Recently many articles have been appearing on the internet extolling the virtues of entering into a prenuptial or premarital agreement prior to your marriage. I offer the following reflections from my practice of law and work as a mediator to strongly counter the idea that prenuptial agreements have no “cost” and provide only benefit to a marrying couple. Both people entering into marriages should seriously consider what these realities are prior to engaging in the idea that a prenuptial agreement will be good for you and your marriage.

Reality 1: Negotiating a prenuptial agreement may irrevocably corrode your marriage and has the potential to make divorce much more likely.

The future spouse who pushes for a prenuptial agreement demonstrates a lack of faith in the other and a lack of commitment to the marriage. That prospective spouse also presumes a lack of fairness from the other in case of divorce.

There is usually an “initiator” spouse, and a “compliant” spouse. The negotiations will always be remembered as callous by the “compliant” spouse. The dynamics of the negotiations set up a bad pattern for the marriage.

Negotiating a prenuptial agreement is not romantic and can destroy a portion of the couples’ love forever. It is a harsh business negotiation, made harsher by the lawyers who must be involved, because the agreement is generally not enforceable without involvement of separate legal counsel.

Marriage is a mixture of a complicated set of laws, customs, expectations, and culturally-based understandings. A premarital agreement will upset this balance in unexpected ways and is bound to have unintended consequences.

Most lawyers representing parties in prenuptial agreements have no sensitivity to the harm they cause the couple and simply act (or pretend) as if it is purely a business deal. Marriage is not a business.

Often the initiating party (or their lawyer) says, “You can just put the premarital agreement in a drawer and forget about it.” That is not true. The premarital agreement cannot be forgotten and is presumptively legally binding as soon as it is pulled out of the drawer.

The initiator of a prenuptial agreement fails to trust and appreciate the balance of good common sense and equity embodied in state divorce laws. These laws were carefully developed during a long period of time and are designed to provide for fair solutions to all aspects of divorce, including the financial elements.

Many things, unforeseeable at the time the prenuptial agreement is signed, will likely happen during the course of a marriage. Applying these state laws at the time of divorce is more sensible than anything the parties can think of years before the divorce occurs.

If a “better” result than would be obtained by state divorce laws accrues to the party who initiated the premarital agreement, that “better” result is by definition unfair and a result of overreaching.

Reality 2: The two parties negotiating a Prenuptial Agreement do not generally have equal bargaining power, so the Agreement tends to be coercive and lacking in fair and equivalent consideration.

I have seen many cases where parties negotiate prenuptial agreements very close to the wedding and after the invitations have been sent out. This is not conducive for arm’s-length bargaining about a financial contract that may affect the next 50 years of your life.

Prenuptial agreements are generally one-sided, but are “dressed up” to pretend that there is consideration for the contract on both sides.

The financial contract at the heart of the Prenuptial Agreement involves the largest financial settlement you will ever make in your life, because it includes all property - past, present, and future; inherited, earned, and unearned - , of each of the spouses.

Even mediators can be insensitive to the power imbalance in the parties when assisting clients in negotiating a prenuptial agreement. Mediators should be very aware that the agreement proposed by “both parties” may be really the thoughts of only one and that the other party feels coerced, although does not admit it. All motivations and feelings should be exposed and discussed in the mediation prior to proceeding.

Reality 3: Prenuptial agreements are generally not appropriate for people entering into first marriages, whether or not there is a disparity in income and assets.

Marriage is an exciting joint venture. If some of the aspects of the joint venture are removed by the premarital agreement, the marriage will become weaker. An important part of the joint venture of marriage is the financial partnership. A spouse may correctly feel that some of this aspect of the marriage has been taken away if a premarital agreement is entered into decreasing the spouse’s rights.

State divorce laws can handle the issues of disparity of income and disparity of premarital assets if and when the spouses get divorced. Avoiding court at the cost of an agreement that may make it more likely that there will be marriage failure may not be a sensible trade-off.

However, prenuptial agreements can be highly useful for people entering into second marriages who have children from the first marriage. An agreement can balance a spouse’s loyalty to the new spouse and with the spouse’s concern and loyalty to the children of the first marriage.

Reality 4: A Prenuptial Agreement often damages the relationship between the two families-of-origin.

A party (or the party’s parents) may want a financial agreement prior to the marriage due to the existence of family wealth. The premarital agreement generally isolates all family property as not part of the marriage, forever. Result: the future spouse’s family feels humiliated and disrespected, and never forgets the rebuff. This is not good for the parties’ marriage, as it will result in family-of-origin conflict that will be present during the entire marriage and remembered until death.

One common fact pattern that I see often is this: the future spouse does not want to have a prenuptial agreement, but his parents insist. The prenuptial agreement is made. The wife feels her husband was unable to stand up to his parents, and loses respect for him.

The control of the marriage by one party’s family of origin disturbs the delicate balance of a marriage and makes it more likely to fail.

Reality 5: The terms of a Prenuptial Agreement are often quite unfair at the time of divorce, even though they are generally enforced by a Court.

Courts routinely enforce premarital agreements that give a spouse a fraction of what the spouse would “deserve” under state law. This proves that the deal made in the prenuptial agreement years earlier were unfair to that spouse.

Parties struggle in courts over prenuptial agreements; prenuptial agreements per se do not eliminate court battles.

Divorce laws are fair. That’s why they were developed. Trust in them (and in your good will and sense of fairness to each other) to do the right thing at the time of divorce. Do not rely on a set of financial agreements made years earlier prior to the marriage that may be totally out of sync with the real facts at the time of divorce. Trust that by foregoing the premarital agreement you have made your marriage stronger and more likely to succeed.

About The Author:
Laurie Israel is a lawyer/mediator who helps clients resolve their disputes with a high level of dignity, integrity and creativity. Laurie works in the areas of collaborative divorce, divorce mediation, divorce negotiation, and prenuptial agreements. She also helps people who wish to stay married through providing marital mediation (“Mediation to Stay Married”) and negotiation of postnuptial agreements. You can find out more about her work and read her articles on her websites: http://www.laurieisrael.com and http://www.mediationtostaymarried.com

A new ChangeWave survey shows a continuing powerful consumer movement towards discount retailers and wholesale clubs - even as overall consumer spending is rising for the first time in nearly a year.

The May 6-14 survey of 4,403 consumers focused on spending patterns for the next 90 days - and Costco ( 9) and Wal-Mart ( 6) once again led all other retail outlets in terms of future spending growth.

This is the third consecutive ChangeWave survey since February that has uncovered strong results for Costco and Wal-Mart, highlighting a continued large-scale movement towards discount retailers that’s being driven by high inflation and - until recently - a slower spending environment.

But here’s the kicker. The retail shopping transformation we’re seeing doesn’t appear to be a short-term phenomenon. Rather, it has the all trappings of a consumer revolution - a ChangeQuake, if you will - that’s continuing to pick up steam.

Case in point — spending has finally begun to improve, but consumers are continuing to shun the mall retailers for the discount chains and wholesale shopping clubs.

Just as importantly, while some of the news in our survey is surprisingly good — much of it is still bad and even downright ugly.

First The Good News

For the first time since June 2007 we’re seeing a consumer spending uptick. It’s only a slight one and overall spending still looks decidedly gloomy, but the 90-day outlook is not quite as terrible as it was in our previous consumer spending survey in April 2008.

Two-in-five U.S. respondents (40%) now say they’ll spend less over the next 90 days than they did a year ago - 2-pts better than in our April survey. Another 28% say they’ll spend more - a full 3-pts better than previously.

The survey also queried consumers on their impressions of current economic conditions, and once again while things still look bad, they don’t appear quite as awful as they did in April:

17% of respondents think the economy will improve in the next 90 days, which is notably 3-pts better than we saw in April. Even more striking, just 39% think the economy will worsen, a significant 11-pt improvement from a month ago.

29% say the current state of the economy is better than they thought it would be 90 days ago, while 21% say it is worse than they thought it would be.

Where is spending improving? For the first time this year there is a slight uptick in consumer electronics sales, although spending in the sector is still very sluggish. There is also a 1-pt uptick in spending on consumer durable goods.

Notably, the overall uptick in consumer spending is being driven by an improved outlook among households earning more than $100,000 per year.

But there are some very powerful undercurrents threatening the U.S. recovery, as the economic downside grows uglier.

The Bad and The Ugly

First, the spending outlook for households earning Less than $50,000 per year is extraordinarily depressed, with 61% saying they’ll spend less over the next 90 days than they did a year ago - a whopping 6-pts worse than in our April consumer spending survey.

Secondly, among those who say they’re spending less over the next 90 days, more than half (52%) cite Inflation as a reason - a 6-pt jump since April. Another 49% point to Higher Energy Costs - also up 6-pts from previously.

Other consumer concerns have increasingly taken a back seat to inflation. Perhaps most ominously, two-thirds of consumers report that due to increased energy costs their discretionary spending will be lower for the next 90-days.

Thus, here at ChangeWave we weren’t at all surprised when Wal-Mart’s latest earnings announcement showed better than expected 1st Quarter results — with profits rising nearly 7%. Similarly, Costco reported an 8% rise in April same-store sales — well ahead of the 6.1% consensus estimate.

In other positive news for the two retail giants, when consumers were asked where they expect to spend their economic stimulus tax rebate checks, Wal-Mart (12%) and Costco (12%) were the two winners among the major retail outlets.

So What’s in Store For Consumers?

In sum, for the first time since June 2007 our ChangeWave surveys are picking up some signs of a bottom among consumers. Although spending remains weak, the 90-day outlook is better than it was in April. There is also a notable improvement in the overall consumer outlook on the economy.

Counterbalancing these positives is a continued deterioration in the economic health of lower-income consumers and a huge spike in inflation worries among virtually all consumers.

According to the government’s latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures, inflation is tame, with a less-than-expected 0.2% rise in April. But there remains a huge disconnect, between the relatively benign CPI report and the virulent spike in inflation concerns among consumers.

Commentator Kevin Phillips recently derided the CPI, calling it the \”great inflation hoax\” and charging that the \”misrepresentation of inflation, pursued statistically over the last 25 years, has been the main buttress of Washington’s over-favorable and self-serving portraiture of the U.S. economy.\”

Putting aside major doubts over the CPI’s accuracy, we’ll continue to keep a close watch on the effects of inflation on consumer spending. The bottom line is inflation is radically altering spending behavior and dampening hopes of a U.S. recovery for the 2nd half of the year - and beyond.

About The Author:
ChangeWave tracks the hottest stocks and technologies through a series of online surveys. To gain early access to reports highlight the winning and losing companies, sign up for free at: http://www.changewave.com/hotwire.

For more additional information on ChangeWave, visit: http://blog.changewave.com.

In a rare and almost unprecedented move - Santa Claus, Mrs. Claus, Rudolph and Arthur Honeytree (the Head Elf), after a brief, spontaneous, top secret meeting at an undisclosed location somewhere at the North Pole - released this statement.

“This kind of behavior is inexcusable and as such, I have no choice but to remove these kids from my Nice List.” Santa said. “These kids think that I’m only watching them in the weeks leading up to Christmas. But the truth is I’m watching them all year long. If you screw up in February, April or even June, I’ll know about it. You’ll be kicked out of all Santa’s special programs. You’ll be removed from my Letter from Santa program, you will not receive your Nice List Certificate… even Rudolph will dis you. Clearly we have to make an example out of these young teens. My letter from Santa program is my most popular and these kids are going to miss out.”

“The Polk County courts may have decided to treat these teens as adults, but they’re still kids as far as the North Pole is concerned.” Santa added.

As it turns out five of the eight kids barely made the Nice List last year. And one of the eight was already off the Nice List before this latest fiasco. Santa would not discuss this particular case however sighting privacy and confidentiality as well as liability reasons.

It is quite rare that Santa would issue the dreaded lifetime ban from Santa’s Nice List. There have only been a couple dozen cases where such harsh punishment has been doled out by the big guy.

The most famous being Timmy Warchickles who posted Santa’s personal cell phone number on his Myspace profile. Santa’s North Pole communications center came to a screeching halt as Santa’s phone was bombarded with more than 12 thousand people a second.

“That kid is a menace to society.” Santa said at the time.

“The Buck Stops Here!” Santa remarked. “I’m the decider! If I decide you’re not going to be on the Nice List, then you’re not going to be on the Nice List. That’s all there is to it! And, I shouldn’t even have to say this, but if you’re not on the nice list, you’re certainly not getting a Letter From Santa.”

An Elf who wished to remain anonymous added, “Essentially Santa is the highest governing power at the North Pole. The North Pole is not a democratic union. Santa rules with a white glove. What he says’ goes. The United States government has no jurisdiction at the North Pole. I’m not complaining. We wouldn’t have it any other way. We love Santa as much as all the kids do.”

Rudolph could not be reached for comment, but Mrs. Claus defended the decision saying, “We will not and can not tolerate this kind of behavior.”

“It’s really sad.” Mrs. Claus remarked. “These kids don’t realize what the long term consequences of their actions are. Once you’re off Santa’s Nice List, there are a lot of things you miss out on. These kids will not receive their personalized “Letter From Santa”; they will not get their official “Nice List Certificate”; no autographed picture of Santa, no picture of Rudolph… it’s just a shame. We know that the highlight of Christmas for most kids is receiving a letter from Santa and the nice list certificate right before Christmas. They sure do sleep better knowing their on the nice list.”

Arthur Honeytree, always the shameless self-promoter added, “These kids are really going to be missing out this year because Santa has designed a whole new letterhead for his personalized letters from Santa. Even the Nice List certificate has been completely redesigned for 2008. These kids are going to be sorry. All the other kids are going to be walking around with their letter from Santa and showing off their nice list certificate and these kids will have nothing, notta, zip. Too BAD!”

Don’t forget kids, just because it’s May or June, Santa’s still watching. And if you hope to be on Santa’s Nice List this year and you want Santa to send you a personalized letter, you’d better be good for goodness sake.

Be sure to catch the full length feature story, along with in depth interviews, coming up in “Santa’s Workshop Quarterly.”

Other features in the nest issue of “Santa’s Workshop Quarterly.”

“Dealing with stress. How Santa stays sane!”

“How a Santa Letter Saved My Christmas”

“Mrs. Claus Talks About the Pressures of Christmas, Getting It All Done”

“7 Simple Techniques for Keeping Your Child Believing in Santa!”

“What Every Parent Should Know About Santa Clause”

“Letters From Santa Claus, Restore the Magic of Christmas”

About The Author:
Alex Russell has performed extensive research in the arena of letters from Santa, and devotes much of his time to reviewing websites that offer services for Santa letters. Alex has earned the respect of many Christmas authority websites such as http://www.PackageFromSanta.com, for his highly regarded articles on such topics as “How to Write a Letter from Santa” and “The Truth about Santa Letters.”

As the economy continues to tank so do the number of Americans without health insurance—and the number small business owners who can afford to insure their employees.

A recent survey by the NFIB Research Foundation, a small business advocacy group, showed that only 47 percent of small business owners offer employee health benefits. Those employing 20 or more people are more than twice as likely to offer employee health benefits as those with fewer than 10.

The survey found that the low numbers are primarily the result of new small businesses opting not to cover employees. Most small businesses who offer benefits have offered them for a while and are reluctant to drop them for fear of losing good employees.

“It’s much better for employee morale if a small-business owner never offers health benefits, than it is to offer them and then be forced to take it away because it is too expensive to continue,” said William J. Dennis, NFIB’s senior research fellow. “Small-business owners experience considerable turmoil in their early years. They often experience cash flow problems and are reluctant to incur additional expenses such as health insurance. What’s new to this picture is that it appears that new small-business owners are waiting longer or choosing not to offer health insurance benefits to their employees at all.”

The fact that new small businesses are choosing not to offer benefits is a disturbing trend because of the swift turnover of the small business population. If the trend continues, the number of employers who never offer benefits will increase. And that will hurt small businesses because it will limit thet talent pool from which they draw.

What Can Be Done?

Small businesses aren’t alone in struggling with the cost of health care (and premiums) in the current economic climate. The U.S. Census Bureau reports 47 million people, or 15.8 percent of the U.S. population, were without health insurance during 2006

Unfortunately for the small business owner, new legislative approaches to help the uninsured may actually hurt them. One popular option is the \”pay-or-play\” mandate, in which employers are required to either provide health insurance for their employees or pay a penalty to offset costs the government incurs to provide health care for the uninsured. The rules likely would only apply to full-time employees.

Proponents say such mandates could significantly reduce the ranks of the uninsured, since the vast majority of the uninsured are in families with at least one full-time worker. Many of these are low-income families, suggesting that such measures could benefit the working poor.

Opponents argue that many low-wage workers will just be paid less, reduced to part-time or laid off to offset the insurance costs.

In their paper, \”Employer Health Insurance Mandates and the Risk of Unemployment,\” researchers Katherine Baicker and Helen Levy found several factors affect the extent to which such mandates cost more jobs:

Cost of the insurance.

How much of the cost of coverage will be passed on to workers via lower wages.

How many uninsured workers have earnings so close to the minimum wage that their wages cannot be reduced enough to offset the cost of the new coverage.

The authors found that the mandate would still leave 54 percent of American workers without coverage.

“The vast majority of those who benefit from pay or play mandate live in families with incomes twice the poverty line or more and, depending on how coverage is determined, the mandate will leave a significant share of the working poor ineligible for such benefits either because their hourly wage rate is too high or they work for smaller exempt firms,” the authors wrote.

Most experts agree that such mandates are bad for small businesses. Employers are faced with hard choices. In the NFIB poll, only 20 percent of small employers said they would simply provide the insurance as required. Many more said they would either cut jobs or move more employees to part-time status.

Moving people to part-time work is a particularly attractive option to small business owners. In fact, how part-time employees are treated is a key influencing factor on whether small businesses support pay or play legislation.

According to NFIB, “The treatment of these employees will alter relative costs in one direction or the other, providing small employers’ strong relative incentive to change.”

Small business experts agree that if part-time employees are covered by a mandate, most employers will respond by simply eliminating jobs, adding to the jobless rate and doing nothing for the rate of uninsured.

Small business owners have always faced an uncertain future but the current economy and the health care crisis make this an extremely tough time to take the startup step.

About The Author:
Melissa Mashtonio writes for Manta.com, the authority for finding 45 million free small to large company profiles worldwide-and their related industries and products. Manta’s Small Business Center features thousands of how-to-guides for small business owners. http://www.manta.com/

A huge shift is occurring in the way corporate America views energy usage.

In a March ChangeWave survey of 1,400 respondents knowledgeable about their company’s energy spending, more than one-in-five (22%) reported their company is Very Concerned about reducing its energy usage. Another 35% say they’re Somewhat Concerned.

The increased levels of concern are ushering in a transformational shift in U.S. corporate energy consumption - with an astounding 26% of respondents saying their company has used Less energy than normal over the past six months.

By comparison, only 16% say they’ve used More energy.

In a related finding, nearly a quarter of respondents (23%) report their company’s spending on energy efficient products and technologies will Increase over the next six months; three-times the percentage that see a Decrease (8%).

“The perfect storm of rising energy costs and concern over global climate disruption is forcing companies to rethink the most basic ways they use energy,” said ChangeWave analyst Joshua Levine. “A tremendous shift in corporate perception is occurring and it’s going to impact virtually all industries and create investment opportunities in the process.”

To track the corporate race towards greater energy efficiency, we asked respondents which technologies and products their company is actually using. Two technologies - solar power and LED lighting - stand out far above the rest.

Alternative Technologies - Here Comes the Sun

Corporate use of “off-the-grid” energy technologies is gaining momentum, with 8% of respondents saying they currently use alternative sources to generate power. Going forward, better than one-in-five (21%) say they’ll install and make use of alternative energy sources within the next five years.

The shift to alternative energy is great news for solar power, which dominates the landscape.

Solar is far ahead of other alternative energy options, both in terms of current corporate usage (51%) and future planned users (72%). Wind Power is relegated to a distant second for current (24%) and future users (19%).

Solar Flares

According to the survey, an unattractive payback period (24%) still ranks as one of the big barriers to corporate use of alternative power technologies, second only to initial capital investment (39%). And when asked how long they think it will take to achieve a payback for their current solar energy investments, the consensus estimate among respondents is seven years (for future solar energy investments it’s 6.4 years).

But despite this, with crude oil prices hitting new all-time highs the solar industry clearly has momentum and is helping bring about a transformational shift in corporate energy use.

“Solar’s rapid expansion on the corporate energy efficiency front is good news for companies in the solar food chain,” says Josh Levine. “Polysilicon producers, solar cell manufacturers and solar installation firms are all likely beneficiaries of the trend toward the sun.”

Adding to solar’s attraction is the near certainty of continued tax credits.

U.S. lawmakers appear likely to pass an extension of a key solar industry tax credit. The bill, if passed, would extend the 30% commercial tax credit by eight years, the residential credit by one year and would remove a $2,000 cap on residential systems. Importantly, utilities would be able to take advantage of the credit for the first time.

According to Levine, the companies best positioned to ride this solar wave are the major photovoltaics manufacturers like First Solar (FSLR), SunPower Corp. (SPWR) and Suntech Power Holdings (STP) - each of which are leading the solar energy industry ever closer to the “Holy Grail” of alternative energy economics - grid price parity.

LED Lights Up

Along with solar power, there is another standout in the corporate race towards energy efficiency.

Overall, the survey points to lighting as the single easiest area for businesses to reduce their energy usage.

It is little wonder then, that energy efficient lighting is the top product/technology companies will be purchasing over the next six months to improve energy efficiency.

And while Compact and Regular Florescent Lighting had the highest market share over the past six months - LED Lighting (21%; up 7-pts) is set to be the clear momentum leader going forward.

We note that the biggest barrier to the more widespread adoption of LED lighting technology is price. Nearly three-in-four respondents (74%) say their company would only consider switching all of its lighting with LED if the cost were lower than $5 per bulb. But despite pricing issues, the survey definitively shows LED lighting as a prime spending area in the world of corporate energy efficiency.

This is a boost for major lighting firms like Philips Electronics (PHG) and General Electric (GE), who are the leading LED manufacturers and distributors. However, Levine believes the smaller pure-plays in LED lighting technology are poised to be the biggest winners.

“Among the handful of innovators that have developed LED technologies, Cree Inc. (CREE) stands out as a likely candidate to be eventually acquired by a lighting giant,” says Levine. “The light fixture market is a 2.5 billion unit market worldwide, and Cree’s technologies are clearly addressing this enormous opportunity.”

About The Author:
The ChangeWave expert research network is composed of 15,000 highly qualified professionals. Members are surveyed weekly on a range of topics, and ChangeWave converts the findings into proprietary reports. Visit us to see more detailed graphs and Corporate Energy Usage findings.

As concerns grow over water shortages and the quality of the world’s supply, a recent ChangeWave industry survey finds increased water project spending for 2008 - but not at the levels of previous years. And there may be trouble ahead.

According to the survey of 147 professionals working in the water industry, two-thirds (67%) think water project spending will increase over the next 12 months - but that represents a sizable 14-point drop from the previous ChangeWave survey in June 2007.

Despite the decline, these results are still relatively upbeat. However, the survey shows clouds looming over the industry that could push spending numbers down further - and they’re centered in the U.S.

Zeroing in on the United States

The Wall Street Journal recently reported that 40% of fresh water consumption in the U.S. is from industrial applications and that water use normally falls during an economic recession. Moreover, the stock prices of many U.S. water utility companies have declined recently on fears of a recession.

Add to this the findings of our ChangeWave survey, which shows a drop in the percentage of U.S. water industry respondents who think project spending will increase over the next 12 months within the private, federal and local government sectors.

Note the main reason for these more conservative growth projections is very straightforward:

By better than a 2-to-1 margin, industry respondents believe a U.S. recession would lead to decreased water project spending.

“Investors in water should keep a close eye on water project spending during a recession,” says Josh Levine, co-editor of ChangeWave Investing. “But our survey also shows there are still plenty of opportunities out there. In particular, industry respondents are most excited about two sectors right now - Wastewater Treatment and Water Infrastructure Repair and Replacement. That’s where we are focused.”

Respondents were also excited about a short list of top water companies, with industry behemoth General Electric (GE) (42%) ranking as the leader. Of course, GE is a huge conglomerate and water is only a small part of their business. But there are a handful of other companies industry respondents cited as having momentum:

American States Water (AWR) - the one utility of this group, engaged in the purchase, production, and distribution of water for California residential and commercial customers. California’s favorable regulatory environment and rapidly increasing population bodes well for the company’s future profits.

Flowserve (FLS) - a seller of precision-engineered flow control equipment, Flowserve receives two-thirds of its business from overseas markets in water as well as other industries. Lately the company’s been on a roll, having experienced record bookings in 2007.

Gorman-Rupp (GRC) - the company’s pumps and fluid control equipment are used in water, wastewater, and other industrial applications. Gorman-Rupp recently announced a 5-for-4 stock split and is enjoying record sales, a boost in new orders, and increased penetration within international markets.

Calgon Carbon (CCC) - focuses on purifying water and air with its granular activated carbon, which is used in the removal of organic compounds from liquids and gases. Recently it’s been an exceptional performer in the water group, its shares rising considerably over the past year.

Nalco Holding Co. (NLC) - provides water treatment products and services to prevent corrosion, contamination and the build up of harmful deposits. Its focus is on production processes that enhance efficiency and improve customers’ end products.

Ben Franklin stated it clearly more than two centuries ago, “When the well’s dry, we know the worth of water.”

And while there may be blips in the rate of water spending short term, wise investors know that water issues are going to be with us for centuries to come.

Be sure to check out our website at the link immediately below for ChangeWave’s next look at the water industry.

About The Author:
For the latest ChangeWave news on technology trends and companies, visit: ChangeWave Research HotWire Blog. The ChangeWave research network is composed of 15,000 highly qualified business and technology professionals. Members are surveyed on a range of topics, and the findings are converted into quantitative and qualitative reports.

Many people go online in search of their elusive soul mate, only to find all of the wrong people on the other end of the meeting. Many women think that they are alone in this outcome, but it happens to guys too.

Women have met so many men online, who only seem interested in a roll in the hay, that they have built defenses that may stand in the way of their ultimate success in dating and lifelong happiness. The ladies always tend to believe that they are the only ones that get the short end of that stick, but it just is not true - it really does happen to guys too.

My best friend recently re-entered the dating game, after his wife of ten years decided that she wanted to play the field rather than to stay committed to her husband and her vows. He is a good Christian man, who is only looking for the next Mrs. Smith. Yet, all of the ladies he has been meeting online are only in the game for one thing - a roll in the hay.

Girls, you are not alone.

Dating on the Internet is just like dating in real life, with only minor differences. In person, one can look into the eyes of their potential date to see if there is any real interest. In real life, one can read the body language of their potential date, to see if the interest is real and the intent is good. But, if you were to accept a date with someone met online, then you would actually have to agree to that first date in order to get that one-on-one to measure the interest and intent of your date.

Men and women both fool themselves, by believing that they can read the person at the other end of the conversation, simply by asking questions and reading the written answers. It is not that simple, especially if the other end of the conversation is only interested in night of passion, because the guy only interested in a one-night stand will likely tell you exactly what you want to hear. If he is willing to lie to you to get what he wants, then he will not be the kind of person you want to meet anyway.

But, here is the rub. Many people, men and women alike, feel that the most effective way to avoid the one-night stand type of date, is to demand a commitment of a long-term relationship from the person with whom they are speaking.

Would you commit to buying a car you called about, sight unseen, and without having at least looked at or driven the vehicle first?

You certainly wouldn’t, would you?

So, why do you want someone else to commit to a long-term relationship, sight unseen, without first meeting that someone?

Commitment runs two ways. If I were to commit to a long-term relationship with someone I had never before met, then I would expect the person forcing the commitment to approach the relationship with the exact same commitment for me as I had given to them. Just as a marriage relationship requires two people to work together towards the same ends, any commitment undertaken will also require both parties to invest the same care of concern for the promise.

But, the person demanding that kind of commitment before our first date is just as likely to find one hundred reasons not to go out with me on a second date. It just goes with the territory.

It is just basic human behavior that assures me of that outcome. The person demanding a commitment from me, without having first met me, is a person who fears what I might want from them. But, when the fear is so strong as to demand an upfront commitment for a date, then the fear will most assuredly prevent the date from leading to greater things.

This is the very reason why I choose to only date women who are willing to approach a date with \”No Strings Attached.\”

\”No Strings Attached\” gives me the liberty to determine if I like the person enough to go out with them a second time. And \”No Strings Attached\” gives her the ability to decide on her own free will if she will want to go out with me on a second date. \”No Strings Attached\” permits both my date and myself to go out on a date, without fear and without pressure to make things work.

With no expectation of a second date assumed, then both my date and myself are free to explore one another, to see if there is a real future potential for the relationship.

Ladies. I know that I am looking for a long-term relationship, and one day, I might be willing to invite my girlfriend to become my wife. \”No Strings Attached\” should never be viewed, as \”I only want a roll in the hay.\” Instead, \”No Strings Attached\” means that I would like to get to know you a bit better, before I agree to any kind of long-term or committed relationship with you.

Just as I want the chance to get to know you before I make a commitment to you, you should want the same from me.

Hit me up, if you live in my neck of the woods. I am single, and I make a real good living. I am looking for a long-term relationship, with the potential of marriage, and I may truly be looking for someone exactly like you. But until you can put away your fear and agree to go on a date with no strings attached, then you and I will never know what could have been.

About The Author:
Lance Metzger writes about relationships, offline and online dating. If you liked this article, you can read more of Lance’s articles here: http://www.nsadatingsite.com/articles.htm \”No Strings Attached\” simply means, \”Let’s get to know one another before we start making any commitments to one another.\” To explore No Strings Attached Dating, at a website where all members get free email, please visit the NSA Dating Site at: http://www.nsadatingsite.com

Researchers have discovered that one of the most striking differences between people who are socially confident and who make friends easily, and those who are shy, is that confident people make eye contact much more often with their conversational partners.

Many shy people never make eye contact at all when they are talking with someone. Instead of looking at the person they are talking with, they tend to look downward or away.

If you have been less successful in making friends than you wish, you may be able to become much more socially successful by making this one simple change in your behavior. Learn to use eye contact effectively when you are talking to someone.

Some of us never make eye contact with our conversation partner when we are talking. This can make other people think we are nervous and untrustworthy.

On the other hand, some of us make too much eye contact, and stare too hard. This also makes our conversations partners uncomfortable. Learn the right balance of making eye contact and looking away.

Most North Americans, especially Caucasians, prefer to have a lot of eye contact when they are talking with someone.

When a person doesn’t make eye contact with them, North Americans tend to assume that person is hiding something. The very phrase \”shifty-eyed\” connotes a person whose eyes dart around the room, implying that they are untrustworthy.

When you are speaking with someone who is from a culture that prefers a lot of eye contact, be sure to keep looking at that person frequently while you are talking, even while you are wondering what to say next. You don’t need to use a piercing stare, a friendly gaze will do.

If it really bothers you to look directly into another person’s eyes, you can look at the person’s face without focusing solely on the eyes. If you gaze generally at the eyebrow area or the bridge of the nose, this is close enough to the eye region that you will appear to be looking at the person’s eyes. You may find that it eases your own discomfort if you let your vision go slightly out of focus.

Whenever you are in conversation with someone, keep the majority of your focus on the other person. If you glance around the room too much, or look too frequently at other people, your conversation partner may assume that you are bored, or that you are looking around for someone else you would rather talk with.

If you have difficulty knowing exactly how to make eye contact, you can benefit from practicing in front of a mirror, or with another person.

Don’t stare at other people too intensely however! A very intense, unblinking start can make your conversation partner feel very uncomfortable. It can be very unpleasant to be on the receiving end of an intense stare, particularly at close range.

You can lighten the impression you are making by smiling more often, nodding, and by gazing at the entire face as well as the eyes. In addition, you can frequently glance away for brief periods.

Practice looking at your conversation partner’s face while you speak, and mix in lots of smiles and nods, occasionally glancing away while you speak and while you listen.

This will show that you are friendly, interested and approachable.

When other people get the sense that you are really paying attention to them and that you enjoy talking with them, they will be much more likely to want to have more conversations with you.

About The Author:
This article is written by self help author Royane Real who is the author of the short report \”Your Guide to Making Friendly Conversation\” If you would like to improve your conversational ability and make more friends, download it today at or get the paperback version at: http://www.lulu.com/real