Plug-In Hybrid Electrical Vehicle - PHEV

As I got to the end of my Green Guide magazine I bumped into an ad that I thought was interesting. It read

Turn Over a New Leaf

Recycle Your Magazines!

I thought to myself that this is an ad that will help encourage environmentally friendly habits. Then I remembered that most local towns do not accept magazines for recycling, so I was hoping for a link or web address so that the reader could find a place to bring the magazine to make sure that it is recycle and not thrown in the trash.

The ad has no link or web address. How piss poor is that? What kind of executives run this company. The company by the way is Magazine Publishers of America (MPA). An industry that makes a living off of advertising failed to put up a URL for more information.

I thought to myself. No bid deal. I am sure that MPA has a website and a quick search will get me to a page that will show me and millions of others where they can go to recycle their magazines.

I quickly learn that they are located on the world wide web at http://www.magazine.org and after a few quick searches and clicks of the mouse I soon realize that they have not given the user an easy way to find out where to recycle magazines.

They have a big link that takes the user to a page that gloats about their advertising campaign. You can see it here http://www.magazine.org/environment/21345.aspx

The area I live in does not take magazines and this is the norm around the country and I am certain that the executives at MPA know this and they failed to leave this out with their feel good advertising campaign that was clearly done to help them feel better about their company and for no other reason.

Why not write articles about the fact that most local wast collection companies hired by our city and state government do not recycle most products.

Luckily for me I was able to find recycling drop off station that accepts most products that is about 25 minutes from my home and office. "NO THANKS TO MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS OF AMERICA"

So here is my message to you MPA. Please tell me I am wrong and I missed the link on your site. Please tell me that this is not some Public Image stunt to help you fight of the attacks and negative publicity being driven by Environmentalist and green consumers concerned about the waste and chemicals used by the Magazine industry.

Charlie Gasparino has no respect for others. He has no right to be on television as a reporter or journalist.

He might be smart guy. He might have something good to say but check the ego at the door jerk off.... If I want to listen to some ego maniac talk over others there are plenty of shows on Fox to watch...

Maybe you need to leave CNBC and head over to Fox News.

I am sick and tired of listening to jack asses that will not let others speak. If I wanted to watch jack asses on the report the news I would listen to Bill O'Reilly.

Get with the program and lose the ego.

You have nothing good to say because it is annoying and you cannot hardly hear what your saying because it is being muffled by your big head....

I don't watch CNBC because I want to be entertained. I watch it because I want to learn and make educated decisions.

You are not helping anyone make better decisions.

Pick up a book on how to listen on your way home today.

Labels: charlie gasparino

How did this guy land such a high level position a Goldman Sachs. How do these guys with no connection to the real world get to fuck up the real world with no concern regarding their stupid market making rhetoric.

It is amazing to me that people like Arjun get to make ridiculous speculative comments based on bad information and they never face any negative consequences. A lot like George Bush with Iraq. It becomes and inner office joke. "Hey Arjun, remember when you said oil would go to $200 a barrel, hahahaha"

How did guys like Arjun Murti somehow convince the world that $140 per barrel was completely logical. Who was verifying the demand was real? Who was taking trips to China to meet with the teams that were collecting and reporting on oil consumption data. India etc;
I heard everyday on CNBC that China's middle class was growing like a weed on steroids. Yet in my little office with my little computer I could not track any crazy demand on automobile consumption that made me think that oil at $140 a barrel made any sense. I heard experts talk about oil demand and that it would drop as soon as governments around the world could no longer afford to subsidize oil yet people like Arjun Murti and others seemed to ignore this fact. How does that happen? How do smart guys like Arjun just ignore real information that has a real impact on the value of oil?

I am not denying growth in China but you cannot simply speculate on future demand and drive up the value of something based on bullshit data? Doesn't the demand have to be real? Doesn't the price have to reflect what the world can afford. Especially when you have governments around the world buying oil for their citizens? Why did idiots on CNBC ignore this fact? How do smart people get away with this logic at companies like Goldman Sachs and reporters at CNBC don't call them on their lack of sound financial justification?

How do I get a high paying job like this? I have been to China. I buy gasoline on a regular basis. I should be able to work at Goldman Sachs with Arjun Murti and talk to the Wallstreet Journal and CNBC about my thoughts on where Oil will trade today and in the future.

Give me a job because I want to know how the data is collected and the speculative comments are made.

I want to know when it became acceptable to trade oil up when a hurricane might hit the gulf of mexico. More importantly I want to know why oil prices would not drop when the hurricane did not hit each time the weather forecast drove up the price of oil. How in the hell does that work? How does one factor drive it up but not drive it down when it doesn't occur?

Where was CNBC? Where was Arjun Murti? Why wasn't this discussed? Speculators kept driving it up and up based on bogus data and never adjusted the value based on bogus data. It was treated like a fucking internet stock back in 2000.

People deserve to be fired. People deserve to lose their jobs at CNBC for not covering the news from both sides.

What is really messed up is that I know people like Arjun Murti and they will not change because it is not in their best interest to cover reality. It is only in their best interest to get away with what they can get away with as long as it benefits the bottom line.

Labels: arjun murti