cc

Barbara Ehrenreich is one of the best, decidedly liberal, journalists going today. However you felt about her support of big government solutions to problems of poverty, Nickel & Dimed was a captivating account of what it's like to live on minimum wage. Going undercover, Ehrenreich worked as a waitress, Wal-Mart employee, maid and more, in an effort to show the indignities of the underclass.

With her latest book This Land is Your Land: Reports From a Divided Nation, she seems to have gotten a bit lazy. First of all, it's not really an original book at all; much of the material is pulled from columns she's written for the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, The Progressive and The Nation. You wouldn't know that unless you read the acknowledgments on page 237.

Onto the content itself: the book is a series of more than 60 "rants" on various political issues including health care, education, social issues, the war in Iraq and corporate greed. I find myself agreeing with her on most of these issues, and her snark is nice, but this is not the brilliant journalism that I've come to associate with her. These read like blog posts, and the research often appears to be shoddy: she criticizes Stan O'Neal for presiding over "$8.4 million" in mortgage-related losses. She was too kind: it was actually about 1,000 times that amount.

If you're a hardcore liberal and like to read Molly Ivins and watch Michael Moore, you'll like this. If you're looking for the trenchant social commentary of some of her earlier books, look elsewhere.

Publicity whore Donald Trump -- who has been married three times and is now married to a woman more than 20 years his junior -- is criticizing Anne Hathaway for breaking up with Raffaelo Follieri amid allegations that he is a con artist.

Trump opined that "She hasn't remained very loyal to him, has she? So when he had plenty of money, she liked him, but then after that, not as good, right?"

Right: women should stand by their men when they're exposed as liars and con artists. I guess that the reason he feels that way is that if women didn't stay in relationships with phonies, he wouldn't be able to keep a lady! Here's the thing Donald: do you honestly think that your latest wife, Melania, is with you for reasons that have nothing to do with money? Is she in it for the hair? Or your rapidly expanding gut? Everyone's entitled to their delusions, Donald, but do you really think your wife would stay by your side if you were arrested on charges of fraud? I doubt it.

Here's the personal finance advice: integrity is generally not compartmentalized. If you're in a relationship with someone who lies to other people to get their money, or lies to you about money, that's a serious form of infidelity, and likely indicative of other problems: liars lie because they're liars.

The idea of Donald Trump giving relationship advice is almost as ridiculous as the idea of him giving business advice, given how poorly so many of his ventures have done. I leave you with this video of Rosie O'Donnell explaining everything that is wrong with him.

With its stock trading down significantly yesterday, the good folks at Overstock.com (NASDAQ: OSTK) decided that it was time for a press release: Worldstock Offers to Ship 400-Pound Rug for $2.95.

Sounds like an impressive offer, right? Well yeah, except that the rug costs $149,999.99. Chairman and CEO Patrick Byrne said that ""Of course you can't ignore the offer to ship the rug for $2.95 . That policy keeps our customers coming back and clearly, the person who buys this rug will enjoy great value."

Patrick: a lot of places would ship a $150 thousand rug for free. With shares of Overstock down about 5% as I write this, the press release doesn't seem to have captured the imagination of investors. It hasn't sold the rug either. If you're interested, you can buy the rug here.

For a look at Patrick Byrne's bizarre conspiracy theories, check out this item from Gary Weiss.

The story of recently captured hedge fund crook Sam Israel just keeps getting weirder. First he faked his suicide and went on the run, leaving behind a message from the TV show M*A*S*H. Then he turned himself in in western Massachusetts.

Now he's telling the judge that he actually did try to commit suicide but failed. Swallowing morphine tablets and fentanyl didn't do the trick: "I ate the balance of my fentanyl patches because I thought it was better to do myself in than to turn myself in. I woke up battered and bruised and I realized God didn't want me to do that and I turned myself in."

Ah yes -- an obligatory reference to god thrown in for good measure. It looks like we can add Mr. Israel to the long list of "born again until you're out again" criminals.

The list of things Israel stinks at keeps growing: he lost a ton of investors' money running a hedge fund, then got busted when his cover-up efforts failed. Then he tried to kill himself but failed then tried to be a fugitive but failed at that too.

House of Taylor Jewelry Inc. (OTC: HOTJ) is closing up shop, according to The New York Post. Elizabeth Taylor and Kathy Ireland, the company's celebrity spokespeople, have severed their ties with the company, leaving New Stream Secured Capital to forage for the $11 million it's still owed.

Taylor and Ireland reaped generous license fees for their participation in the venture and also owned a combined 49.5% stake in the venture.

Having debuted at $4 per share in 2006, House of Taylor closed on Tuesday at less than 4/10th's of one penny. The failure of this company could hardly be considered surprising. The company's large debt load makes this a tough economic environment to execute a turnaround and it seems doubtful that has-beens like Kathy Ireland and Elizabeth Taylor have sufficient selling power to justify their licensing fees.

Looking through the S&P list of jewelry companies, I'm having trouble finding one whose stock has been up over the past 52 weeks.

Citing unnamed sources, The New York Post reports that Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) could come back to Circuit City (NYSE: CC) to try to acquire the company.

The sources said that Circuit City pulled out because of weakness in the credit markets, but still feel that a deal could have strong long-term benefits. I don't think it makes sense for Blockbuster to acquire the company but, if it does, pulling out for now is probably a good idea. Shares of Circuit City tanked when Blockbuster announced that it was no longer pursuing a deal, and, according to the Post, Best Buy (NYSE: BBY) isn't interested because of antitrust concerns. With few indications that there is anyone else bidding for Circuit City, and the company's fundamentals in a rapid state of decline, it seems like the longer Blockbuster waits the less it will have to pay. Unless another bidder emerges, there's no real rush.

Back in April, Blockbuster made a preliminary proposal to acquire Circuit City "with an all cash offer in the range of $6.00 to $8.00 per share, subject to due diligence." With shares of Circuit City down 9% to $2.32 on Wednesday, Blockbuster could probably get the company for considerably less if it made another offer today.

With Circuit City bleeding cash, continued consumer weakness could make it really cheap on the courthouse steps later this year. Maybe then Blockbuster shareholders would be more supportive of a deal.

Back in August of 1979, BusinessWeek ran a cover story proclaiming The Death of Equities, suggesting that the stock market was dead, and only a fool or old, out-of-touch person would invest there.

Needless to say, that article could not have been more wrong, and the bull market that began three years later was the longest in history.

Now, the good folks at BusinessWeek are back nearly 30 years later to declare that "the treat of a free fall is growing" for the housing market. There are some similarities. Like stocks in 1979, real estate has been a poor performer of late and it's hard to find anyone, except realtors of course, who is bullish.

But the question is whether sentiment has shifted too far to the negative side, versus the optimist of a few years ago. As Benjamin Graham wrote, the secret to successful investing is to be "greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy."

The BusinessWeek article is well-researched and has some valid points. But to the contrarian, it's hard to think of a better buy signal based on BusinessWeek's less than stellar track record with Chicken Little headlines.

I've been critical of dividends for as long as I've been writing about stocks, most recently slamming the big banks for using dividends as a Potemkin village to inspire investor confidence -- while simultaneously raising cash at depressed valuations.

In a piece in their Exclusive Outlook newsletter (PDF File), the value investors at West Coast Asset Management explain the pros and cons of dividends in a way that I've never seen done before: their position on dividends is ambivalent (mine is that they're basically always bad.), but it's a great introduction for anyone looking to understand the capital allocation decisions that companies make. Here's the thought-provoking conclusion:

Cash is king, and the truth about dividends is that they are merely one optional use of cash flow. Share buybacks make great sense when the stock is cheap, but a regimented recurring distribution of dividends reduces a company's ability to invest opportunistically. Instead of making blanket statements about the superiority of dividends or share buybacks, investors should understand the context of each decision, and companies should consider eliminating recurring dividends in favor of situational, opportunistic cash flow decisions.

To me, the double-tax on dividends makes them impossible to rationalize -- if you'd rather pay extra tax to receive cash than own a larger stake in the company (via a share buyback) -- you should find another company to invest in.

By now you've probably heard that Samuel Israel, the hedge fund fraudster who faked his suicide and went on the run on June 9 rather than report to prison, has turned himself in in western Massachusetts. He will now be transferred to prison, but could also face additional charges.

The day he disappeared, his GMC Envoy was found at the Bear Mountain Bridge near the Hudson River with the words "suicide is painless" written in dust on the hood.

This was the first hint that the suicide was a fake: "Suicide is painless", the theme song for the 1980s hit show M*A*S*H, was sung during a fake suicide in the movie version of the show.

Folks, faking your death to flee from prison is no time for jokes, especially not one that suggests the whole thing is a fake. According to the New York Times, the discovery of the connection to M*A*S*H was seen as a sign that the suicide was fake and may have actually contributed to the failure of the escape attempt.

For more stories of criminal incompetence, check out the Stupid Criminal Files.

While calling Arthur Levitt's tenure as chairman of the Securities & Exchange Commission ineffective would be an understatement, he could, and still can, be relied upon to say the right thing. Now that the SEC finally has the quorum necessary to take action on a variety of issues, they should take Levitt's advice about proxy access changes.

Earlier this year the SEC made it impossible for shareholders to change the way directors are elected -- one of the most anti-investor events in recent history -- and it's time for that to change. Levitt writes in The Wall Street Journal that "While not a panacea, giving shareholders a bigger voice in the companies they own would go a long way in helping to restore trust."

Exactly. Some critics of strong corporate governance say that the SEC shouldn't meddle in these affairs. I basically agree: but the problem is that the SEC has meddled, making it impossible for shareholders to take control of their own companies when necessary.

In a PowerPoint-style presentation intended to rebuke criticism of its commitment to enhancing shareholder value, Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) attacks Carl Icahn's recent track record as an investor.

One slide points out that 11 of Icahn's 15 most recent investments in public companies have declined in value since he took his position. But what exactly is Yahoo!'s point? That Icahn is a lousy investor and probably wrong for investing in Yahoo! too? If that's the case, then they'd better sell the company while they can before it turns into another Icahn dud!

One of the silliest possible mergers in recent memory (no small accomplishment) is dead in the water now that Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) has announced that it will no longer pursue its previously announced effort to acquire Circuit City (NYSE: CC).

In a press release issued yesterday afternoon, Jim Keyes, Blockbuster Chairman and CEO, said that "Based on market conditions and the completion of our initial due diligence process, we have determined that it is not in the best interest of Blockbuster's shareholders to proceed with an acquisition of Circuit City."

Given the shares of Blockbuster tanked when the company announced its initial offer, the company's shares could be expected to trade up today.

For Circuit City, the situation is more grim. With its stock in the toilet, Blockbuster's offer represented one of the few exit strategies. Blockbuster's assertion that its "initial due diligence" was a factor in its decision to withdraw its offer indicates that the company's financial situation may be worse than it appears to outside shareholders.

In a press release offered in response, Philip J. Schoonover , chairman, president and chief executive officer of Circuit City, said that "Our exploration of strategic alternatives is intended to serve the interests of our shareholders by considering every possible alternative to enhance shareholder value. The board's review was not dependent on Blockbuster's participation."

But Blockbuster was the only suitor to emerge publicly so far and, now that it's lost interest, there's little reason to expect anyone else to emerge.

A New York State appeals court has ordered claims of excessive pay leveled at former NYSE chairman Richard Grasso to be dismissed. Grasso rose to infamy in 2003 when it was reported that he had been granted a deferred compensation package of $140 million. The SEC criticized the deal, Grasso was asked to leave, Eliot Spitzer sued, and much publicity was had by all.

The court ordered the claims dismissed on the grounds that the attorney general's office no longer had the authority to pursue the claims because the NYSE restructured itself as a for-profit corporation in 2005.

As egregious as Grasso's pay was, this is not a matter that should have ended up in court. It's a corporate governance issue. If the board is inept and captured enough to throw money down the toilet, it's up to the people they represent to revolt. True: Grasso probably exerted undue influence over the board but ultimately the directors are responsible for maintaining their independence.

If regulators want to improve executive compensation practices, they should do it by making it easier for shareholders to hold directors accountable -- no wasting taxpayer money necessary! Gary Weiss chimed in that "it struck me and many others as an odd use of public resources to pursue a case on behalf of the millionaire seatholders of the NYSE.

Ladies and gentleman of the jury, I present to you exhibit 424A in the case of The People v. Donald Trump. Florida developer Jorge Perez -- who built a billion dollar fortune as a Cuban exile starting with nothing -- recently came out with a book of real estate advice called Powerhouse Principles: The Billionaire Blueprint For Real Estate Success.

I'm only about 40 pages into it and so far it's nothing special. But after a foreword from Donald Trump, there was nowhere to go but up. Trump started his one-page foreword with praise that still managed to come across as self-aggrandizing: "The one person who could teach me something about real estate is Jorge Perez."

What? The one person? Did Donald Trump really just say that there is no one who can teach him anything except for Jorge Perez? There's no question that Donald Trump's an expert in the savvy selection of wealthy parents, losing money operating a casino, and resurrecting his career by playing a caricature of a mogul on a sitcom -- I mean, reality show. But real estate?

In a rare indication that there may be some reasonably intelligent executives running things at America's top banks, Wachovia Corp. (NYSE: WB) has decided that it will stop offering a mortgage that allows customers to pay less each month than the bank charges in interest.

Hold on. What? The "Pick-a-Payment" mortgages allowed borrowers to choose one of four payment options each month -- as in, "Do you want to pay off your mortgage or do you want to buy a new television and every season of Golden Girls on DVD?"

You can probably guess which option many people chose. The problem was that paying less than the interest each month led to negative amortization -- owing progressively more on the house each month. Recently it's been discovered that home values are not contractually obligated to go up every year and the result is that many people could end up owing more than the home is worth, trapping them in it -- and leaving the bank with a hefty loss in the event of foreclosure.

Wachovia has hired Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) to evaluate its loan portfolio and suggest alternatives. I wonder how much they're paying. I could have told them that letting borrowers decide whether they want to pay the interest on their mortgages was a bad idea.