<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Summer Spending Solstice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.canajunfinances.com/2008/06/17/summer-spending-solstice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.canajunfinances.com/2008/06/17/summer-spending-solstice/</link>
	<description>Personal Finances and Consumer Concerns, essays, stories, examples and how to articles with a distinctly Canadian Point of View</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:56:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gene</title>
		<link>http://www.canajunfinances.com/2008/06/17/summer-spending-solstice/#comment-1743</link>
		<dc:creator>Gene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canajunfinances.com/?p=925#comment-1743</guid>
		<description>Great posts today.

I like the summer spending solstice phrase.  Seems to fit nicely with Tax Freedom Day this week.  Interesting that you see the lull in spending, and it makes sense.  Makes me think of the larger cycle too, where spending increases after marriage, house purchase and children, and again as the kids go to university (unless they get decent summer jobs, part time jobs, or student loans), then the lull again after the house is paid off and the kids leave home.  At least until they move back in by their mid-20s.

The section about BCE considering the dividend cut makes me think of how management often acts in their own best interest rather than the owners'.  I'm not entirely sure in this case, but that is broadly true.  I think the structure of a publicly traded company, with the board of directors supposedly looking out for owners is flawed, and the ownership base is too diluted.  It's laughable to think that a company manager with a sole owner would act as audaciously as some CEOs.  For example, how could directors willingly back-date options if they were REALLY looking out for the owners?  Why would owners willingly pay a CEO millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars when a similar candidate for CEO would be willing to work for perhaps 20% as much?

Anyway, I'll step down from the soapbox.  Again, great post today, BCM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great posts today.</p>
<p>I like the summer spending solstice phrase.  Seems to fit nicely with Tax Freedom Day this week.  Interesting that you see the lull in spending, and it makes sense.  Makes me think of the larger cycle too, where spending increases after marriage, house purchase and children, and again as the kids go to university (unless they get decent summer jobs, part time jobs, or student loans), then the lull again after the house is paid off and the kids leave home.  At least until they move back in by their mid-20s.</p>
<p>The section about BCE considering the dividend cut makes me think of how management often acts in their own best interest rather than the owners&#8217;.  I&#8217;m not entirely sure in this case, but that is broadly true.  I think the structure of a publicly traded company, with the board of directors supposedly looking out for owners is flawed, and the ownership base is too diluted.  It&#8217;s laughable to think that a company manager with a sole owner would act as audaciously as some CEOs.  For example, how could directors willingly back-date options if they were REALLY looking out for the owners?  Why would owners willingly pay a CEO millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars when a similar candidate for CEO would be willing to work for perhaps 20% as much?</p>
<p>Anyway, I&#8217;ll step down from the soapbox.  Again, great post today, BCM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
