Categories
Personal Finance

Win A FREE Driving School Session In A Formula 2000 Race Car!

This is a very exciting contest! WhereDoesAllMyMoneyGo.com, Canadian Capitalist and myself have teamed up and are holding a joint giveaway for one lucky recipient to receive a FREE driving school in an open-wheel race car courtesy of The Bridgestone Racing Academy!

You can learn more about the exact prize by clicking here: A Thrill Of A Lifetime (Reynard 1 Session)

CONTEST RULES:

  1. You can earn an entry by copying any one sentence from anywhere on the school’s website (www.race2000.com) and pasting it in a comment on ANY or ALL THREE of our blogs’ respective contest posts.
  2. You can earn up to one entry per blog. So if you leave a valid comment on all three blogs, you will have three (3) entries into the contest.
  3. Entries will be accepted until 11:59 pm Saturday, June 27th, 2009. A winner will be announced and/or contacted on or before Monday June 29th, 2009.
  4. Winner is responsible for their own transportation and/or accomodations if necessary.
  5. The prize has no cash value, but is transferable, and is only good for enrolment in the Thrill Of A Lifetime Reynard 1 Session school.
  6. You are subject to all the Bridgestone Racing Academy’s rules and restrictions.
  7. You must provide a valid email address in the comment form – but note that your email address will not be visible to anyone but the blog owners, and your information is never shared or sold. The winner will be contacted by this email address. If the winner has not responded to us within 1 week, a new winner will be selected from the other entries. (So make sure you get your email address right and you check your junk-mail folders after the contest ends!) 🙂
  8. If you receive this post via e-mail, click on the artible heading to visit the website, scroll down to the end of the page, type in your comment under “Leave a Comment” and click “Submit” (and don’t forget to visit the other blogs and leave comments there to increase your odds of winning!).

Thanks again to The Bridgestone Racing Academy and GOOD LUCK EVERYONE!

Categories
Frugal

Freegans

I’ve written in the past about people like Charles Long and Don Schrader who make me seem like I should be called Mr. Spendthrift, not Mr. Cheap.  An entire group who also makes me look like I’m throwing money around like a drunken sailor are the Freegans.  At our recent get together, neither Preet nor Mike had heard of Freegans, so I thought it might make an interesting post.

What Are Freegans?

People who have embraced Freeganism are scavengers, trying to minimize the social and environmental impact of our consumer society by extreme reuse of the waste of others.  They dumpster dive to secure the necessities of life (and for non-necessities discarded by others), and by doing so are able to release themselves from having to be a wage-slave.  They’re basically human raccoons.

Freegan is derived from “free” and “vegan”.  Some Freegans eat discarded meat (yum), but these are more accurately called “Meagans” (no, I’m not making this up.  If you’re wondering if this is a joke post, it’s not).

Apparently restaurants and grocery stores will often wrap up food that’s being discarded, so it’s possible to dig out food from the trash that’s still quite clean and hygienic (if you’ll allow a broad definition of both terms 🙂 ).  Restaurants and grocery stores have been sued in the past when food they donated made people sick. Rationally, they’ve responded to these lawsuits by no longer donating food, which is a shame for everyone involved (why do a few bad apples always need to spoil things?).  There was a recent bill signed into law in Florida that provides liability protection for restaurants to donate food.  Clinton signed The Federal Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act which supposedly does the same thing (I’m not sure why Florida had to create a similar law if there was Federal protection provided 13 years ago).

Things I Like About Freeganism

I admire people who are able to take their dissatisfaction with some part of modern living and change how they live.  I’m perpetually annoyed at people who complain endlessly, but do nothing to change things.  I’m even more annoyed at people who try to force change on everyone else (most activists).  People who say “I don’t like this part of the system, so I’m going to change how *I* live so that I’m not part of the problem and to show people that there’s another way” are very, very cool.

I find efficient resource consumption endlessly appealing.  I like the Walden-esque element of structuring their life such that they can be fairly independent from society at large.  Beyond the positive impact of not having products produced for them, they also save all the associated costs and impact of distribution.

Apparently Freegans don’t panhandle, which is a very good thing (in my opinion).

People make the criticism of Charles Long that his system of living wouldn’t work if everyone does it (which he acknowledges, but rightfully responds that most people won’t).  Similarly Freegans need people to generate the trash for them to live off of, so we can’t all live this way (and, I suspect, very few people would be willing to).  We can’t all live this way (and won’t), but it’s great for some people to do it if they’re willing.  Some people criticize Freegans for living indirectly off of a system they condemn, but I don’t have a problem with this.

I love that Freegans are able, by drastically reducing their cost of living, to be far more selective about what employment they take on.  Often they will volunteer or focus on projects of personal interest to them.

Freegans tend to find good garbage dumps that they’ll visit regularly.  Hopefully this means that they don’t make a mess when garbage picking.  I’m disgusted by littering in general and it always annoys me when I see homeless people dumping trash, sorting through it, then leaving the mess for someone else to clean up.

Things I Don’ t Like About Freeganism

I’m a pretty easy-going, open guy, but eating garbage is past where I draw the line.  I’m happy for other people to do it, but I’m not going to.

Part of the Freegan philosophy is moral support of theft (look about 2/3rds of the way down the page).  They advocate shoplifting as “better than forking over big bucks”, employee theft (they’re “stealing” your time, so steal things from the workplace), and scams such as returning goods they’ve dug out of the trash (for a refund).  I think they lose the moral high ground in a hurry when petty thievery becomes a part of the lifestyle.

While I like the libertarian elements and philosophy behind Freeganism, I think I’d have a very different perspective on life and society compared to most Freegans.  I don’t think our economic system is broken to the degree that it requires a complete boycott.  Ironically, it could be argued that the incredible strength of our modern economic system is what allows them to live a decent (debatable perhaps) lifestyle off of the system’s discarded trash.

More Info About Freeganism

A couple blog posts about Freegans are available at the Go Frugal blog, Tigers & Strawberries (a pretty blistering criticism of the movement) and at The Everyday Economist.  Two very comprehensive overviews are at “How Stuff Works” and a “lens” at Squidoo.  More mainstream news coverage is available at MSNBC (with video), Green Living Tips and Mother Nature Network (also with video).  If you don’t mind some really ugly English accents, there’s also a YouTube video.  An interesting critique of Freeganism is available here (it’s Tribe.ca, a message board about club culture in Toronto).

You can read what Freegans say about themselves at their main US website, their main Canadian website, and on the Canadian Activism Archives.

What do you think of Freeganism?  Would you ever consider a Freegan lifestyle yourself?  Have you ever met a Freegan (or know one as a friend / family)?

Categories
Personal Finance

Dave Ramsey Debt Snowball Method Of Debt Repayment

snowballThe “debt snowball” method of debt repayment was popularized by “financial expert” Dave Ramsey.  The method was created for people who are having trouble paying off their debts and need some more motivation and a different strategy.  The basic idea of the snowball method is to pay off your loans in order from the smallest loan amount to largest loan and ignore the interest rates and minimum payments.  The benefit of this strategy is that the person paying off the debts will experience some early success (after paying off a small loan) and will be able to use that momentum to tackle the larger debts.  The more logical way to pay off your debts is to start with the highest interest loans and work your way down to the lower interest loans.  This is one of the Dave Ramsey baby steps.

The snowball method may result in the person paying more interest but as Ramsey says “Finances are 20% knowledge and 80% behaviour”.  In other words – sometimes you have to do what works for you rather than do the method which makes more financial sense.  At the end of the day, if you can get out of debt then you have won the war – does it really matter if you could have won a few more battles along the way by paying the high interest loans first?

How it works

The way to pay off your debts using the snowball method is as follows:

  • List all your debts by amount.
  • Determine the smallest loan to start paying off first.
  • Increase your regular payments to that loan and make any extra payments you can come up with.
  • Only pay the minimum amount to all your other loans – decrease the payment amount if necessary.
  • Once you pay off the first loan then you starting increasing the payments to the next largest loan so that your total payments are the same.

Example

[table id=4 /]
Susan has 3 loans which out detailed in the chart above.  She has a total of $30k in debt and the minimum payments are $1,000 per month.
To pay the loans off using the snowball she has to identify the smallest loan which is of course the $5,000 loan.  Susan has an extra $500 per month which she can put towards debt repayment so she applies that to the smallest ($5k) loan.
These are her new monthly payments:

  • $5k loan – $700 =  $200 min + $500 extra
  • $10 loan – $350 minimum
  • $15k loan – $450 minimum

Her monthly payments now total $1500.

Once the smallest loan ($5,000) is paid off then she now has to identify the next largest loan ($10k) and increase the payments on that loan.  When Susan first started her minimum payments were $1,000 – then she increased the payments by $500 to $1500.  By keeping her monthly debt payments to $1500 (even though she owes less money) she will get the full snowball effect.  When she started the method she was paying an extra $500 on one of the loans – now that she has removed one of loans, her payments now look like this:

  • $10k loan – $1150 = $350 min + $500 extra payments + $200 which was the minimum of the $5k loan which no longer exists
  • $15k – $450 minimum

You can see that she is now paying $700 above the minimum on the $10k loan which is a big increase from the $500 extra she was paying on the smallest $5k loan.  This is the snowball effect.

Once she pays off the $10k loan then she can apply the full $1500 per month to the last $15k loan.  Since the minimum payment is only $450 – she is now paying an extra $1050 per month towards the last loan.  By paying off the loans and adding the payment amounts to the remaining loans, the extra payment is increased as each loan is paid off so your payment “snowballs” and your debts will get paid off quicker and quicker.

snowball

Should I use the Dave Ramsey snowball method?

I would strongly suggest that you try to pay off your debts with the higher interest rates first – however if that strategy isn’t working for you then the debt snowball method might be a good thing to try.

Some scenarios where the DRS is good or not so good from a financial point of view.

1)  If your smaller loans are also your highest interest then it works well

2) If your loan interest amounts are similar then using the snowball method won’t make much of a difference.

Scenario:

15k loan at 6%, min payment is $100

20k loan at 15%, min payment is $200

Let’s say you have an extra $500 per month to put into the loans.  If you follow the Dave Ramsey method then you will put the extra $500 into the smaller $15k loan until it is paid off – then you will put the extra $500 plus $100 into the larger loan until it is paid off.  According to my spreadsheets – the total interest paid will be $8278 and the loans will be paid off in 50 months or 4 years, 2 months.

If you didn’t follow the Dave Ramsey method and paid off the higher interest loan first – the total interest paid is $5132 and both loans are paid off in 45 months.

In this case the Dave Ramsey method would be very expensive, costing an extra $3146 in interest and would take an extra 5 months of payments.

Some things to think about

If the lower interest rate loans are small (in terms of how long it will take to pay off) then it doesn’t matter that much if you pay them off first.  The absolute amount of the smaller loan isn’t that important but rather how long it will take to pay off .  If the small loan can be eliminated in a few months, then the extra interest cost will probably not be that significant.  An example is provided by Frugal Dad recently who was so close to paying of his Tahoe that he decided to put all extra payments into that loan even though it wasn’t his highest interest loan.

The difference in interest rate of your loans is also very important.  If the interest rates are pretty close to each other then paying the lower interest loans first won’t cost that much more than paying off the higher interest loans first.

Photo credit tjflex

Categories
Money

Florida Unemployment Benefits Extension – 20 More Weeks

Update – Feb 7, 2011 – Legislation to add extra weeks for 99ers

Democratic Reps. Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Bobby Scott (Va.) are reintroducing legislation this week to provide additional weeks of unemployment insurance benefits for “99ers,”

Main article

In 2009, the 2009 stimulus package was created by President Obama and provided extra funding for states to extend the length of unemployment benefits if necessary.  Most states have a fixed number of weeks available for benefits but can increase the number of weeks if necessary.  The Florida unemployment rate in April was 9.6%.

The state of Florida recently approved an extension of the unemployment benefits by 20 weeks as a result of Senate Bill 810 sponsored by Sen. Rudy Garcia, R-Miami and Rep. Dave Murzin, R-Pensacola.  This applies to unemployed persons who have already used up the previous maximum of 59 weeks of unemployment benefits.  The legislation allowing this EB extension was signed by Governor Charlie Crist and will provide more benefits for up to 250,000 unemployed Floridians.  The payments will be up to $300 per week.

The money to pay for these extended benefits will come from the stimulus package of 2009 – about $415 million in total.

The agency responsible for these benefits is called the Agency for Workforce Innovation – they expect to start sending out the extended benefit checks in July.  According to a spokesman from the agency Robby Cunningham – some people might be able to collect benefits retroactive to February of 2009.

“It’s actually retroactive to February 22nd of this year so some qualifying receiptence could receive initial payments up to 5,100 dollars.”

Please note that any retroactive payments will be from February 22, 2009 or when your last claim ran out – whichever is later.

How to apply for extended benefits

If you qualify for the extended 20 weeks then you still have to apply – go to www.floridajobs.com and click on the big red “Extended Benefits” square near the top of the right side of the screen.  The actual link which will open up the application form is here.  You can also fill in and mail the EB application to the address indicated on the EB notice/application you will be receiving in the mail.

How do I know if I’m eligible?

Here are a few guidelines you can use to determine eligibility:

  • You are totally or partially unemployed.
  • You exhaust all entitlement to regular and emergency unemployment compensation (EUC) benefits prior to February 22, 2009 but your benefit year ends after February 22, 2009.
  • You exhaust all entitlement to regular and emergency unemployment compensation benefits after February 22, 2009.
  • You are not eligible for unemployment compensation benefits in any state (including Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, The District of Columbia) or Canada.
  • You satisfy all requirements of the Florida UC Law that apply to regular UC and EB, such as being able and available for work, and have not been disqualified from receiving benefits based on your reason for separation.
  • You actively seek work for each EB week claimed and provide the work search record as instructed.
  • You do not refuse an offer of suitable work or fail to apply for suitable work.

 

Categories
Announcements

Switch To Digital TV And Lose Weight

Ok, my combined title is a bit misleading.  Today is the first day that analog tv signals no longer exist and you have to have some sort of cable, satellite or digital box in order to watch television.  I have no idea who this change might affect since I suspect most people already use digital tv.  I suspect it will affect people who only watch minimal tv and don’t want to pay for cable or a low-income person who can’t afford to upgrade.

Has this change affected you or anyone you know?

Losing weight

I’ve let my weight go a bit the last few months – I’ve crept up from 180 lb up to 185 lb so I decided to cut out all evening snacks this week which I think is my achilles heel.  Following the advice of Mr. Cheap – I weighed myself everyday and recorded the results.  I forgot a couple of days but here are the results:

  • Starting weight – 185 pounds
  • Monday, June 9 – 184.5
  • Tuesday, June 10 – 183.5
  • Friday, June 12 – 183.0

So far, so good.  Tonight, Mr. Cheap and Preet from WhereDoesAllMyMoneyGo.com will be coming over for dinner and a couple of beers so I may have to skip tomorrow’s weigh-in.  🙂

Categories
Personal Finance

Canadian Financial Discussion Forums

I enjoy blogging. Twice each week, I have the chance to spend a bit of time articulating my position on a financial topic, then get a variety of smart people to respond with their $0.02 on the subject. Sometimes there will be a bit of back and forth on the day of the posting (or for really inflammatory controversial posts for weeks or months afterward).

Often the best part of blogging (for the blogger) is that we choose what is being discussed (for our own posts at least). Discussion forums become far more democratic where anyone can start a topic they’re interested in, and if they can attract enough interest, pick other readers’ brains and get some alternative points of view on the issue.

Five places I’m aware of, and have participated in conversations at, are:

  1. Canadian Business Online:  This is the grand-daddy and has been around forever.  Forums are focused on topics from taxes to stock discussions, frugality to starting a business.  Derek Foster will often interact with fans (and foes) here and whatever your question is, if it’s about finance someone can probably give you a decent answer or point you in the right direction.  It’s been around FOREVER and is quite large, so it can be a bit overwhelming for newbies.
  2. Canadian Money Forum:  I’m not 100% sure what their original motivation was for starting this (I would have guessed that running their successful blogs would have kept them busy enough), but the Canadian Capitalist and Million Dollar Journey started this up.  It’s like the Pepsi to Canadian Business Online’s Coke:  the choice of a new generation.  Very similar discussions, but quite a bit more intimate.  It gives a chance to interact directly with a number of bloggers as well as Canadian finance celebrities like Jon Chevreau.
  3. DRiP Investing Resource Center:  This forum is focused almost entirely on dividend reinvestment plans, but because of its focus it provides AMAZING information.  Basically anything you could possibly want to know about DRiPping is answered here.  Although the site supports Canadian and American DRiPs, most of the people there seem to be focused on Canadian companies.  They also facilitate stock exchanges between users (which allow investors to cut their investments fees down to almost nothing, although it’s more time consuming than using a broker).  The veteran members are very knowledgeable about DRiPs (and willing to help), but have a tendency to be unpleasant to some rookies (and to be VERY set in their ways).
  4. My REIN Space Forums:  The “Real Estate Investment Network” (R.E.I.N.) was set up by Don Cambell to sell real estate information and mentoring to aspiring real estate investors.  I heard one of his speakers at a seminar one time (and met a number of members through other venues) and didn’t get a good feeling about the organization.  The bulk of his talk amounted to generating goodwill by buying a turkey for his tenants at Christmas (wow).  It has been recommended to me on a number of occasions by other people I’ve met, so SOME people must find it worthwhile.  The forums have a public area, as well as a members-only area.  While I haven’t participated or read posts here extensively, there seems to be some good info (and knowledgeable people) posting in the public areas, so this would be worth checking out if you’re interested in real estate info.
  5. It Sucks to be a Landlord in Ontario!:  I just found this recently and I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to get into real estate investing.  Basically it’s a support group for Ontario landlords, where they swap war stories and complain about how skewed towards tenants the province’s laws are.  It’s a great resource to give aspiring landlords a dose of reality (such as how little good giving your tenants a turkey will do).  There’s a few threads where they start beating the war drum to begin advocating on behalf of the province’s landlords, but I suspect that won’t amount to much (they’ve got a pretty poor choice of a name if they want to go that route).

It should go without saying (but I’ll say it anyways) that these forums are filled with regular people who, although well-intentioned for the most part, are as likely as Mike or I to give you incorrect advice :-).

Where do you go online to chat about finances in a Canadian specific context? Any experience with these (good or bad)?  Any suggestions for sites not mentioned?

Categories
Personal Finance

Failed Auto Bailout – A Brief History Of Leyland Motor Corporation

car-wreckThe largest auto company in Britain at one time was called the Leyland Motor Corporation which eventually became British Leyland after being nationalised. In 1986 it became Rover Group.

It started in 1896 as the Lancashire Steam Motor Company in the town of Leyland and became Leyland Motors in 1907. The company was quite successful and in the 50’s and 60’s took over quite a few other auto companies.By the 70’s however things weren’t going so well. This paragraph is taken directly from Wikipedia

The BLMC group was difficult to manage because of the many companies under its control, often making similar products. This, and other reasons, led to financial difficulties and in December 1974 British Leyland had to receive a guarantee from the British government.

The Ryder Report was a report created for the British Government in 1975 that recommended bailing out British Leyland with approximately 1.5 billion pounds sterling which was a bit over 1% of GDP at the time. Failure to do so would result in the car company failing and about 1 million workers becoming unemployed. The report also suggested that the company chairman Donald Stokes should be replaced.

Under Thatcher there were more bailouts even though Thatcher herself admitted that the long-time viability of the company was very much in doubt. The market share had fallen from 35% to 16%.

“Closure would have some awful consequences. But we must never give the impression that it was unthinkable. If ever the company and its workforce came to believe that there would be no end to their demands on the public purse.”

Thatcher was skeptical of the ability of management to engineer a turnaround

“BL’s annual plans always forecast major improvement but every year things seemed to get worse…”

Thatcher on yet another cash infusion

“The political realities had to be faced. BL had to be supported … and, most painfully, we provided £900 million.”

Leon Brittan, a top official in the government of Margaret Thatcher

“The lessons of the British experience is don’t throw good money after bad. British Leyland carried on for a few more years, but they’re not there now, are they?”

British Leyland (now called MG Rover) went bankrupt in 2005. In the end most of the original jobs were lost and the only saving grace was that the job losses were spread over 10 years instead of occuring all at once. The cost was $16.5 billion US$ (in today’s dollars).

Summary

The bailout of Leyland was a complete waste of money.  Unfortunately the more I read about the great Canadian and American car bailout, the more I think that the taxpayer is going to get screwed and the jobs will be lost anyway.

Some other articles

Open Market

New York Times

National Post

Categories
Personal Finance

Mad About Madoff

The Canadian Capitalist recently highlighted two terrific Vanity Fair articles about Bernie Madoff.  For those who weren’t watching CNN or reading papers in December 2008, Mr. Madoff operated an “asset management business” (hedge fund) that was actually the largest ponzi scheme of all time. He took massive amounts of money from rich people, famous people (like Steven Spielberg), and numerous charitable foundations.  Apparently people were desperate to invest in his fund.

The two articles, which details who Bernard Madoff is, as a man, from the perspective of his victims and his employees are great reads (normally the only part of Vanity Fair I’m interested in is the photographs of naked celebrities on the cover).  What surprised me most about him was that, according to these articles, he basically had no personality at all.  To his investors he was smiling, benevolent “uncle Bernie” and to his employees and family he was a bully.  He would be around clubs and organizations where rich people would beg him to take their money, but beyond living “the good life” the guy seems to be more of a shell than anything.  He wasn’t flirtati0us, didn’t take much interest in recreational pursuits (other than apparently cheating at golf according to Donald Trump), wasn’t a big drinker and wasn’t passionate about religion, politics or other topics of interest.  He basically existed to be a blank slate to keep money coming in, and hide what he was doing from regulators.

When this story first broke, I was visiting my parents and we were glued to the TV as more information kept coming out about it.  These articles paint a sadder story of people who have gone from being “ladies who lunch” to having to work (or move in with children) in their golden years.

Some are painting Madoff as a devil who set out to defraud his family, friends and community.  I don’t have anything to base this on, but my feeling is that the whole situation probably evolved gradually.  He might have been running investments profitably at one point (in the 80’s or 90’s is the speculation), got used to being viewed as a “market genius”, took a risk that didn’t pay off, then instead of being upfront, he hid the loss.  Perhaps he was hoping to get back “in the black” then move forward again, or maybe he just couldn’t take the blow to his ego that he’d messed up.  At a certain point he must have thought “I’m never going to be back in the black, but I’m not a young guy, maybe I can keep this under wraps until I die then leave it for other people to unravel”.  One Warren Buffett quote I like is “You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.”  The recent market drop was the tide that went out and showed that Bernie had been swimming naked.

Some people have compared Madoff to Hitler (many of his investors were rich Jewish families) which is insulting.  Comparing someone who defrauded a bunch of wealthy people to a man who attempted the systematic genocide of a race of people is offensive.  Godwin’s Law certainly applies.

There has been a number of racist perspectives on the whole deal as well.  Some anti-semites have apparently been happy that the whole situation occurred:  both for discrediting Madoff, who is Jewish, and his victims (many of whom are Jews as well and often very committed to philanthropy).  This is a blatantly ugly attitude, however some Jews have also made very racist statements claiming that “it’s especially bad that Madoff did this ‘to his own people'”.  Come on!  There are good people and bad people of all races, genders and religions.  Thinking that someone is going to be a good person because they’re Jewish, or not take advantage of the Jewish community because they’re a Jew is ridiculous and naive.  Madoff is a man who behaved badly.  His ethnic / religious identity has nothing to do with that.

Beyond being more sympathetic to Madoff than most (although I don’t think he’s Hitler or the devil, I do think life imprisonment is probably reasonable), I’m also less sympathetic to his victims than most.  Given, any time you’re robbed it’s bad.  And, it bothers me when people think it’s ok for bad things to happen to rich people because their rich.    A number of investors with Madoff lost EVERYTHING (they gave it all to him and were living off of the returns) and went from being rich to being poor.  Even if these are people who don’t have a lot of experience managing their money, it was pretty stupid of them to put 100% of their money into one investment (no matter how good they thought it was).  People did the same thing with Nortel and with income trusts.  They’re happy to cash the checks in the good times, but start howling when their luck turns.  Grow up!  If you’re retired and don’t have enough investments with ultra-safe, conservative investments (like fixed income) to get you by at a minimum standard of living, then you’re gambling with your future (and shouldn’t get much sympathy if your luck turns).  Madoff was giving consistent returns of 10-12%, which tells anyone with a brain that there’s significant risk there.

That being said, it’s remarkably easy (although crass) to tell people who have lost on investments that they were greedy.  However, Madoff investors who lost it all were being greedy (there, I said it).

What has been your feeling about the whole Madoff situation?  Do you think spending the rest of his life in prision is a reasonable punishment?  Do you believe that he was acting alone?  Should investors be required to return money they withdrew from Madoff before the news broke?