Republican Senator James DeMint Traveling to Honduras - The Note
ABC News has confirmed Senator James DeMint is traveling to Honduras on Friday to meet with de facto President Roberto Micheletti and members of the Honduras Congress. The focus of the visit will be the upcoming November elections …
BNO News Updates Its Great iPhone App, Lets You Harness Stream Of …
One of my favorite iPhone applications is BNO News — a lightweight app that lets you receive messages from the BNO newswire. The …
Perez Hilton: Some Very Good News For A Desperate Housewife!
Since 2004, Hollywood's most hated website has been delivering the juiciest celebrity gossip. The blog is The go-to source for daily happenings in Hollywood. Written by the internet's most notorious gossip columnist, Perez Hilton (Mario …
The bad economy is dramatically impacting family life. It is not only impacting how many children families are deciding to have, but it is also changing what opportunities are available for kids and how they interact with their families. While many of the impacts of the bad economy are negative, there are also a few positive changes that are taking place in the American family unit that will benefit kids of this generation in the future.
Family Planning
One of the biggest impacts that the bad economy is having on families is that it is dramatically reducing birthrates. This reduction comes from conscious choices made by couples to put off having children until the economy improves and from conscious choices to limit the number of children that a family has in total. This trend is supported by an increase in the number of vasectomies that men are getting and the increase usage of hormonal and barrier type birth control by women. Furthermore, adoption inquiries have also experienced a decline since the downturn of the economy. This demonstrates how concerned parents are about being able to support a family.
School Problems
Another aspect of children's lives that are being impacted by the bad economy is their school experience. There are several problems that have developed in school systems as a result of the bad economy. First of all, many school districts are cutting gifted programs and other “non-essential” educational programs including music and art. These cuts have been criticized by many who think that some schools are just using the struggling economy as an excuse to make cuts to special programming in their districts.
Another problem that is becoming a huge problem is that more sick kids are coming to school. This trend is being caused by the fact that many kids come from homes where their parents work. When the child gets sick they are sent to school because either the parent is afraid of losing their job if they stay home with their sick child or they can't afford to miss a day of work. Since most kids contract an average of six to ten colds each school year, the number of sick and contagious kids at school is increasing. With the swine flu epidemic looming in the background, this is just not a safe situation for children, teachers or parents.
Families Are Stronger
While many aspects of children's lives are negatively impacted by the bad economy there is one place where things seem to be improving, family life. Many families no longer can support a life of excess. This means that they are staying home and spending more time doing things as a family. This is a huge advantage for kids, who have in recent generations been offered little quality time with their family.
Another advantage of growing up in a bad economy is that kids are learning practical skills that will help them to thrive in the future. They are learning to economize, to survive using fewer resources and to focus on what truly matters in life; family, friends and health. All of these skills will help today's children to be better leaders of the next generation.
References
Anonymous. (2009, February 20). “Bad economy means more sick kids going to school.” KFMB-TV. Retrieved from the World Wide Web 09.22.09 from http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=9881752
Bainbridge, Carol. (2009, April 15). “Bad economy affects gifted kids.” Carol's Gifted Children Blog. Retrieved from the World Wide Web 09.22.09 from http://giftedkids.about.com/b/2009/04/15/bad-economy-effects-gifted-kids.htm
George, Cindy. (2009, May 18). “Taking birth out budget: Women are delaying having children because of economic slump.” Houston Chronicle. Online version accessed 09.22.09 from http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6428622.html
Skipper, Jason. (2009). “Thank God our kids are being raised in a bad economy.” Playground Magazine. Online version accessed 09.22.09 from http://www.playground-magazine.com/2009/03/thank-god-our-kids-are-being-raised-in-a-bad-economy/
NEW YORK (Fortune) — Ken Lewis doesn't have a golden parachute, but he's all set for a comfortable landing — unlike his long-suffering shareholders.
The Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) chief executive officer said Wednesday he'll step aside at year-end after eight years at the helm. Based on the company's most recent proxy statement, he will have $53 million in pension benefits waiting for him when he leaves.
That should give him about $3.5 million a year in pension payouts for the rest of his life — at a time when people who bought the stock when he took the reins in 2001 are underwater on their investments.
Although the bank swore off employment contracts and eliminated golden parachutes seven years ago, Lewis can thank a pension plan that dates back decades for his rich retirement rewards.
While this plan was open, certain top executives were eligible to accrue benefits they would receive following retirement in the form of annuity payments.
Lewis was the biggest winner in these plans, but other BofA execs benefited as well. Vice Chairman James Hance, for instance, retired in 2005 with an indicated annual benefit of $2.7 million.
Ironically, BofA decided to freeze this so-called supplemental executive retirement plan at the same time it got rid of golden parachutes, citing the need to better align executive compensation with investor returns. By any measure, those have been poor at BofA of late.
The company's stock fetches less than half its year-ago price and remains below its level when Lewis took over in April 2001 — even after a 563% jump off lows from this March.
But before BofA made its compensation switch, Lewis had participated for more than a decade in the supplemental pension plan — racking up the more than $50 million supplemental plan account.
That's not all. Lewis also has $10 million in deferred compensation owed to him and another $8 million in restricted stock and stock options as of Dec. 31 that will continue to vest over coming years, according to the most recent proxy filing. BofA referred questions about Lewis' retirement plan to those filings.
Assessing a total value on Lewis' walking-away pay is an inexact science, given changes in BofA's stock price and other factors.
But Paul Hodgson, the research director at the Corporate Watchdog, an executive pay tracker, said his firm's most recent survey of retirement plans puts Lewis' take at $64 million.
That number is down by more than half from 2006, when BofA shares traded above $50, compared with a recent $16.21. But it still “puts him in the top 40″ nationwide, Hodgson said.
Not that Lewis should need the money. Though his cash salary has been $1.5 million annually since he took the reins in 2001, he has managed to chalk up $63 million in pay and perks over the past three years, according to filings — including almost $10 million last year, which ended with Lewis bickering with federal officials over the terms of its purchase of brokerage Merrill Lynch.
In the end, the U.S. backed BofA's purchase of Merrill — but at a steep cost to Lewis' standing with shareholders, who stripped him in April of his chairmanship, prompting numerous critics to start the countdown to his departure.
“Ken Lewis's resignation as CEO is the overdue but inevitable result of the overwhelming shareholder opposition registered at Bank of America's 2009 annual meeting,” the CtW Investment Group, long a vocal critic of Lewis' leadership, said in a statement Wednesday evening. “The onus is now on the board of directors to engage with shareholders to name a successor who can quickly restore the bank's credibility with investors, regulators and Congress.”
Lewis' decision to throw tens of billions of shareholder dollars at Merrill when it was on the brink of collapse even drew chortles from the likes of Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who last month dubbed Lewis the “ironic hero” of the meltdown.
But with BofA shares down two-thirds from their 2006 highs, Lewis will depart as no hero to investors — ironic or otherwise. 
Michael Cook