Building Your Debt-Free Life 2000

Average customer rating:

Simple, down to earth ideas to get out of debt in 1 year

Building Your Debt-Free Life 2000
Bobbie Christinsen , and Eric Christinsen
Manufacturer: Effective Living Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Perfect Paperback

Management | Management & Leadership | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books
Budgeting & Money Management | Personal Finance | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books
General | Personal Finance | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Building Your Financial Portfolio on $25 a Month (Or Less)

Top 50 Best Stock Investments

Adding to Your Financial Portfolio

Making a Living Without a Job: Winning Ways For Creating Work That You Love

ASIN: 096436994X
Release Date: 2000-06-01

Product Description

An easy guide to paying off your bills, eliminate debt, live within a budget, and have the extra money you need to do the fun things you want in life. Learn how to payoff $30,000 or more in debt (not including your mortgage or car payments) within 1 year. Includes should you buy or rent, should you pay off your home early, should you buy a car for your teenager, what kinds of insurance do you really need and what can you do without, plus much more.

Customer Reviews:

Simple, down to earth ideas to get out of debt in 1 year.......2003-09-21

Bobbie & Eric Christensen's book Building your debt-free life is simple and straightforward. Most of the information on good and bad debt, creating a budget, and strategies for either making more money, or scaling down your living expenses are not new. However, their down to earth, easy to read style, may just motivate you to try them and finally get out of debt! I especially liked their advice of putting the debt reduction plan into action for 1 year to 18 months. Having a deadline and sticking to it, and knowing that you are not going to be in debt reduction hell for years makes it achievable. Also, having a goal (a trip, investments, home remodel, no creditors hounding you, etc.)to look forward to when you are debt free is critical. Overall, this book is a common sense guide that gives you the building blocks for getting out of debt. The rest is up to you.

Book Description

The bitter and protracted struggle between President Thomas Jefferson and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall defined the basic constitutional relationship between the executive and judicial branches of government. More than one hundred fifty years later, their clashes still reverberate in constitutional debates and political battles.

In this dramatic and fully accessible account of these titans of the early republic and their fiercely held ideas, James F. Simon brings to life the early history of the nation and sheds new light on the highly charged battle to balance the powers of the federal government and the rights of the states. A fascinating look at two of the nation's greatest statesmen and shrewdest politicians, What Kind of Nation presents a cogent, unbiased assessment of their lasting impact on American government.

Customer Reviews:

Thomas Jefferson v. John Marshall.......2006-10-15

James Simon, Dean Emeritus of the New York Law School, has written a seminal work on the history of the early republic, comparing titans Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall--Virginians, cousins, lawyers, and political enemies. What Kind of Nation recounts the struggle between America's first political parties, Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans and Marshall's Federalists, over the future of the federal judiciary and the future of the democratic experiment called the Unitied States.

After losing the 1800 election to Jefferson, John Adams attempts curb Jefferson's Republican influence by filling the judiciary with faithful Federalists. His most influential and lasting appointment was John Marshall as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Over thirty four years leading the Court, Marshall secures the independence of the federal judiciary through brilliant legal arguments and skilled political maneuvering.

In Marbury v. Madison, Marshall led a unanimous court in securing the right of judicial review of the consitutionality of all actions of both the executive and congressional in a case that on the surface was a loss for the Federalists. In deciding the case against Adams' midnight appointments for lack of jurisdiction, Marshall makes the the Supreme Court the arbiter of consitutionality for all time to come. Jefferson had argued that consitutionality was the domain of all three branches of government, and in his Kentucky Resolution he contended that states could determine a federal law to be null and void if it was unconstitutional. Marshall's interpretation stands to this day.

Simon is one of the few scholars who sees Jefferson for what he was, a stalwart party man whose hyperbolic condemnation of his opponents though successful in the short term, was ultimately rejected along with his vision of America. Jefferson saw the United States as a loose confederation of powerful states, all pursuing a bucolic ideal of an agrarian economy that rejected banks, paper money, and all things industrial. Instead, the vision of Hamilton and Marshall, the chief representatives of the Federalists, comes to be. The industrial revolution takes hold in the Northeast and the backward looking vision of the agrarians is finally put to rest after the South's defeat in the Civil War.

In reading What Kind of Country, one comes to realize that Jefferson is not a true progressive visionary. In fact, he is the reactionary in this morality play. Industrialization was the future in the early 19th century; agriculture was the past. Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, envisioned a country of political freedom but economic and indealistic bondage to the land, which in point of fact, would never allow true political freedom.

Intriguing!.......2005-08-31

This is a most relevant book. It is the story of two cousins who consistently and relentlessly clashed over just what kind of nation the United States would become.

Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall were political polar opposites. Jefferson, the Republican, was a fervent believer in State's rights. He held forth strongly that unguarded concentrations of power within the Federal Government would ultimately lead to the destruction of the United States. He was right.

John Marshall's views were just the opposite. Marshall subscribed to a strong central government. He passionately believed that left to themselves, each State's regional self interest would lead to the destruction of the United States. He was also right.

Therein lays the conundrum that faced the early republic and led to the formation of the first political parties. Both sides were right and both sides were wrong. Both men lived to see their fears of unchecked concentrations of power in the Federal Government or in the States lead to exactly the assaults on liberty that each feared. But in a larger sense both men, probably without realizing it, truly lived the concept of checks and balances both subscribed to and cherished within the Constitution.

This is an amazing story of continual, unrequited confrontation. Make no mistake; these men did not like each other. Each defined the other as what was wrong with the early republic. Ultimately, John Marshall prevails in his bid to establish the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of the Constitution and the authoritative voice for the constitutional supremacy of the federal government over the states. More than 150 years after Jefferson's and Marshall's deaths, their words and achievements still reverberate in today's constitutional debate and political party battles. You will be fascinated by this work. Theirs was a confrontation that continues to define just what kind of nation the United States should be.

An illuminating discussion of a crucial episode of the early republic.......2005-08-17

John Marshall isn't often mentioned in the same breath as figures such as Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, or Thomas Jefferson, but Simon makes a very good case for doing so. Just as these other figures played crucial roles in determining the shape of the nation, Marshall is perhaps the key figure in establishing the practical role that the Supreme Court was to play in U.S. history, and the key figure in making the judiciary truly independent. The latter cannot be emphasized too strongly, for as Simon demonstrates, Jefferson had a vision of the judiciary that would have made if subservient to the executive and legislative branches. Jefferson wanted to be able to replace judges with relative ease--a move that would have created a permanent timidity on the part of the courts and would have made them the easy toy of party politics--and he wanted the notion of popular democracy to extend to the courts. No matter how one feels about Jefferson on other issues, and no matter how one feels about such issues as judicial activism, I would imagine that most Americans are relieved and grateful that Marshall's vision and not Jefferson's prevailed. The system of checks and balances works because each branch of government has the genuine capacity to precisely that, whereas if Jefferson had succeeded, the courts would have of little or no consequence.

Simon tells the story of the struggle between John Marshall and Thomas Jefferson through discussing the ins and outs of several key judicial controversies. The most important of these was, of course, Marbury v. Madison, in which the U.S. Supreme Court found for the defendant, Secretary of State James Madison, but in doing so established the precedent of assuming for the Court the ability to adjudicate the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. This precedent vastly outstrips all of the issues of the case itself, and could very well be seen as the charter for all else that the Court would do in subsequent centuries.

There is an image in Wittgenstein's Preface to his PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS that I often think of when reading books on early American history (or, for that matter, on any subject area to which one returns). Wittgenstein states that the issues he is going to explore need to be approached from a number of different viewpoints, so that in the end investigating his subject is very much like exploring a landscape, approaching once from this direction and then from another. Reading about the founding of the United States is unquestionably like this. Studying it by on one occasion reading a biography of Hamilton, another by reading about the Constitutional Convention, another by reading about the writing of the Declaration of Independence, another by reading about the FEDERALIST PAPERS, another by the age of the Federalist party, or reading a book about the Adams-Jefferson correspondence or the correspondence itself, or by reading a book about the struggle between Jefferson and Marshall on the limits of the judiciary are all ways of going over the same intellectual landscape, and the more ways that one finds to traverse the region, the stronger one's grasp. Simon's book is especially valuable because it approaches an important issue and focuses on it in a way that sometimes is obscured by more popular issues. Reading about Marbury v. Madison is simply not as exciting as reading about the mutual slandering that occurred in the 1800 election between Adams and Jefferson.

As a side note, I read this book while commuting to and from work each day to my job in the Loop in Chicago. Each evening as I ride the Brown Line home my train would pass by the John Marshall School of Law, established to honor the chief justice who was crucial in maintaining the long-term integrity of the rule of law in America.

A debate that resonated deeply.......2005-08-07

The clash between Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall over the kind of nation the United States was to become was sharp and bitter. It was a battle between two of the most influential men in the early Republic, and revolved around some of the most important constitutional issues of the time. The fact that the protagonists were blood relatives (second cousins descended from the Randolph family), that both were Virginians, and that both were dedicated to the ideals for which the American Revolution was fought, adds irony to their differences.

Jefferson was an uncommon man, an aristocrat by birth and lifestyle who achieved wide popularity by preaching the virtues of common men and the political ideals of self-government. Marshall was more modest, able to mingle easily with ordinary men and women, but convinced that the United States was destined to become a strong nation and that the Supreme Court could play a key role in achieving its destiny. The legacies of Jefferson and Marshall are both alive in the United States today, though Marshall's ideas have had a much more practical influence, while Jefferson's legacy is perhaps more idealistic and philosophical.

The debate resonated deeply in the early republic. It is still relevant today, as Americans continue to argue about the proper roles of the federal government and the states in shaping our political life, and of the Supreme Court in deciding questions of national concern. Much of the debate, however, is frankly over, for no one today can realistically envision a country like the one Thomas Jefferson imagined, in which most Americans are engaged in agriculture not business, in which the states and the federal government are equal sovereigns, with neither able to resolve differences between them, and in which loyalties to one's state trump one's loyalties to the federal government. John Marshall won much of the old debate, and the result is frankly accepted by most Americans.

Simon is a law professor and veteran journalist who writes clearly and engagingly.

A fine approach to the study of these two giants........2004-09-11

Lawyers often make poor historians. That might strike some as counter-intuitive as precedents are by their nature `historical'. But legal precedents are a narrow technical field and though they can encompass the political, economic and social issues of their day the legal logic and argument that surround them are usually- with some major exceptions- divorced from them. And perhaps it's that their [the lawyer as historian] early years have been shaped by legal reasoning and in spite of exposure to history such as an undergrad or grad degree, this legal mindset often limits a more holistic approach to the subject matter.

Not so with James F. Simon's "What Kind of Nation". Simon writing eschews the sort of legal analysis best left to law textbooks in favor of a clear, fairly encompassing and biographically based approach. And a fine approach it is. With healthy portions of legal analysis but an even finer biographer's paintbrush Simon comes close to bringing to life many of the individuals and their ideological stands.

At the center is of course Jefferson and Marshall. Both get sympathetic, but honest treatment from Simon. Jefferson, the idealist, strongly holding the belief that favored the limiting of government and the Federalists as the greatest threat to liberty in the young nation. His horror at the Sedition acts and the steps taken by the Republicans are highlighted as are the equally strong beliefs and actions taken by the Federalists to implement them.

Marshall is painted in an even finer light I think. Perhaps it's because Jefferson's more volatile temper got the best of him at times or perhaps Marshall's nature was to be a more moderating influence, he comes across a intelligent and subtle thinker. Read his approach to Marbury, where he takes the long road to come to his final conclusion. It was an approach that made upheld many of the Federalist tenets yet gave the victory to Jefferson. Masterfull.

Simon does a great job in describing two important events in that era. The first is the impeachment of Samuel Chase a justice on the Supreme Court. Simon presents the legal arguments in clear precise prose. But he does more than that, he describes the individuals involved-their strengths and weaknesses, the drama behind the scenes and sets it all in the context of the political mechanizations of the era. Equally compelling is the description of Burr's fall from grace and subsequent trial for treason. Marshall and Jefferson's role in both events are given in some detail and their rationales analyzed within the framework of the issues each was faced with.

James F. Simon has given a well written and immensely interesting picture of the dynamics between Jefferson and Marshall and the era in which they lived. With a clear, precise and entertaining writing style and with one foot firmly planted what seems like a historian's mindset I'm anxious to read more of his works. I would love to read a more in depth study of Chase or Burr- for example- written by Simon.

Highly recommended.

What Kind of Nation: Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States.(Book Review) : An article from: The Historian

Average customer rating:

What Kind of Nation: Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States.(Book Review) : An article from: The Historian
Stuart Leibiger
Manufacturer: Thomson Gale
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital

Book Description

This digital document is an article from The Historian, published by Thomson Gale on March 22, 2004. The length of the article is 561 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Citation Details
Title: What Kind of Nation: Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States.(Book Review)
Author: Stuart Leibiger
Publication: The Historian (Magazine/Journal)
Date: March 22, 2004
Publisher: Thomson Gale
Volume: 66 Issue: 1 Page: 162(2)

Article Type: Book Review

Distributed by Thomson Gale

Average customer rating:
National Directory of Nonprofit Organizations 2003

Manufacturer: Taft Group
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Directories | Catalogs & Directories | Reference | Subjects | Books
General | Reference | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 1569954437

Average customer rating:
National Directory of Nonprofit Organizations 2003 Volume 1 Part 2 P-Z Annual Revenues of $100,000 or More; Indexes 16th. Edition.

ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: 1569954631

Product Description

2003.

Customer Reviews:

A great book for would-be agents.......2000-06-15

I'll give this book 4 out of 5 stars, leaving one out because of its size. It was very complete and easy to understand, but if you're studying for the state exam on your own (as most do) and only have a couple of weeks to complete the process (my DM did have some expectations), it might be a bit excessive to use this book as your sole source of study material. If I had several weeks to ease into the material I would have used this book as my primary study guide. I used it to study the more difficult concepts once I had identified them in the abridged material and practice test software. It was great for that!

Book Description

From humble beginnings in a rural French Canadian town, Celine Dion has risen to the heights of superstardom. The beloved Ms. Dion, best known for the gorgeous title song from the smash hit movie Titanic, has been called the premier pop vocalist of the nineties. She has won numerous music industry awards from all over the world, including Grammys in the United States, Juno and Felix Awards in Canada, and many others in Europe. Her recordings sell in the millions.

This revealing biography details the international phenomenon that is Celine. Born the youngest of fourteen children, she began performing at the tender age of five. At twelve, she made a demo tape that was brought to the attention of a respected personal manager named Ren Angelil, who was so impressed that he mortgaged his home to finance her debut album. His gamble paid off beyond anyone's wildest expectations. Their relationship blossomed, and they were married in December 1994, an event the Canadian press dubbed the "Royal Wedding."

Jean Beaunoyer goes beyond the myth, beneath the tons of press releases and official biographies, and delivers the real stories, interviewing those who know Celine best. The result is a seductive biography that will fascinate Celine fans everywhere.

Book Description

This powerful book blends the rhythms of daily arctic life with high adventure. "Jans's writing is a pleasure," said the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

Customer Reviews:

A review from the Northwest Borough of Alaska.......2003-12-27

This is a must-read for anyone planning to spend time in Alaska. Jans captures the norms, customs and ways of the people in the Northwest Arctic region. This was one of my very first books when contemplating moving to Alaska. And I recently re-read the books and realized exactly how much I had missed the first time through. It has been almost two years since returning to the Arctic and I cannot believe the everyday life he captures! Read this for all it is worth and extract all you can from his words.

Like Most Sequels...............2002-03-21

My extremely low ranking is not for this book as a stand alone, its in comparison to his first, 'Last Light Breaking', which was a masterpiece. I would equate these two books with Tarantinos two films, 'Pulp Fiction' & 'Jackie Brown', the first also being a masterpiece, but the second leaving you wanting. Not that 'Jackie Brown' or 'A Place Beyond' are wastes of time, its just that compared to what came before, and the fact that they are basically the same subject matter, you expect that level of art and when you dont get it youre dissapointed as I was with this book.

If youve already read 'Last Light', and still want a good book on the "Alaska Experience", im reading his latest now and let you know how it is when I finish.

But if you havent read 'Last Light Breaking' and are looking for a book in this genre, waste no time in buying it, its truly an amazing book. ...

After reading The Last Light Breaking, I was hungry for more........1999-10-20

A Place Beyond didn't disappoint. Jans writing style isbeautiful, simple, and eloquent. There are few authors who can weavethe reader into the story. Through all of Jans adventures, I was right there with him riding shotgun. The most underated and under publicized book(s) about Alaska. A must read!

Excellent writer.......1999-09-13

Nick Jans is an extremely gifted writer. I first read one of his essays in the Reader's Digest, and I was so impressed, I just had to read the rest of the book. His straightforward clarity, use of metaphor and intriguing observations make the Alaskan wilderness come to life. I personally would never want to live in Alaska, but I thoroughly enjoyed experiencing a bit of Alaska by reading this book.

A bit of a dissapointment........1999-09-03

Nick Jans has done what I did not think he could (would) do - dissapoint. Much of "A Place Beyond" is actually "Last Light Breaking". I was truly let down when I turned to a new chapter, only to discover that it wasn't new! I must say that his writing is superb - vivid, usually modest, captivating. If, however, I wanted a second helping of "Last Light Breaking", I could have simply grabbed my old copy. No matter how good his writing is, if he can't find the time to write enough essays for a new book, then why publish one?!

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books