Switzerland's Vote On Executieve Pay

I really don't agree with this. I feel that this is just going away from laissez faire. CEO's of company's have the most experience and have worked very hard to make their businesses successful. If the CEO is running a successful company, he should be able to decide what he is paid. The government intervention in how a public business pays shareholders is too far, and is moving away from a hands off government. On the other hand though, I do believe that CEO's ,who make and reward themselves high amounts of pay, should in their heart give some to middle class shareholders. There appears to be no appreciation of the fact that there are many middle class investors who invest their savings accumulated over many years of service, and many of them are receiving little or no return when they could be receiving part of the CEO's and other overpaid high office holders. There is no doubt that the compensation system has encouraged CEO's to find ways to increase there bonuses, but I don't think it is the governments duty to change this. The CEO's just need to be a little more giving.

Twitter's IPO

Facebook went public last year and now Twitter is. Facebook's launching of an IPO had a terrible start because of how late Mark Zuckerburg decided to launch it, but hopefully this is not the case for twitter. I think that twitter will be more successful than Facebook was strictly on the fact that I believe its perks and structure is overall better. It is simple and easy to use. It provides easier access for marketing from businesses, and also easy  and quick ways to get news out to the public. Facebook use has died down in the recent years and I think that has some part in its disastrous launch of an IPO. Looking at the price chart for Twitter's stock, it will be interesting to see how it does in the future. Since November 7th it had done fine, but you never know what can happen. These next few weeks will show how much confidence people really have in twitter, and hopefully it is not the same confidence people had with Facebook when it launched.

Bigfoot

The so-called "Legend of Bigfoot" started around 1958. No one really has discovered clear evidence of this strange creature's existence, but people continue to buy in. Why though? Brian Cronk, a professor of psychology at Missouri Western State University stated, "The human brain is always trying to determine why things happen, and when the reason is not clear, we tend to make up some pretty bizarre explanations. Since it is not clear that Bigfoot is real or not, people want to go ahead and believe in it just to make an explanation the blurred sightings. Another reason this phenomenon continues to exist is that it is a huge business hoax, and the people running the show are doing a great job bringing people into the idea. The only way for this to stop is for scientists to prove it doesn't exist, which is kind of an impossible task. And now this past week a accidental shooting occurred in the hunt for this mystery creature. Two men are hunting for Bigfoot, and one man hears a barking noise so he turns around and accidentally shoots his friend. Why would you hunt Bigfoot anyway? In all the Jack Links commercials he is a  big friendly beast, so obviously there is no reason to shoot him. The police didn't believe the guys, and I wouldn't either. The story sounds absurd right from the get go. People need to stop being so gullible.