Your Questions About Paper Trading Futures

Sandy asks…

My player Vinny…traded?

According to the St. Petersburg Times, Vincent Lecavalier’s future with the Lightning might be contingent on the club finding new investors.
Lightning co-owner Len Barrie wants to keep Lecavalier in Tampa, but opened the door to a possible move.

“He’s a generational player,” Barrie told the Times. “He’s one of the top five players in the league when he’s healthy. You never say never, but am I waiting for [a trade]? No.”

Lecavalier, 29, signed an 11-year, $85 million contract extension last summer. The deal includes a no-trade clause, but doesn’t kick in until July 1.

The Times suggests the Lightning could trade Lecavalier around the June NHL Entry Draft in Montreal and rebuild the team based on what can be acquired in a deal.

However, the paper also notes that if an investor, or more, can jump on board to help pay a large portion of what OK Hockey owes after purchasing the team (approximately $100 million remaining), the situation could change.

The team is presently in debt, but is expected to receive about $14 million through league revenue sharing.

“If we put ourselves in a non-debt situation, what we’re paying now in interest and fees can go into getting players instead of to the banks,” said Barrie, who claims to have “several” inquiries about investing in the Lightning.

Barrie doesn’t believe the team is in any significant jeopardy, but without investors, the team might have no other choice but to alleviate itself from Lecavalier’s contract.

“We need to put good players around good players,” Barrie said. “If we make two or three moves, shore up the defense, maybe add a forward, we’re in pretty good shape.”

What do you make of this, would you want him on your team, after last years piss poor performance I don’t know if I would really want him only because of his contract.

John answers:

If the Lightning were smart, they would completely ignore trading this man. Martin St. Louis would be a better trade fit, and people would definitely shell out for St. Louis because he is unbelievable. But to even think of trading Lecavalier would be absolutely retarded. Then again, after this year’s display, they need all the help they can get.

I like the Lightning, but I also love changes and big deals in the league. Something to go “ooohhh next season he’s gonna make our team the best” over. Therefore, I would like to see Vinny L. Go for that reason only. Plus, he deserves so much more right now.

And I agree with the article.. When healthy, HANDS DOWN one of the top 5 all around players in the league.

Joseph asks…

Fantasy Football Trade?

Should I trade FJax, Beanie and Bowe for CJ2K, Vick and Ocho?

I’m tempted, but…Ocho is obviously garbage filler, and giving up Bowe concerns me due to my already relatively weak WR corps…

But with my RB depth, I may be able to cash in on Vick or CJ in a trade for a top tier WR down the line…

I’d rather he pony up another better WR, he has Sidney Rice and DJax which would even this deal out on paper a little more…

I’m 4-0 in 1st place, so looking to set myself up for the future…

My team:
QB: Big Ben/Eli
RB: Rice/McCoy/FJax/Beanie/Lynch (Start 3)
WR: Wallace/Maclin/Bowe/Knox/Colston/Gaffney/Ward (Start 4!)
TE: Finley

John answers:

I don’t like the deal at all. Vick has struggled to stay healthy behind a line that’s letting him get hit like crazy. And Johnson has struggled this year, and with a bad passing offense that got worse when Kenny Britt was lost for the season I expect Tennessee will see a lot of defenses putting 8 men in the box to stop CJ and letting Tennessee try to pass on them. I don’t like making a big deal for either of those guys right now.

You’re fine at QB with a rotation of Ben and Eli, playing the matchups. Your WR depth is definitely shallow though, so trading a top WR would be dangerous. Plus you’re running into the bye weeks, and Lynch sucks horribly this year, so you probably want to keep your RB depth so you have a third RB to fill in when one of your top 3 is on bye. And what happens if Rice or McCoy gets hurt? Then you’re stuck with CJ as a #2 RB, and no quality #3 RB.

I like the way your team is set up now. You do still need to hunt for a 4th WR, but this trade doesn’t help you do that at all and WR is the easiest position to fill from free agency. But I like your rotations at QB and RB, I wouldn’t mess with those at all right now. Sometimes the best move is the one you didn’t make… That’s where I see this team now. Ride them to a playoff spot.

Linda asks…

Conservatives — Can you read this summary of the Cap and Trade bill without foaming at the mouth?

Summary Of The Waxman-Markey Climate Bill: American Clean Energy and Security Act.
June 27th, 2009 • Related • Filed Under

Some of the key points of the American Clean Energy & Security Act from Grist, since they know better than I do. You can head to their site to read the nitty gritty, but here is a general summary:

Renewable electricity standard

The bill creates a renewable electricity standard (RES) that would require large utilities in each state to produce an increasing percentage of their electricity from renewable sources. Qualifying renewable sources are wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, marine and hydrokinetic energy, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, hydropower projects built after 1992, and some waste-to-energy projects.

Emission cuts

The bill would put a cap on emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases, and would require high-emitting industries to reduce their output to specific targets between now and the middle of the century. (This is the “cap” part of the “cap-and-trade” program.) The bill covers 85 percent of the overall economy, including electricity producers, oil refineries, natural gas suppliers, and energy-intensive industries like iron, steel, cement, and paper manufacturers.

Emission permits

Regulated industries would need to acquire permits for their emissions. (Emission permits are also referred to as “carbon credits,” “pollution allowances,” and various combinations of these words.)

If a company cuts its emissions so much that it has more permits than it needs, it can sell excess permits to other companies or bank them for future use. If a company doesn’t have enough permits, it can buy more or borrow its future credits and pay interest on them. Non-regulated entities (banks, nonprofits, people like you) can also buy and sell permits. (This is the “trade” part of the “cap-and-trade” program.) If a company’s emissions exceed its permits, it would be fined two times the fair market value of the permits it should have purchased.

How permit auction revenue would be spent

About 15 percent of the pollution permits would be sold by the federal government in the initial years of the program. Here’s how the revenue would be spent (shown as a percentage of the value of all permits):

* 15 percent would be used to offset increased energy costs for low- and moderate-income households
* 5 percent would be used to prevent international deforestation, scaling back to 3 percent from 2026 to 2030 and 2 percent from 2031 to 2050
* 2 percent would be used to help the U.S. adapt to the negative effects of climate change from 2012 through 2021, scaling up to 4 percent from 2022 through 2026 and 8 percent thereafter; half would be spent on wildlife and natural resources and the other half on other adaptation concerns, like public health

Investments in energy technology

By 2025, the bill would direct an estimated total of $190 billion to energy technologies and efficiency measures:

* $90 billion to energy-efficiency and renewable-energy technologies
* $60 billion to carbon-capture-and-sequestration technology
* $20 billion to electric vehicles and other advanced automotive technologies
* $20 billion for basic scientific research and development

Offsets

Regulated companies would be allowed to purchase carbon offsets to meet a portion of their required emission reductions—meaning they could fund clean-energy projects elsewhere instead of cutting their own emissions. This could lower the cost of complying with the new law.

Coal-fired power plants

* New coal plants could be built between 2009 and 2020, though they would be expected to adopt carbon-capture-and-sequestration (CCS) technologies when they become commercially available
* By 2025, all coal plants built after 2009 would have to capture 50 percent of their CO2 emissions

Worker transition

* Workers displaced due to new emission regulations would be entitled to 156 weeks of income supplement (70 percent of their average weekly wages), 80 percent of their monthly health-care premium, up to $1,500 for job-search assistance, and up to $1,500 for moving assistance

Smarter cars and smarter grids

* The bill includes a “cash-for-clunkers” program that would provide roughly 1 million vouchers, ranging from $3,500 to $4,500 in value, to consumers who trade in older, less-fuel efficient vehicles for new vehicles that get better gas mileage

http://www.thegoodhuman.com/2009/06/27/summary-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill-american-clean-energy-and-security-act/
Apparently they can’t…

John answers:

So, … It sounds like, in addition to substantial costs being passed on to the consumer, you’re counting on the means of energy production being sources that have minimal output. It’s unbelievable that anyone in their right mind supports this. The real question is: If and when programs like this, socialized medicine, and an unimaginably oversized budget take effect, what will the democrats do? You can only blame Bush for so long. So long!

Sandra asks…

Could you help edit this?

Daniel Shays was a poor farmer from Massachusetts before the Revolutionary War. He joined the continental army and was wounded in action. Therefore, he resigned from the army unpaid and went home to find himself in court for not paying his debts. The paper money circulating Massachusetts was basically worthless which made it impossible to pay off his debts. Shays’ Rebellion, the post-Revolutionary clash between New England farmers and merchants tested the precarious institutions of the new republic. The rebellion arose in Massachusetts in 1786 and was the first armed uprising of the new nation. Bands of angry farmers joined together to close law courts with force and free debtors from jail. The rebellion pointed out the weakness of the Articles of Confederation for governing the United States.The Articles could not tax the colonist’s efficiently. The central government recommended taxes but the states could reject those proposed taxes. Therefore, many of the states refused to pay taxes due to the debt that they were already facing from the Revolutionary War. The lack of governmental funding hindered the novel nation, as there was limited money to provide regulations on trade, industry and defense. The central government attempted to form a type of paper money to fix the economic struggles. However, the money had no gold to back it up so the Continentals were worthless. Other problems included not having a universal form of money so interstate trade was made difficult, which hindered the economic ability of the new nation. Article six of the Articles of Confederation sets out those powers not available to the states. It forbade standing navies and armies, with the exception of local militias. This caused difficulty if there ever was a rebellion since there was no central power to halt the revolt, therefore, Shay’s Rebellion to a long time for the bands of farmers to be defeated.In order to prevent such anarchy in the future and to strengthen the central government, the Philadelphia Convention convened to draft the Constitution in the spring of 1787. Shays’ Rebellion reflected the overall inadequacy of a political system dominated by semi sovereign states The rebellion warned the American leaders that the Articles of Confederation needed to be fixed or else the United States would continue falling into a situation of despair. The Constitutional convention consisting of delegates from twelve states came together to fix the major problems in the confederacy. With the many disagreements between large and small states, state power versus federal power, the constitution became the perfect balance of compromises. Convention members proposed that no state should coin their own money. This way, all of the money in the United States had the same worth as to keep inflation from escalating. The next consequence of Shays’ Rebellion on the Constitution was the need for the national government to have a standing army. Therefore, the United States created a national army that would be trained to settle problems in America. For the constitution to become ratified it needed nine out of the thirteen states to approve. The people in the newly formed country found themselves in a position of complete control over the government in which they were not used to. Scared of creating a country in which the people had no rights, the central government had limited power. However, without a powerful governing body, the United States was falling into disrepair. The difficulties in the Articles of Confederation culminated in Shay’s Rebellion that demonstrated the need for a standing army, ability of the federal government to collect taxes, and the for common currency throughout the United States. Therefore, to help the United States reach its full potential as a successful nation, the Constitution was written. It provided for a strong central government. Shay’s Rebellion caused our country to become stronger by uniting.
If you could fix some of the grammar/make it clearer/sound better in general that would be highly appreciated!

John answers:

Daniel Shays, a poor farmer from Massachusetts before the Revolutionary War, joined the Continental Army and was wounded in action. He resigned from the army unpaid and went home only to find himself in court for debts. But the paper money circulating in Massachusetts was essentially worthless because of inflation, which made it impossible for him to pay off his debts.

Shays’ Rebellion, the post-Revolutionary clash between New England farmers and merchants, tested the precarious institutions of the new republic. The rebellion arose in Massachusetts in 1786 — the first armed uprising of the new nation. Bands of angry farmers joined together to close law courts with force and to free debtors from jail.

The rebellion highlighted the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. For one thing, the Articles could not tax the colonists efficiently. The central government recommended taxes, but the states could reject them, and many of the states refused to pay taxes due to the debt they had already incurred during the Revolutionary War. The inability of the federal government to raise adequate amounts of money hindered the new nation, as there was limited funding to provide regulations on trade and industry or to pay for defense.

The central government attempted to form a type of paper money to address these economic concerns, but since the money had no gold backing it up, these “Continentals” were worthless. In addition, interstate trade was difficult because of the absence of a universal form of money, so the economic ability of the new nation was hindered.

Besides the problems the new nation faced regarding money, Shays’ Rebellion showed that the Articles of Confederation proved inadequate in another way as well. Article Six of the Articles set out those powers denied to the states. It forbade standing navies and armies, with the exception of local militias. This caused difficulty since there was no central power to halt the revolt, so it took a long time to defeat the bands of farmers of Shays’ Rebellion.

So in order to prevent such anarchy in the future and to strengthen the central government, the Philadelphia Convention convened to draft the Constitution in the spring of 1787. Shays’ Rebellion demonstrated the weaknesses of a political system dominated by semi-sovereign states. The Rebellion warned American leaders that the Articles of Confederation needed to be amended or the United States would continue to face disruptions. The Constitutional Convention, consisting of delegates from twelve states, came together to fix the major problems in the structure of the Confederacy.

With the many disagreements between large and small states, state power versus federal power, the constitution became a balance of compromises.
(Dear Student: This sentence is off-topic for your thesis, and you do not develop it in the rest of the paragraph. It should be deleted.)

For example, Convention members proposed that no state should coin its own money. This way, all of the money in the United States had the same worth, which served to keep inflation from escalating and enhanced interstate commerce. Another influence of Shays’ Rebellion on the Constitution was the establishment by the federal government of a standing army trained to settle problems in America.

Another helpful change was that for the Constitution to be ratified, the approval of only nine of the thirteen states was required, instead of the previous requirement of unanimity.
(Dear Student: This sentence is off-topic.)

Afraid of creating a country in which the people had no rights or control, the Convention delegates limited the powers of the central government. But in the absence of a powerful central governing body, the United States was falling into disrepair. The shortcomings in the Articles of Confederation that were illuminated by Shays’ Rebellion demonstrated the need for a standing army, for the ability of the federal government to collect taxes, and for a common currency throughout the United States. To help the United States reach its full potential as a successful nation, the Constitution provided for a strong central government, and Shays’ Rebellion was an important spur.

Dear Student:
1) This essay looks like a close re-write (without giving credit) of something from a book
2) You must settle on one spelling of Shays’ Rebellion in terms of the apostrophe

Lizzie asks…

choosing single parenthood (sorry if it’s a bit long, I like to explain in detail, lol)?

If you want to get straight to the question, scroll to the bottom lol

I am choosing single parenthood via AI/sperm donation.I have found a wonderful sperm bank that is taking “identity release” donation to a whole other level and offering video interviews of donors.I am lucky to be able to show my future child more than just a piece of paper with herritage and medical history.The “package” as I like to call it includes a 30-min. interview with the donor, along with an extended questionaire in his writing, a adult picture and a baby photo of donor.

I am so happy that this bank offers this service and some guys are willing to do this even though they know their identities will basically be blown.I think this is something a child would treasure growing up until they are able to meet their father (unlike ann. donors which I disagree with)

I am confident in my parenting abilities as I cared for a child (infant – toddler) when the parents skipped out on him and didn’t want to parent him.I’ve gained much experience from him and learned a few tricks of the trade.I own my own home, and in a more than stable financial position- that is not my worry.I have friends from all different backgrounds including single parenthouse holds, so naturally, I went to them before making this decision and talked with them about how they grew up, their feelings about their position etc. The ones who are emotionally disconnected are the ones who had a single parent that didn’t actually act like a parent although I know everyone is different.

Question for single parents or kids brought up in single households, what advice do you have? for the kids/adults- what are you grateful for that your parent did? what did you wish your parent did?

parents- what advice do you have for a soon to be single mother?

As of now, I only plan on one child but I am storing a few extra viles from the same donor in case I want another child.

John answers:

A good friend in California chose the anonymous donor plan. Her son was graduated a number of years ago with honors from Dartmouth on a full scholarship. She was always loving, mature, and supportive. He is productive and creative and remarkably generous with what little he happens to have. With patience, deliberate values, love and maturity, you can’t go wrong.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *