<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Solitary Mind</title>
	
	<link>http://www.solitarymind.com</link>
	<description>Meandering Thoughts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:54:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/SolitaryMind" /><feedburner:info xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" uri="solitarymind" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:emailServiceId xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">SolitaryMind</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><item>
		<title>Times are Hard in the Neon Jungle</title>
		<link>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=189&amp;source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=189#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I got this from RCNevada: If you&#8217;re thinking about moving to Las Vegas&#8230; Stay Home. Our official unemployment rate is at 14.8%. This doesn&#8217;t count the people who have dropped off the unemployment rolls &#8211;I think the rate I read was around 6000 a month. (The same number of people who were moving to Vegas [...]<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=189">Times are Hard in the Neon Jungle</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I got this from <a href="http://rcnevada.com/">RCNevada</a>:</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re thinking about moving to Las Vegas&#8230; <em>Stay Home</em>. <a href="http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/aug/20/las-vegas-jobless-rate-climbs-148-percent/">Our official unemployment rate is at 14.8%</a>. </p>
<p>This doesn&#8217;t count the people who have dropped off the unemployment rolls &#8211;I think the rate I read was around 6000 a month. (The same number of people who were moving to Vegas a couple of years back.), or the people who worked for cash and didn&#8217;t qualify.</p>
<p>On top of that, Las Vegas has been rated by Forbes magazine as <a href="http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/aug/17/report-las-vegas-tops-list-nations-most-stressful-/">the county&#8217;s most stressful city</a>.</p>
<p>Oh yea, mustn&#8217;t forget that while the nation wide average foreclosure rate is holding at around 2%, last year&#8217;s rate here in <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-20-cities-with-the-highest-foreclosure-rates-2010-01-28">Las Vegas was at 12%.</a></p>
<p>On the other hand, if you have a business that doesn&#8217;t require most of your income come from local spending, Las Vegas has a lot of empty office and warehouse space and if you shop around you&#8217;ll find that houses are cheap.</p>
<p>&#8211;Note to self: Be nice to the boss.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=189">Times are Hard in the Neon Jungle</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.solitarymind.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=189</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Courts Still Protect the Powerful</title>
		<link>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=183&amp;source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=183#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:49:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Wachovia was sold to Wells Fargo there was a class action suit filed by the banks shareholders to try and recover monies they had lost. However, a settlement was reached in which the shareholders received nothing, the bank admitted no wrongdoing, the lawyers received a million-dollar payout for their work on the case and [...]<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=183">The Courts Still Protect the Powerful</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Wachovia was sold to Wells Fargo there was a class action suit filed by the banks shareholders to try and recover monies they had lost. However, a settlement was reached in which the shareholders received nothing, the bank admitted no wrongdoing, the lawyers received a million-dollar payout for their work on the case and the depositions given by top executives were sealed.</p>
<p>Two former stockholders recently asked the court to unseal those documents, but a North Carolina judge, Albert Diaz, has ruled that while the two former Wachovia stock holders may view the depositions given by former Wachovia CEO Bob Steel and three other executives for use in their appeal, the contents <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2010/08/09/daily30.html">may not be made public.</a></p>
<p>They are appealing the judges decision.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=183">The Courts Still Protect the Powerful</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.solitarymind.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=183</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Coca-Cola Defends Vitaminwater by Saying You Already Know it’s Bad for You</title>
		<link>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=180&amp;source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=180#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Aug 2010 01:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Coca-Cola is being sued for misleading health claims about their &#8220;VitaminWater.&#8221; First the reasonable part: Coca-Cola is being sued by a non-profit public interest group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, on the grounds that the company&#8217;s vitaminwater products make unwarranted health claims. WASHINGTON—A federal judge has denied Coca-Cola’s motion to dismiss a [...]<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=180">Coca-Cola Defends Vitaminwater by Saying You Already Know it&#8217;s Bad for You</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Coca-Cola is being sued for misleading health claims about their &#8220;VitaminWater.&#8221;<br />
<img src="http://www.solitarymind.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/vitaminwater.gif" alt="" title="vitaminwater" width="75" height="128" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-181" /></p>
<p>First the reasonable part:<br />
Coca-Cola is being sued by a non-profit public interest group, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201007231.html">the Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, on the grounds that the company&#8217;s vitaminwater products make unwarranted health claims.</p>
<blockquote><p>WASHINGTON—A federal judge has denied Coca-Cola’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit  over what the Center for Science in the Public Interest says are deceptive and unsubstantiated claims on the company’s “vitaminwater” line of soft drinks. The company claims that vitaminwater variously reduces the risk of chronic disease, reduces the risk of eye disease, promotes healthy joints, and supports optimal immune function, and uses health buzz words such as “defense,” “rescue,” “energy,” and “endurance” on labels. </p></blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Now the WTF? part:<br />
Coca-Cola&#8217;s defense is that &#8220;no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p>The judge also rejected Coke’s argument that disclosing sugar content on Nutrition Facts labels eliminates the possibility that consumers may be misled into thinking the product has only water and vitamins, and little or no sugar. Gleeson cited a similar case involving deceptive fruit imagery on packages for Gerber’s Fruit Juice Snacks, which are mostly corn syrup and sugar. That court held that “reasonable consumers should [not] be expected to look beyond misleading representations on the front of the box to discover the truth from the ingredient list in small print on the side of the box.” Vitaminwater has 33 grams of sugar in each 20-ounce bottle. </p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.solitarymind.com/?p=180">Coca-Cola Defends Vitaminwater by Saying You Already Know it&#8217;s Bad for You</a> is a post from: <a href="http://www.solitarymind.com">Solitary Mind</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.solitarymind.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=180</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
