We all know that song with the little kid singing, “All I want for Christmas is my two front teeth!” Well, as we get older we start wanting things a little more complex than that. All we want for Christmas are his-and-hers Kindles! Check out what Americans went for last year and what we’re pining after this holiday season!

Last year, the typical US shopper spent $688.87 on gifts for others. That’s a lot of dough-ho-ho!

Digital picture frames and remote helicopters were popular in the thrifty price ranges, while vacuuming robots and Apple hardware were among the favorite expensive gifts above $50 and $100.

When in doubt, cash, gift cards, electronics, toys, clothes, jewelry, games and sporting equipment are often safe bets. They’re the categories Americans cite most.

This year, people are hoping for a Playstation Move, CoD MW3, Apple iPods and iPads, Kindles, GPS systems, Canon digital cameras and Asus lightweight laptops. If they’re really lucky, they’ll get to mount a Samsung 40-inch LCD HDTV on their walls.

Toddlers want to build, learn, play with animal toys and take care of baby dolls.

In the 2-4 age range, easels, garbage truck toys, tea sets, the Batcave and a Barbie townhouse are the keys to their little hearts.

Over 5, kids start getting into more complex games like Bananagrams and Set. Building sets remain popular, too.

Games are great choices for kids above 8–but LEGO is still quite popular!

Men are mostly after technology this year, and women are too–but they’d also like jewelry, yoga equipment and pajamas.

Steer clear of scented candles, cheap gadgets, photos of yourself, socks, self-help texts, themed gifts and anything out of date or thoughtless.

Gift cards have been a popular present for some time, with 77.3% of Americans having planned to buy one for someone else last year.

A fifth of people anticipated returning at least one gift last year–hope it wasn’t yours!

Ultimately, last year 23 million people were still shopping on December 24. Don’t join them this year. Get to shopping; you can do it! If it comes down to cash or homemade “love coupons,” go for the cash. And remember, you can get gift cards in grocery stores now!

Most people go all-out for Thanksgiving. They want the biggest turkey, the best artisan bread for their stuffing, the most popular pumpkin pie in the city.

But all these things can be tough on your wallet, and when holiday shopping rolls around, you might wish you’d spent less on the turkey dinner. Here are some ways to trim the fat on your Thanksgiving budget.

Among the cheapest stores to buy food fixings are Walmart, Target, WinCo and Costco. Not surprisingly, they’re some of the largest retail chains in the United States.

When you’re shopping, remember that item sales vary from week to week. Start your shopping early so you can get deals on all your items as they appear.

Keep the fruits and veggies seasonal to save on the price hikes from out-of-season produce.

Write your menu ahead of time and bring a shopping list to protect from impulse buys.

Brrr–think about buying a frrrozen turkey to save money. No one will know, except your wallet.

Although it’s tempting not to do any dishes on Thanksgiving night, paper plates and cups are expensive. Bite the sponge and wash those dishes.

Ask people to bring some of the menu items, so one person isn’t stuck with the whole bill. (Then one person won’t be stuck with washing all the dishes, either.)

Diners in 2010 spent 25% more on Thanksgiving than they did in 2009. The biggest culprit? It’s actually celery, costing 29% more last year.

If you’re going out of town, plan your trip dates early. Prices go up as the departure date nears.

Avoid exorbitant bag-checking fees by traveling only with carry-ons where ever possible.

It’s also valuable to know the most expensive airports to fly out of: San Francisco is the worst, for example, so one might consider driving to Oakland instead.

Getting back into the kitchen: 66% of Thanksgiving face-stuffers will stuff their faces with home-cooked goods this year.

All the turkeys raised in 2010 together weighed 7.11 billion pounds.

A total of 2.4 billion pounds of sweet potatoes were produced in 2010.

Even with all the jack-o-lanterns and pumpkin pies, only 1.1 billion pounds of pumpkin were grown in the United States last year.

2.1 billion bushels of wheat will be harvested this year for your dinner rolls, pies and bread.

Food isn’t only on the table. It’s also in many place names in the United States.

There are 4 cities and 11 townships in the United States with “Turkey” in their name.

Other Thanksgiving-themed names are Plymouth (37 places and townships), Pilgrim, and Mayflower.

Remember to gobble your turkey, not your savings, this Thanksgiving.

EMBED THIS IMAGE

Whether you’re in the 99%, the 1%, or attempting to ignore the issue altogether, Occupy Wall Street is a pretty enormous–and now international–movement. It’s still making the news daily, blocking traffic, raising voices and making itself heard.

Take a look at how the protests got started, how they’ve evolved, what the mission is and how the public and government perceive it.

July 13, 2011:
Adbusters publishes a blog post asking for people to rally on Wall Street.

The important point they make is that there should be no official leadership at the protests, and that what the group hopes to achieve may only be decided when the entire group agrees. The movement was spearheaded by a group and was meant to be carried on as a group, too.

The hashtag #occupywallstreet first shows up on Twitter.

July 26:
A website, Facebook page, and Twitter profile have been created for the movement by this time.

Adbusters asks for global involvement after less than two weeks of domestic protests.

August 23:
The hacktivists at Anonymous debut a video to show their support for Occupy Wall Street.

They also promote OWS on Twitter.

September 17:
Rally and march day. Occupy Wall Street sets up a temporary city in Zuccotti Park, New York City.

OWS’s city has its own newspaper, food and wi-fi.

Police and protesters begin to clash.

September 24:
Over 80 people are arrested during an NYC march to Union Square.

Accusations fly against the NYPD when its use of excessive force and pepper spray is brought under fire.

October 1:
Over 700 people are arrested while marching across the Brooklyn Bridge.

NYPD says the myriad protesters were blocking traffic.

October 5:
Nearly three months after the movement’s inception, major unions across the United States begin to support the protests.

In fact, Occupy Wall Street’s approval rating was 19 points higher than that of Congress that day–33% approval to Congress’ 14%.

October 6:
In accordance with the high approval rating, the movement begins to spread much faster across the United States.

In the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C., protestors vow they will occupy the city for weeks.

October 11:
As must be expected with every movement, a counter-movement develops.

“The 53%,” a play on the 99% that Occupy protestors identify with, claims to be the percentage of the working class that pays to support the protestors.

“The 53%” feel the protestors are complaining publicly to avoid working, thereby missing out on perhaps attaining a higher financial class.

October 12:
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg tells the protestors they must vacate so that Zuccotti Park can be cleaned.

Not to be discouraged, the protestors begin cleaning the park themselves.

October 14:
In response to a job well-done, Zuccotti Park’s property management company, Brookfield Properties, decides that the protestors do not need to vacate the park for cleaning.

October 15:
Occupy Wall Street has occupied Earth.

951 cities in 82 countries hold protests.

October 17:
Adbusters side with Robin Hood, asking for a Global Robin Hood March at G20 on October 29.

The march would promote a Robin Hood tax on the 1%–take from the rich, give to the poor.

October 19:
The NYPD announces plans of discipline for an officer who pepper-sprayed women on the September 24 march.

October 25:
500 protesters in Oakland refuse orders to move.

The police respond with tear gas to clear them out.

October 26:
Since the number of shooting victims in NYC in the first week of October was 154% higher than the same time in 2010, NYPD blames Occupy Wall Street on the rise in gun crime.

The number was up 28% for the entire month.

Digital Takeover:
Occupy Wall Street is in 82 countries, 951 cities worldwide.

Its Facebook page has over 100,000 fans.

There are over 14,000 followers on Twitter.

Meet-Up has formed 2,340 groups worldwide for local protests.

On October 27, 2011, #occupywallstreet was tweeted 918.4 times per hour.

Beliefs:
80% of surveyed protestors believe the very rich should pay higher taxes.

88% believe the government should limit the salaries of CEOs.

98% think health care should be free, and the same amount believe insurance companies profit too much.

95% believe the government should regulate prescription drug prices.

32.5% think government would manage health care poorly.

93% feel student loans should be forgiving, and also that internet and cell phones should be free.

How Much of the National Wealth is Consumed by the 1%?
In the United States, the top 1% earns 20% of national wealth.

In the United Kingdom, they earn 16%.

In Canada, 14% of national wealth is earned by the top earners.

In Germany, Belgium, Portugal, Australia and Japan, the top 1% earns about 10% of the national wealth.

Poverty:
5% of United States citizens live below poverty.

That number is 9% in Canada.

10% of Australians are below the poverty line.

14% of United Kingdom residents live in poverty.

In Belgium, it’s 15%.

In Germany and Japan, 16%.

Portugal is home to 18% of citizens living below poverty.

It’s worth noting, however, that some protesters in “the 99%” make about half a million dollars annually.

Slogans:
Aside from the “We Are the 99%” slogan that Occupy Wall Street is known for, there are some other popular slogans seen on signs globally.

These include “We Are Too Big to Fail,” “Will Work for Money,” “Human Need Not Corporate Greed,” “OUT$OURCED,” and “People Over Profits.”

Final Note:
Keep an eye on Occupy Wall Street–it seems to be far from over.

EMBED THIS IMAGE

A bond is a savings instrument that you purchase at a fraction of its face value, then hold until it matures. For example, you may purchase a fifty dollar savings bond for twenty-five dollars, and it may take ten years for that bond to mature to its full value. You get to choose when to cash your savings bonds in, and you get what they are worth when you exercise that option. If you are considering your investment options, then you may want to consider savings bonds. Keep in mind that, just like all other investment vehicles, savings bonds come with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. Here are the pros and cons of investing in savings bonds.

Pros:

No risk. Savings bonds are better than low risk options. They have absolutely no risk. When you purchase a savings bond, you know exactly what it will be worth, and when it will mature to its full value – no mystery involved.

Minimal required investment. It’s possible to start investing by way of savings bonds with as little as twenty-five dollars (even less, if you participate in an employer matching program). This is ideal if you are new to investing, on a tight budget, or are looking for inexpensive supplements to diversify your existing investment plan.

No commissions or fees. You don’t have to go through a broker to purchase savings bonds, so there are no broker commissions or fees to account for.

Cons:

Low return. As compared to other, more risky, investment instruments, savings bonds offer only minimal returns.

Penalties for early cash-ins. You will pay three months’ worth of interest if you cash your savings bonds in at the six month mark. Additionally, you must hold onto your savings bonds for at least five years in order to avoid paying a cash-in penalty.

Return cut-off. Savings bonds stop working for you at the thirty-year mark. It doesn’t matter how long you hold on to them – they simply stop collecting interest after thirty years.

As you can see, there is a lot to think about when it comes to investing in savings bonds. It’s your money, and you owe it to yourself to do your research and figure out what’s best for you. Consider these pros and cons of savings bond investing. You also may want to consider starting small and making a minimal investment in savings bonds in order to decide if it’s right for you, before you make a bigger commitment and purchase that ten-thousand dollar bond.

Do you think you know the story of Mother’s Day?  If your historical knowledge of the day begins and ends with a dutiful child’s desire to honor and celebrate their mother, then you are under informed at best. A more inclusive knowledge would include the fact that Mother’s Day became a national holiday in 1914, when President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill setting aside the second Sunday of May as a special day to celebrate mothers.

This version is slightly better, but only slightly.  The roots of Mother’s Day are much deeper than that. The concept of Mother’s Day was not originally to honor mothers or motherhood, but rather an idea that mothers band together during a time of deepest sadness to prevent their same burden falling upon others.

It was Julia Ward Howe in 1870 who penned the Mother’s Day Proclamation.  This document is credited with being the first official call for an observance of a ‘mother’s day.’ The intent, however, was far from the traditional celebration observed today.  Instead of removing mothers from the kitchen  and sitting them down in the bosom of their doting family to enjoy a relaxing meal and afternoon gift giving, the proclamation was a call to action.

Julia Howe, who had been deeply affected by the pains and horrors of the Civil War, called upon mothers everywhere to rally for peace. She stated, “We women of one country will be to tender those of another country to allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs.”

Who would ever have thought that this day of flowers, chocolates, and meals out had, at its core, the broken heart of a mother protesting war to spare other women the same agony?

If you are asking yourself what happened, you are not alone.  How did this maternal peace rally become the lazy Sunday afternoon affair we now enjoy?  The wheels of commercialism have all but buried Julia Howe’s original design and intent.

No early sponsors of Mother’s Day stood by and let this metamorphosis take place without a fight.   After Howe’s efforts, Mother’s Day had yet to catch on, but the torch was taken up by Ann Reeves Jarvis and her daughter Anna Jarvis.  Anna Jarvis saw the fledgling holiday begin to take wing, then in dismay, it drew the attention of the florist industry who smelled a major opportunity.

Florists were not wrong. Mother’s Day today is a $14 billion dollar industry, and flowers are no small part of the spending.  May sees the highest floral sales of the whole year, even beating out June and its attending plethora of weddings.

As florists began to advertise flowers for Mother’s Day, and even hold Mother’s Day events, Anna Jarvis began to decry the shift into commercialization of such an important day. She protested saying, “[Mother’s Day] is to be a day of sentiment, not profit.”

Standing idly by was not her way.  She took action.  Jarvis sued sponsors of a Mother’s Day events in an effort to prevent it from taking place.  In 1930, she was arrested for disturbing the peace by trying to prevent the sale of flowers at a Mother’s Day event.  Not to be beaten, in 1938, Jarvis attempted to get a copy write for Mother’s Day, enabling her to control use of both the term and the holiday itself.

In her attempts, she failed.  She died alone, and ironically, childless, in 1948.  Yet in spite of her destitute condition, she was cared for in her blindness by an anonymous benefactor who paid for her care.  Any guesses who that benefactor was?  The Florist’s Exchange.  Anna Jarvis had been instrumental in getting Mother’s Day set apart by the US Government as a national holiday that whatever else she did later was a minor imposition when compared to the jump in posy profits.

So, what are you getting for your mother this year? I don’t think she’d appreciate the history lesson and a call to make love, not war.  Wherever Mother’s Day may have begun, it is now a day to thank perhaps the most thankless of jobs. And if this means lining the pockets of corporate America, why fight the establishment?  Your mom probably doesn’t think about this – what she wants is the time together!

To learn more about the history of Mother’s Day and popular gift categories, click the graphic to the left.

EMBED THIS IMAGE

Kate Middleton and Prince William have dated for 8 years. The moment they announced their engagement, a media circus began. For example, the blue Issa dress Kate wore during the official announcement sold out within 24 hours on net-a-porter. Amidst this chaos, have you been wondering what the upcoming royal wedding costs, when stacked up against the cost of the average American wedding?

You’re Invited…

It is estimated that 1800 people have received invitations to the wedding, and of those 600 will attend the reception at Buckingham Palace. A more intimate circle of 300 will attend the after party. 1.1 million visitors are expected to flood London for the wedding, yet London only has 120,000 hotel rooms.  Worldwide, 2 Billion people are expected to watch the royal wedding. To keep up with the unprecedented media demand for more information about the wedding, Comcast is adding 130 shows to an on-demand channel covering everything leading up to the ceremony.

Overall, this event is predicted to bring about $995 million to boost the British economy. $1,007,252,000 is expected to be generated by the wedding for Great Britain. Prince Charles’ wedding to Princess Diana in 1981 cost approximately $47.8 million, while Prince William’s wedding to Kate is ballparked at between $16 and $64 million.

With This Ring…

Middleton’s engagement ring, which was formerly Princess Diana’s ring, has an 18 carat sapphire. Its worth is currently estimated at $398,000. QVC made a simulated knockoff of the royal bling just five days after the engagement was announced priced at a mere $34.95.

The Average Nuptials…

While we all enjoy the spectacle of the royal wedding, in truth, most weddings are much more modest. Traditionally, the father of the bride was supposed to pay for everything; nowadays, 30% of couples pay for the wedding themselves, while the bride’s parents pay around 17% of the time. The average wedding budget is $20,000. On average, the wedding rings cost about $1,016.

Usually, guests at a typical wedding number about 178, and they each spend between $70 and $100 on a present. Over 91% of couples have a registry.

99% of couples then take a honeymoon, and they spend an average of three times more on that trip than on any other vacation. The average honeymoon budget is $3657.

Per year, $72 billion is spent on weddings, $19 billion is spent per year on gifts, and $8 billion is spent on honeymoons. In 1945, the average cost of a wedding was $2,200. Over time, that has increased drastically; one of the most expensive years for weddings was 2007, with an average cost of $28,000.

The Demographics of Weddings…

Most grooms are about 26.9 years old, while the brides are usually 25.3 years old. 1/3 of wedding couples have already been married once before. In 1945, there were 1.61 million weddings – that number has risen to 2.3 million weddings in 2010. Worldwide, the most wedding ceremonies are performed in Istanbul, Turkey, with 166,000. A close runner up? Las Vegas, Nevada, with 114,000 annual ceremonies.

While Kate and William have opted to marry in April, most weddings occur in summer – June and August are the most popular months for weddings. The least popular month is January, with only 4.7% of weddings.

Is America truly the land of opportunity for everyone, regardless of gender? Or are other places in the world more conducive to women’s careers in the media? The answer to this question is more complex than you might think. If you subdivide the world into seven regions, you can get contradictions not just across different sides of the ocean, but within regions as well. The regions we looked at are: Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Nordic Europe, the Americas, sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, and Asia and Oceana.

Among the seven regions, the ranking from highest number of women employed in upper management to the lowest numbers are as follows:

1.     Eastern Europe – 48%

2.     Nordic Europe – 43.4%

3.     Western Europe –  43.20%

4.     Sub-Saharan Africa – 41.7%

5.     The Americas – 36.8%

6.     Middle East and North Africa – 35.1%

7.     Asia and Oceana – 20.7%

If you combined, all the statistical data into one huge lump sum, then roughly 35.1% of women across the world are employed in positions of some authority.

But even if women are employed in larger numbers in a given region, does that mean their salaries are high too? How do they rate when stacked up against male colleagues in the same field? Well, let’s look at the average salary for women in top-level management in each region:

Nordic Europe – $109,230.20
Eastern Europe – $27,300.28
Western Europe – $374,324.69
The Americas – $89,242.23
Sub Saharan Africa – $28,300.34
Middle East and Northern Africa – $18,332.14
Asia and Oceania – $41,986.59

In most regions, women employed in top-level management earn significantly less than their male colleagues. In the Americas, for example, men earn an average of $115,934.37. The only regions that did not follow this trend is Asia and Oceania, where men earn, on average, approximately $6000 less per year than women. So while Eastern Europe may lead the pack when it comes to promoting female employees, they earn much less on average than men in the same fields – a trend that is echoed in almost every other continent.

So, where does the glass ceiling hang when it comes to each region? Are some countries more progressive than others on the same continent? Not surprisingly, the answer is yes. In fact, it’s easier to point out which countries seem to offer a relative parity between the genders than it is to list the ones with an obvious glass ceiling.

Middle East and North Africa – Israel
Sub Saharan Africa – South Africa and Uganda
The Americas – Venezuela and Mexico
Asia and Oceania – Fiji and New Zealand
Eastern Europe – Bulgaria, Estonia, Romania, Russia
Nordic Europe – Finland and Sweden

The bitter reality still holds true – for women expecting to advance in the field of media, jobs may pay less than their male counterparts, and they may have fewer opportunities for promotion. By the data we’ve compiled, women in Nordic Europe, specifically in Finland and Sweden, have the best chance for advancement as well as a high salary – though their salaries are still much lower than men in the same field.

 Two of television’s most beloved annual events are the Super Bowl and the Oscars. But how does one event, which culminates the football season, stack up against the other, which celebrates excellence in film? Both events came from (relatively) humble roots. Super Bowl one, held in 1967, had a ticket price of $10 and an attendance of about 61, 946. The first Oscars, held in 1929, had a ticket price of $5 and was attended by 250 people. (If you’re curious about who won these inaugural events, the Green Bay Packers won the first Super Bowl while the silent film “Wings” won the first Best Picture statuette).

Compare those modest figures to the 2010 numbers and you might be shocked: the Super Bowl was the most watched event in television history, with nearly 111 million viewers. The Oscar ceremony for 2010 was also a great draw, attracting 41.3 million viewers.

The Cost of Hype

Everyone talks about the wit, cleverness, and hype surrounding Super Bowl ads – but they definitely come with a price. An ad for Super Bowl XLV cost $3 million for a mere 30 seconds. To give you an idea of how much this costs each company:

Snickers would have to sell 6,329,406 candy bars to pay for a $3 million ad;

Bridgestone would have to sell 298,656 tires; and

Skechers (SKX) would have to sell 205,339 pairs of shoes.

So by comparison, the advertising cost for the 2010 Oscars seems downright cheap at $1.7 million per 30 second spot.

The Cost of Victory

What about the rewards that are offered to winners of each competition? How much does a Super Bowl ring cost when compared to an Oscar statuette? On average, the NFL shells out $1,125,000 each year for Super Bowl championship rings – $750,000 to the winning team and $375,000 to the losers. That is the cost of 150 rings for each team. If you’d like to snap one up for your own collection, you can bet on spending at least $40,000. That’s the cost of a Jostens-made Super Bowl ring being sold by an anonymous member of the 1997 Green Bay Packers – free shipping and original wooden box included!

On the other hand, each Oscar ceremony costs about $25,000 in statuettes. Each one costs about $500 to make, and about 50 are ordered each year. Michael Jackson made the most expensive Oscar purchase in history, when he paid $1.54 million for David O. Selznick’s Best Picture Oscar.

The Cost of Disaster

With so much money tied up into each annual event, you would think that the cost of postponing one or canceling one would be astronomical indeed. In fact, the Super Bowl has never been cancelled to date.

The Oscars has been postponed, but never cancelled. The three events that caused postponement were:

Flooding;

The Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination;

The attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan.

The Cost of Bets

These annual events are also a huge draw to the betting crowd, with millions being wagered on possible outcomes every year. The Vegas sports books – 183 in all – totaled bets at around $87.5 million on this year’s Super Bowl. But it’s not just football that draws the crowd. Last year $41 million was wagered in Vegas on the film “Slumdog Millionaire.”

These television events aren’t just about excellence in football or film. They are multi-million dollar entities that flood the economy with cash. From their modest beginnings, they have definitely become two major financial happenings that we can look forward to every year.

According to the statistics, nearly 50.5% of the world’s population is urbanized, compared to a mere 5% just a century ago. More than ever, the world’s urban centers are drawing a crowd of sophisticated city dwellers with some measure of disposable income. These citysumers are spending their disposable income on urban-centered goods, services, and experiences.

What’s behind this trend? There are three factors contributing to mass urbanization:

1.    The sheer increase of the number of city dwellers around the world;

2.    The increasing wealth and power of cities and the populations that live in them;

3.     The spread of urban culture and values.

Need it in numbers to believe it? Close to 180,000 people flock to make their homes in cities each day, adding roughly 60 million new urban dwellers annually. If these trends continue, the global urban population is expected to reach 6.3 billion in 2050, or 70% of the world’s population at that time. By 2030, China will have 221 cities with more than 1 million people, and India will have 68.

Where in the World is Population Growth Exploding?

The majority of the urbanization going on in the world isn’t occurring in North America or Europe. The biggest growth is in Asia and Africa, both of which lay claim to the largest population growth centers in 2010:

Beihai, China, with a growth of over 10%;
Ghaziabad, India, with growth of 5.2%
Sana’a, Yemen, nearing growth of 5%;
Surat, India, which grew 4.99%;
Kabul, Afghanistan, with growth of 4.74%;
Bamako, Mali, growing at 4.45%;
Lagos, Nigeria, and Faridabad, India, both with growth of 4.44%;
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, which saw growth of 4.39%;
Chittagong, Bangladesh, which grew 4.29%.

But vast growth doesn’t equal wealth and power – at least, not yet. The world’s richest cities are still centered in Europe and North America. Copenhagen, Zurich, and Geneva are the top three richest cities in the world, zooming to the top three from the top ten in 2009. The rest of the world’s richest cities are New York, Oslo, Los Angeles, Munich, Luxembourg, Frankfurt, and Dublin, respectively. The two American cities entered the top ten this year after being 11^th (NYC) and 14^th (LA) place in 2009.

By 2020, the largest urban areas will still mostly be located outside of North America and centered in Asia, with a few notable exceptions in South America. Tokyo, Japan is expected to lead the pack, with a population projected at 37.28 million. New York is the only city in North America to make the projected list, with a population estimate of 20.43 million.

The other top ten largest urban centers in 2020 are expected to be:

Mumbai, India (25.97 million)
Delhi, India (25.83 million)
Dhaka, Bangladesh (22.04 million)
Mexico City, Mexico (21.81 million)
Sao Paulo, Brazil (21.57 million)
Lagos, Nigeria (21.51 million)
Jakarta, Indonesia (20.77 million)
Karachi, Pakistan (18.94 million)

But with this shift in the world’s urban centers, will there also be a shift in the world’s concentration of riches? In other words, will Tokyo, Mumbai, and Delhi replace Copenhagen, Zurich, and Geneva in terms of wealth? In order for these up and coming urban centers to become rich and powerful, they need to hold the edge in terms of industry as well as sheer population numbers. The top three cities in terms of wealth in 2010 are closely connected with the world’s banking industry – so if there is a shift and other cities in Asia supplant Europe in terms of banking power, there may well be a shift in terms of wealth as well.

In simple terms, it’s not enough for a city to be big – it has to have a hold on industry and power as well. It will be interesting indeed to see where the world’s wealth shifts over the next ten years.

(CLICK TO ENLARGE)

What do the Blair Witch Project, credit cards, and the human condition’s need to keep up with the proverbial ‘Jones’’ have in common? Well, one leads to the other.

In the case of the Blair Witch Project, the production costs were funded by credit cards and many homes across the country are watching this movie on their credit card funded HDTV and surround sound while seated on their financed leather sofa.

Of course, this particular movie was a screaming success costing only $35,000.00 to make and grossing over 140 million. This makes it a block busting success, financially speaking. The makers of this movie had faith in their venture and decided to put their money, or their credit cards, where their mouths were when they were unable to get the big production houses to buy in.  More and more low budget movies are being made the same way as the Blair Witch Project.

Low budget might not seem like a term one would apply to anything that cost several thousand dollars, but in movie circles, that is really a drop in the bucket  (remember your household budget is not necessarily the best comparison to hold up to a multi-million dollar industry that is film making).  Large budget movies can cost millions of dollars to make, with the cost of one A-list celebrity topping $20M in their salary alone. So, spending a paltry 10-20K on credit card debt to finance a flick truly represents a shoestring budget.

Not all credit card financed low budget films fare as well as Blair Witch, but many prove their director’s faith in the project to be well founded. Click the graphic at the left for a list of movies who owe all or part of their funding to the magic plastic of credit card debt.

Perhaps no one believed in their project more than director Robert Rodriguez.  He believed so much in his movie, El Mariachi, that he not only maxed out several credit cards, but put his body on the line as well.  A significant portion of the $7,000.00 in production costs were garnered from the proceeds of medical testing. Suddenly, your job doesn’t seem so bad.

Now the average Joe doesn’t stand to increase their credit card debt by 114 times like the makers of The Clerks did, but that is the fundamental difference in the type of debt.  The average Joe is not financing a low budget film, which can potentially turn from money pit into money tree, but rather he is charging new shiny toys like an iPod or new shoes.