This is Part 1 of a 2 part interview …

David Asman has lived an adventurous life on his road to classic American success. From a school teacher in Chicago to the host of a world wide show on Fox Business Network, David has worked hard for his rewards.

The Start of a Successful Career

Damien Hoffman: David, you started your career as a teacher. How did you get interested in financial journalism?

David: I was studying to get a Master’s in teaching at Northwestern University. I thought I would teach and do Journalism at the same time, but I realized I had to choose. It was just too much to do both.

So, in the late 70′s I quit graduate school and saved up money to pay off my school debt. Then I moved to the East Coast to take an assistant editor’s job at a magazine called Prospect which was affiliated with an alumni organization at Princeton University.

It was very exiting time for economic literature because people like Milton Friedman and George Gilder were trying to turn around the awful economy we had back then. We had inflation in double digits and interest rates in the low 20s. It made the current situation look almost enviable.

The problems seemed so intractable. But I wasn’t interested in the people who said we’d be in the mess permanently. I was more excited by the people who said that if we increased incentives in a dramatic way for businesses to create things, the economy could correct itself.

Of course, that’s eventually what happened. We had a combination of a serious Federal Reserved Chairman Paul Volcker – who was appointed by President Carter — squeezing inflation out of the economy while a serious President, Ronald Reagan, lowered tax rates to create a tremendous boom of small and medium-sized businesses in this country. That recipe led to seven very strong years of economic growth between 1983 and 1990.

And that period was marked not only by the overall figures, but more importantly, by the fact that small businesses were the ones generating growth in the economy. And that’s of course when epic companies started such as Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL), Compaq (NYSE: HPQ), and FedEx (NYSE: FDX).

The deregulatory and lower tax rate environment gave a tremendous leg up to the small and medium-sized businesses — the ones that are the most creative. That’s why we began to see a significant increase in creativity among information services which dramatically changed our economy. I think it was one of the most dramatic changes in economic history — not only for the U.S, but for the world. It was the information revolution and was as important and fundamentally transformative as the industrial revolution.

Damien: Where were you at that exciting time?

David: I was right in the heart of it. There was an organization called ICEPS — the International Center for Economic Policy Studies — which later became the Manhattan Institute. That was a think tank which focused specifically on what later came to be known as “supply-side economics”: the idea that by incentivizing the growth of small and medium-sized businesses in this country, we could fundamentally transform the entire economy.

All of the thinkers at the forefront of that movement either came through the Manhattan Institute or were part of it. I edited a lot of books there and also a little magazine called “The Manhattan Report” that focused on these thinkers, economists, and business people.

I did that for two years and then freelanced for about a year and a half.  Eventually a politician in Washington — Senator Gordon Humphrey — offered me a job to be his press secretary. I called up a friend at the Wall Street Journal — George Malone — to ask whether this would taint my reputation as a journalist. He didn’t think it would, but he said there was a job opening at the Wall Street Journal and asked if I would apply for it.

The job was actually two positions. One was editing a weekly column called “The Managers Journal”. That was an advice column for managers by managers about how to operate more efficiently. The second was editing a column called “The Americas”. Latin America was very hot at that time. Mexico had just defaulted on its debt — like what’s happening with Greece right now and the other PIIG Nations [Portugal, Italy, Ireland].

Latin America had a debt crisis. Citi (NYSE: C) and a bunch of other banks had made terrible loans to corrupt governments. I remembered going to Manufacturers Hanover for a luncheon in one of their very pristine Park Avenue offices. We were drinking Cherry in a very verified environment. And I asked the head of the investor department, “How many of your loans, because you had a portfolio of billions of dollars, how many of those in percentage-wise are government loans as supposed to private loans?”

He said, “Oh, about 80-20.” And I said, “Wait a minute, you mean 80% private, 20% public, right?” He said “No, no, no. 80 public, 20 private” — meaning 80% of their exposure in Latin America was to these corrupt governments. How could you possibly expect a corrupt government to use their loan profitably when most of the money was being shipped off to Swiss bank accounts immediately?

Moreover, the projects that were built were terribly built because they were built by the cronies and relatives of these politicians. These people were being hired not on the basis of the quality of their work, but on the basis of their connections.

We also had a socialist government in Nicaragua with intentions of spreading throughout Central America. They were funding a revolutionary operation in El Salvador and moving into Guatemala, orchestrated out of Havana.

As dangerous as it was, it was a perfect environment for journalist. I started that in 1983 and I continued with that job until 1995.

During that period I also did the management column which was fascinating. I got to know managers around the country. People like Andy Grove who, at that time, was a lowly VP at Intel (Nasdaq: INTC).

A Love Story

Damien: David, when I was on your show, the staff said I should ask you about your wonderful love story. How did it all unfold?

David: During one of my travels to Central America in the mid-’80s, I met a guy in Nicaragua who became a great source for me — a lawyer named Roger Guevara. He was in and out of prison because he was a lawyer who stood up for human rights. For that reason, the Sandinistas kept throwing him in jail and torturing him.

We became close.  I helped him out when I could using the committee to protect journalists and so forth here in New York. Eventually, in 1988 he introduced me to a woman at a dinner party who would become my wife now, Marta Cecilia. We met, fell in love, and spent about about six months in a long distance relationship.

At the time, our friend Roger was jailed again. They were beating him up quite a bit. They were also following Marta Cecilia and her son. So, things were getting very dangerous.

I knew the Foreign Minister Costa Rica, a guy named Madrigal Nieto, who was a very nice guy.  He arranged for Marta Cecilia and Felipe to get a visa for life to Costa Rica.  The plan was for her to pretend she and Felipe were just going to Costa Rica for the weekend.

So, they packed a little bag for the two of them and flew to Costa Rica. I flew to Costa Rica to meet them. I remember them getting off the plane and Felipe –this little seven-year-old — looking way up at me and wondering, “What the hell was happening?” because he couldn’t be told he was leaving his extended family.

He didn’t speak any English at that time and was about to go to New York in November where it’s cold and rainy. He’d never experienced the cold before. And he was going to live at my one-bedroom bachelor pad.

The best part is Felipe and I got along as well as Marta Cecilia and I did. It was an amazing way to begin our new life together.

The first year was very tough for Felipe. I was still making Wall Street Journal money which was about $35,000 at that time. That covered three people and a bachelor who’s used to living alone. Of course, MC couldn’t work because she didn’t have her green card yet.

I was continuing to go to South America and Central America over the next few years.

From Print to TV

Damien: Was that around the time you started your transition to television?

David: Yes. John Malone wanted to start television programming as opposed to just providing programs through cable. So, he hired Bob Chitester, an executive producer to begin programming. Chitester and I had known each other for a long time. He had actually produced a show called “Free to Choose” – a PBS series based on Milton Friedman’s work. He hired me as the anchor of a show called “Damn Right”, which was a political affairs show that later became “Issues USA”.

Damien: Was “Damn Right” a controversial title at that time?

David: Oh yeah. It was meant to be controversial.  This was before Fox News (NYSE: NWSA). Malone saw that a vast group of peoples’ needs were not being met. These people did not describe themselves as liberals. They were either moderate conservative or libertarian. This group was dissatisfied with the content on CNN (NYSE: TWN) and network news.

The show was from 7:30PM to 8:00PM, every Monday through Friday. So, I’d lock-up in the editorial page at about 6 o’clock in the evening, take a subway up to the studio, then prepare for the show.

That was my introduction to television. Then Roger Ailes got together with Rupert Murdoch to start a news channel. Roger had just left the NBC (NYSE: GE) empires: CNBC, America’s Talking, and what later became MSNBC. At that point, Malone said, “If Rupert and Roger get together, there’s no stopping them.” So, he pulled the plug on his little programming, and Fox News was born.

At about that time, I went to a lunch at Mort Zuckerman’s house for Fidel Castro. I was invited because of my background in Latin-America and I’d just come back from Cuba. I was seated in between the late Bill Safire, the New York Times (NYSE: NYT) columnist, and Roger Ailes. I later wrote an article called “I’ve Been to a Marvelous Party” — a take-off on the Noel Coward song — because it was a ridiculous scene where all these TV personalities were hugging Fidel as though he was a sweet old uncle rather than a tight, tyrannical dictator.

Roger read the article and said, “How would you like a full time job in television?” At that time, I declined because I liked having one foot in print and one foot in broadcast. But about a year later in 1997, he came back to me and we did the deal.

So, that’s when I made the switch to Fox News and I’ve been with TV ever since.

Damien: What has been the biggest development since you joined Fox in ’97?

David: The major shift here from ‘97 until now was the emergence of Fox Business in 2007.

Damien: Right before the crash.

David: Talk about baptism by a fire. It was terrible from a business standpoint but wonderful from the journalistic standpoint because there was so much to talk about.

I love the amount of input everyone has here. It’s like the beginning of Microsoft or Apple — very entrepreneurial. Roger is involved. Rupert is involved. They think so far out of the box that they very often keep their competition guessing.

Everybody knows Roger is a genius when it comes to programming.  So, people look very closely at what we’re doing — not necessarily because they think tomorrow we’re going to overtake them in the numbers, but because they know eventually we could …

There is a limitless supply of suckers in the world of investing. Will Libya soon become a victim of Greece’s slick salesmanship? Or, is Libya the sovereign Warren Buffett snapping up shares at the most opportune time?

During my investment banking days, one of my roles was to meet with sell-side salesman to evaluate the prospects of a deal. The first prong of my framework was what I call the Bullshit Test.

Promoters (i.e., Wall Street speak for “salesman”) came into our office dressed in expensive clothes. They came into our office wielding a shiny prospectus with sexy graphs and financial models. They came into our office high on their own hype and believed their story with an overwhelming conviction.

However, as my boss taught me, only a very small percentage of those salesman were pitching something that would actually result in a winning investment. Therefore, when I smelled bullshit, we kindly took a pass on the “opportunity”.

The pool of rejected beggars played the law of numbers and swiftly moved on to the next large purse holder. To the promoters’ dismay, their reputation would usually precede them because the world of professional high finance is a very small group who tend to discuss deals on tour within the circuit.

Consequently, as top-tier investors say “No”, many of these promoters continue to move down the ladder of quality capital partners. The riskiest and most tenuous projects seem to quickly gravitate to the biggest suckers.

This morning, Greece made headlines after the Libyan Investment Authority took a look at investment opportunities in Europe’s Achilles’ heel. Clearly, Greece is running out of top-tier investing partners. In my humble opinion, Libya could be a fool who has fallen in love with the idea of investing in a sexy vehicle such as a Euro zone country.

Unless I am missing something, I am not convinced the entire Greek culture will suddenly break long-standing habits. But that’s hard to see when someone is smitten with becoming a part owner in one of civilization’s greatest brands. It reminds me of all the people who fell prey to the allure of Bernie Madoff and Lenny Dykstra.

Only time will tell whether Libya makes an investment or whether such an investment goes sour. But if I was the gatekeeper being wined and dined at Greece’s most spectacular destinations,  I would ask myself whether the strong smell at the deal table is more than just fresh feta.

Looking for great investing ideas? Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium subscribers have been crushing the markets with winning stock picks and a professional navigator in the hot gold and silver sectors. Let our team of professionals give you their best investing and trading ideas: click here now for your free trial.

You’ve heard it already and you’ll hear it again: California is the next Greece.  Everyone loves the catchiness and simplicity of the analogy, but is there a real connection? A simple Google search yields countless articles with “California is the next Greece…” in the title.  There are just too many such articles to pick one to dissect and link to.   Why is this an important question?  The answer lies in the consequences and remedies of a potential policy response.

When one asserts that two ailments are the same, those two ailments should be treated with the same remedy.  Shaping the discourse around California’s troubles being the same as those in Greece allows for problem solvers to view potential solutions under a very narrow and confined  lens.   Rather than discuss the particular assertions of any one article, I went about my own analysis in search of whether Greece and California (and to some extent New York and Illinois) are really all that analogous.

In conducting this analysis, I wanted to know if there really is some sort of common theme or thread between the two–California and Greece–other than a solvency crisis and sure enough, the more I looked, the more I learned, the more it became clear that the two are very different situations altogether, requiring rather different remedies.  Let’s take a closer look to prepare for what will certainly be the next hot-button topic in this ongoing economic crisis saga.

The Similarities:

Both California and Greece are facing significant short-falls in their 2010 budgets and both need to figure out a way to close that gap in the future.  California’s right now sits at about $26.3 billion, while Greece is at a $17 billion following their recent austerity measures.  California and Greece both also have short term debt that will require rolling over into longer-term maturities.  This leaves them vulnerable to credit market risk tolerance.

To an extent, California and Greece are both federations within a larger monetary union.  California is part of the United States and the US Federal Reserve System, while Greece is part of the European Union and the Economic Central Bank zone.  Neither locality controls their own monetary policy, and neither has the power to print their way out of their respective debt crises.  As a result, they both are subject to the monetary policy actions and decisions of their respective monetary federations/unions.

The Differences:

There are several crucial distinctions between California and Greece in the economic sphere that are critical to any analysis.

Economic Might:

Greece has a GDP of $356 billion, while the Eurozone on the whole has a $13.6 trillion GDP.  Contrast that to California, which has a Gross State Product (GSP) of about $1.85 trillion, in a US economy with a $14.1 trillion GDP and it’s hard to equate the significance of Greece to California.  On the whole, California accounts for 13.1% of all productivity in the United States, while Greece accounts for a mere 2.6% of the Eurozone economy.

Whether looking at the gross numbers or the relative numbers, it is clear that California’s economic might dwarfs that of Greece.  California is a much larger economy and counts for a significantly larger share of its federation’s (the US) economy than does Greece.  In this context, size does matter.  Greece is largely inconsequential to the Eurozone in terms of its GDP output.  They do matter in terms of the sovereign contagion risk, but a significant deflation in Greece will have little impact on the Eurozone GDP.  Pain in California, on the other hand, would have a major negative effect on the United States economy on the whole at a time when the US could least afford it.

Political Structure:

While Greece is a sovereign, California is a region within a larger sovereignty.  As a result, Californians must pay federal taxes to the US government, while Greek citizens pay no such equivalent tax.  Additionally, the US government spends money in California, while no such body does the same for Greece.  Greece as a country spent well past their means.  One can assert that in light of the fact that California’s budget faces a shortfall, so too did California, but we need to look at one additional element to assess just how true this really is.

Between 1981 and 2005, Californians paid a total of approximately $4.08 trillion in federal taxes.  Meanwhile, the federal government spent a total of roughly $3.59 trillion in and on the state of California.  Altogether, Californians contributed a net total of $495 billion to the federal system.  While Californians paid more than they received from the federal government, other states received far more than they spent (all data on the tax flow to individual states comes from the Tax Foundation’s Federal Taxes Paid vs. Federal Spending Received by State report from 2007).

This problem is not unique to California.  Two other big states (in terms of population and economy), New York and Illinois also had net federal outflows of over $400 billion.  Combined, California, Illinois and New York were net contributors to the federal system in the amount of $1.31 trillion between 1981 and 2005.  While these states were net contributors, many states were net recipients.  Between 1981 and 2005, the US federal government accrued a $3.88 trillion federal deficit.  Were it not for the contributions of these Big Three States, the budget short fall would have been 33% greater.

While California has had huge outflows of funds to the federal system, Greece has had no similar economic drain.

What to do with California (and also New York and Illinois):

Yes California and Greece have superficial similarities, but in no way is “California the next Greece” other than in terms of the likelihood for a default without some form of bailout or aid.  The differences are so strikingly huge, that the powers that be should take note and attempt to anticipate a California default rather than react to one should eventually happen.  One thing we learned when it comes to Greece is that the longer one waits for a solution, the more contagious the risks become and the more expensive the solution.

Without a healthy California, it is nearly impossible for a healthy US economy.  Additionally, should California’s economic troubles persist, this would bode increasingly more difficult for net recipient states (those states who pay in less to the federal system than they receive) to continue on their present paths.  Pain in the big states in the US equates to pain in the entirety of the US.

Not only are the consequences far larger when it comes to California, so too is the economic and moral obligation greater.  It is in the interest of just about every party involved for the federal government to use its cheaper cost of capital in aiding the troubling state governments in California, New York and Illinois in realigning their respective state budgets and cleaning the slate for a solid foundation for the future.  Without helping these Big Three States, the US federal budget would look increasingly more troubling.  Sometimes you have to spend a little to save a lot.

Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium subscribers have been crushing the markets with winning stock picks and a professional navigator in the hot gold and silver sectors. Let our team of professionals give you their best investing and trading ideas: click here now for your free trial.

Imagine growing up in a family of twelve. Chances are you would experience some challenges and complexities, but most families manage to pull it together and find livable solutions.

What if you were a member of a professional sports team and shared a uniform with teammates from 6 other countries? This is a scenario for potential Grade A conflict and dysfunction.

The challenges and complexities of leading a multinational group can quickly grow exponentially. Differences in language, education, religion, law, currency and work ethic make it difficult to function homogeneously. Herein lies the formidable challenge of the 27 member European Union.

The Spontaneous Potty Break

I recently visited Manhattan for some business meetings. As I exited my hotel early one morning, I was greeted by the “Dog Whisperer.”  This young man managed to successfully shepherd a herd of no less than 20 dogs. Big dogs, little dogs, all kinds of dogs.

I was astonished by his seemingly effortless command over his pack — until one little guy (a terrier of course) derailed the entire operation with his unannounced and untimely potty break. Chaos ensued and the once dignified “Conductor of the Canine” was now reduced to a mere traffic cop.

I mean absolutely no disrespect with this analogy, but the citizens of Greece are the potty-breaking terriers of the EU. And the German Shepherds and English Bull dogs are none too happy with this apparent lack of focus and discipline.

The EU currently consists of 27 independent nations which have come together to create a synergistic community for mutual benefit. The concept is meritorious in an idealistic world. But much like the sports team comprised of players from 6 different nations, machine waxes poetically when the team is winning. Introduce some struggles and tensions and … you know the story. When that one terrier decides to strike out on his own, you better have a seasoned veteran holding all those leashes.

Dysfunction Causes Delays

The EU has yet to implement the Trillion dollar bailout package they agreed upon a few weeks ago. The primary reason for the delay is discord among the alpha dogs in the pack. Although Germany’s two houses of parliament rubber-stamped the country’s contribution of 750 Billion Euros, a recent spat between the leaders of Germany and France triggered fresh market jitters and further delays.

The chief complaint emerging from the crisis is Europe did too little, too late to defend the Euro. Now they are fighting to make up for lost time. However, their focus seems to be on a short-term fix rather than a long-term solution.

Christine Lagarde, France’s Minister of Economic Affairs recently stated “the EU taskforce has to focus on what is deliverable quickly.” She added: “We will continue to focus on what we can achieve in the short-term, because it’s really what is guiding us at the moment, it is being pragmatic.” C’est la vie, I say, c’est la vie!

Troy’s Top Five Reasons the EU Really Needs a Dog Whisperer, not a Finance Minister

5) The EU needs to strengthen economic governance to be able to act quicker and in a more co-ordianted and efficient manner to deal with any future economic crises.

4) The EU bailout package needs to be backed and supported by a charter of rules that govern the Euro.

3) The EU has to look for ways to reduce the divergences in competitiveness between member states.

2) Bail em’ out or kick em’ out: the alpha dogs still aren’t convinced that keeping some of the smaller dogs is truly in their best interest.

1) A pervasive sense of entitlement to excessive vacation time and early retirement has crippled the labor force of some of the member nations.

Can you hear the whispers?

Troy A. Buder is the Founder & President of Tri Pillar Investments, LLC — boutique Registered Investment Advisory firm which specializes in working with members of the Medical and Academic communities including Duke University, Wake Forest, UNC Chapel Hill, NC State, Emory and UCLA.

Last night, Micheal Ventrella was declared the winner of the 2010 season of The Biggest Loser. In celebration of such a respectable accomplishment, I propose we solve the global sovereign debt crisis in the same manner: good ‘ole fashion reality TV competition.

The season premier starts with each countries’ head of state taking to the scales (yes, that means every country, not just Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland, the UK, and the US). Once the starting debt load is measured in each home country and the politician makes the requisite tear jerking regrets and promises to his/her citizens, the heads of state travel to a “ranch” where they are isolated to work off their sovereign debt.

Like The Biggest Loser trainers Bob and Jillian, our Sovereign Debt edition will include fiscal austerity trainers. In addition, the ranch will also have onsite: an elementary school mathematician who teaches that 2 minus 3 equals a negative number, an addiction counselor from the show Intervention, and a shock therapy doctor who specializes in reconditioning the brain to stop lying.

Rather than have a season of shows during which countries are voted off the ranch for not losing enough debt, it’s one long season with one final weigh in. This will prevent the laziest politicians from throwing in the towel to head back to their homegrown spending spree.

At the end of the season, each head of state will once again weigh in for the entire world to see. No more excuses. No more scapegoating. The prize? Super cheap interest rates, global investor confidence, and possibly the chance to become a reserve currency.

Heads of States: are you in? Do you truly desire to run a sustainable ship for the benefit of future generations of your peoples? If so, hop on the scales and let the games begin!

If you are interested in seeing my special report about how the sovereign debt crisis may impact markets, click here for your free copy of Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium.

Have you ever seen a car crash in slow motion? (See video). Well, we’re watching one across the pond (and the US is also going to be on this list sooner than later).

As of this morning, here are the 5-year Credit Default Swap spreads (i.e., measure of default risk) and Debt:GDP for the PIIGS, Germany, and UK:

Greece: 784.3   |   115.1%

Portugal: 364.02   |   76.8%

Ireland: 259.82   |   64%

Spain: 231.42   |   53.2%

Italy: 191.81   |   115.8%

UK: 85.94   |   68.1%

Germany: 42.35   |   73.2%

If you want to see our market scenario based on the sovereign debt crisis, click here for your free copy of the May issue of our Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium newsletter.

Let’s look death in the face and say, “Whatever man…” – Hugo ‘Hurley’ Reyes, LOST

The EU is sliding, Greece is breaking plates and banks, and who’s left to flex the leadership muscles — none other than the United States of America.

Since the EU took a page out of the U.S. playbook recently and China is waving red flags, the U.S. financial markets could be the leader out of this near-term correction. Could the patriotic rebound come following Memorial Day (May 31)?

From a technical perspective, the U.S. financial markets are broken. Once the 200-day moving price averages were penetrated and not recovered, the markets struck another lightning bolt of fear to a slowing jobless recovery. Wall Street stock prices are finally correcting to the real story on Main Street.

IMPORTANT LINE OF SUPPORT: S&P 1040. If support is proven over a few trading days, the S&P could see bounce back to 1125 in the near-term. Along with the potential of 5% upside on the S&P, Gold Prices are catching wind to the upside this morning (NYSE:GLD up $1).

All eyes from around the globe are LOST in this choppy trading environment, however leadership indicators will arise and direction will follow suit soon.

To get entry points, stop-loss points, and profit targets for my MAY watch list stocks and Featured Trade, simply click here to try a 14-day complimentary trial by visiting here: Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium

If you’re living outside Europe and looking for an inexpensive vacation, your time may be coming. This morning the Euro reached a 4-year low in early trading as investors continue to show little confidence in the currency.

If you’re interested in an in depth look at the sovereign debt crisis and how it may affect your investments, click here for a free copy of our most recent issue of  our Wall St. Cheat Sheet Premium newsletter.

In an effort to deflect the Greek government’s unconscionable irresponsibility, Greece’s Prime Minister George Papandreou told CNN he “is considering taking legal action against U.S. investment banks that might have contributed to the country’s debt crisis.”

Really? So let me get this straight. Greece has been borrowing money from other countries and spending more than they were making in tax receipts, yet they want to pass the blame onto US banks? They are receiving bailout money from the US and they want to sue us? Give me a while plate to break.

We all know political rhetoric is the art of lying and blame-shifting. But President Obama needs to tell Papandreou to go screw himself. The Prime Minister is correct that US banks should be shamed for their crimes, but US banks did not dictate Greek fiscal policy to take money from others and blow it. Moreover, the Greek government’s attitude toward borrowing and spending is much like that of US consumers who leveraged their homes without care for how they’d pay off the loans.

Seems to me Papandreou and his colleagues need to look in the mirror. Time to face the facts, buddy: you are the only ones responsible for lying to your citizens about how your entitlements worked … now go put out the fires you started.

Ever since the house of cards in Greece started falling, the world has been in a fit over the Euro. However, there is one great upside to the devaluation of the Euro: cheaper travel to Europe!

The last time European travel was remotely reasonable, we were still watching the dotcom bubble inflate (and that was like, uh, two bubble ago). I’ve been to Europe 3 times since then, and it’s not nearly as much fun when you trade in a $100 bill for 75 or less Euros.

On Wall Street we like to talk about hedging. In the case of the Euro, my hedge is an affordable European vacation for the whole family. It always pays to look at the bright side.