the company's Russian partners that helped it through its financial difficulties by purchasing BP assets in Brazil and Venezuela at market prices.
The current escalation of the internal TNK-BP conflict is apparently a direct result of last year's heated quarrel, when BP wanted to enter into a partnership with state-controlled to gain access to Russia's Arctic shelf. But AAR felt the proposed deal had violated its exclusivity agreement with BP to develop other projects in Russia and challenged the BP-Rosneft agreement in the International Court of Arbitration.
To the surprise of many, then-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin did not intervene on the side of his ally, Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, who had close ties to Rosneft. Putin let the terms of the BP-AAR investment agreement determine the outcome. In the end, the BP-Rosneft deal collapsed. For his part, Sechin rejected a bid by the AAR consortium to partner with Rosneft in developing the Arctic shelf. Rosneft later formed an alliance with ExxonMobil.
Most likely, if the TNK-BP divorce is completed, it could lead to the state strengthening its control over the oil industry. Only two domestic companies have the resources to buy the BP stake, valued at $30 billion to $35 billion. One is . Although its management structure is opaque, the company has the available funds to buy out BP's stake. The other purchaser could be Rosneftegaz, which owns 75 percent of Rosneft and 10 percent of Gazprom, and is closely linked to Sechin. Although Sechin is not a member of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's new government, Putin wasted no time in signing orders that place an enormous part of the country's fuel and energy complex under his control.
Through Rosneftegaz's purchase of BP's shares in TNK-BP, the Kremlin could create a state-owned mega oil company along the lines of Gazprom, the state's giant gas monopoly. Sechin is also said to oppose the new privatization of the Russian energy sector. If Rosneftegaz expanded its market position by buying out the BP stake, it would provide yet another dangerous example of heavy government intervention in the economy and would likely spark a continuation of capital flight and a further worsening of the investment climate.
If the state is looking to increase its control over the oil industry, it will not allow AAR to snatch up the BP stake. On the contrary, the authorities will surely bring enormous pressure to bear on AAR to convince it to step aside. For example, the state has already had success in using its "environmental weapon" against BP, citing trumped-up charges of violations to force the company to pay almost $1 billion to clean up Samotlor, Russia's biggest oil field. Few in the government seemed to care that the site was heavily polluted during the Soviet period — long before BP entered the picture.
In another possible scenario, if Rosneft trades shares for the BP stake in the consortium, BP could use that roundabout approach to finally obtain its coveted access to the Arctic shelf through some form of partnership with Rosneft.
In any case, by announcing its readiness to leave the partnership with TNK, BP has showed how fed up it is with the problems of working in Russia's difficult business environment. At this point, state intervention in the deal is inevitable. Knowing this, it would make sense for BP to negotiate directly with the country's leadership. If BP plays its cards right, one visit to President Putin's office could be enough to solve all of its problems.
Georgy Bovt is a political analyst.
Source: www.themoscowtimes.com
BUMGARDNER: Divorce doesn't have to derail your financial security - News-Herald
Divorce is rarely a life event that one plans for, but while many couples live happily ever after, some undoubtedly will go their separate ways. A divorce can be emotionally devastating, but it doesn’t have to derail your long-term financial security. If you’re facing a divorce, consider these steps to protect and claim what’s yours:
•Understand your assets. A divorce can be expensive, especially if you fail to spend the appropriate amount of time reviewing and discussing your finances as you go through the process. Educate yourself by examining investment and bank statements, qualified plan and pension information, tax returns, mortgage information and insurance policies.
Before you can begin to split the assets you’ve accumulated as a couple, you should know your total net worth so that you’ll be able to assess how the divorce will impact your financial goals.
•Consider the big picture. When deciding how to split the nest egg, it helps to look into the future and think about how your lives will look postdivorce. Will you have short-term needs — like buying a home and furniture, new or continued child care costs or paying an attorney — that require immediate funding? Will you be able to replenish your retirement assets if you must use them to pay for these unexpected expenses?
Develop a detailed written financial plan as a soon-to-be single so that you can act in your best interest when deciding which assets will best fit your needs.
•Think about tax consequences. Most retirement plans are made up of pre-tax dollars, meaning your contributions won’t be taxed until you withdraw them. This can be beneficial if you believe your income and tax rate will be lower in retirement — but it also means the amount of cash you’ll be able to use to meet your day-to-day expenses will be less than what you actually withdraw.
Be sure you’re aware of how taxes can affect your retirement income as you divide assets with your former spouse. Trusted financial, tax and legal advisers are especially valuable as you make such important decisions.
•Follow the rules. If you decide that it makes sense to divide funds from you and your former spouse’s 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts, it’s important to carefully follow state and local guidelines. This process is complicated, so be sure that your divorce settlement states specifically how assets are to be divided and transferred.
Dividing a pension or 401(k) plan might require a qualified domestic relations order, which allows funds to be withdrawn without penalty and deposited into a separate retirement account. Make sure that you discuss preparation of such an instrument with your attorney.
•Update your financial accounts. Once your divorce is final, revise the beneficiaries on your checking and savings accounts, investments, retirement plans and life insurance. Also re-evaluate your insurance policies and confirm that you still have adequate coverage for you and any dependents. Nothing can undermine your financial security faster than an uninsured accident or illness. Once the dust has settled on your divorce, create a new will or update the existing document to reflect your new marital status. Continued...
Source: www.thenewsherald.com
No comments:
Post a Comment