<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>The Washington Independent - Latest Comments in You, Too, Can Suckle the Government Teat</title><link>http://washingtonindependent.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 09:27:27 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: You, Too, Can Suckle the Government Teat</title><link>http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/1405/you-too-can-suckle-the-government-teat#comment-1789528</link><description>Checks and balances of this government have been sold out to corporate compliance and the Consumers First Energy Act is just that</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iamfrank</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 09:27:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: You, Too, Can Suckle the Government Teat</title><link>http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/1405/you-too-can-suckle-the-government-teat#comment-1789529</link><description>Mutual funds and retirement accounts such as 401(k)s are spread over many companies. It is likely that if you have one of these funds, the percentage of it invested in an oil company is very low. For the American Funds Capitol World Growth and Income Fund, the amount invested in Oil, Gas and Consumable Fuels is 8.1%. Also, only 19.2% of all assets in that fund are invested in the United States.  I would think that a reduction in fuel costs would equate to an increase in profits for the remainder of the companies you are invested in, even though the profits for the oil companies would drop. That why they are lower risk than stocks, the investments are diversified. So screw you oil companies with your only half truth telling.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ajm8127</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 08:45:20 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>