Only in a day BBRI increases by 650

From 5300 to 5950...seems kind of money game

Ban Junk Food and Cigarette Ads in Indonesia

via Yahoo News

Fat has become an epidemic in America, with a staggering 30% of the population now classified as "obese."

Although there have been reports that obesity growth has tapered off, a new study predicts that, within 20 years, more than 40% of Americans will be dangerously overweight.

The good news is that the country finally seems to be noticing this and trying to do something about it.

Disney (DIS) announced Tuesday it was banning junk-food ads aimed at kids on its television networks (including on ABC, which Disney owns), becoming one of the first corporations to publicly take a stand against this problem. Starting in 2015, food makers will have to adhere to Disney's new nutrition policy, limiting calories, sugar and sodium content. As of now, a number of current products advertised on Disney channels will not fit the bill, including Kraft's (K) Capri Sun juice pouches, Lunchables and other sugary cereals.

"Parents can be confident that foods associated with Disney characters or advertised on Disney platforms meet our new, healthier nutrition guidelines," said Robert Iger, chairman and CEO of Disney.

On Tuesday, the company will also introduce new products to the grocery aisles, which follow the aforementioned nutritional guidelines. Disney says these products follow what it calls the "Mickey Check" and will be labeled with Mickey Mouse ears and a check mark.

Meanwhile, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently startled the city by proposing a ban on soda serving sizes bigger than 16 ounces. Although this announcement was met with widespread ridicule and outrage by people who viewed it as nanny-state over-reach, Bloomberg observed that 5,000 New Yorkers die from diseases related to obesity each year and said that it is time to do something about this.

The "fat problem," as it might be more directly described, is complex. And there are no easy answers.

The instinct of many people, fat and skinny alike, is to lay the problem solely at the feet of those who are fat, saying that they should be more disciplined.

And obese people should be more disciplined--no question about it. Ultimately, people need to take responsibility for their own health. If they want to overfeed themselves, there's nothing the government or corporations can or should do to stop that.

Where the problem becomes more complex is that it is much easier, cheaper, and more convenient to eat unhealthy food--and too much of it--than it is to eat well. And the fact that massive corporations that are highly skilled at research and marketing are applying their enormous resources to the challenge of selling more food makes it even easier to overeat.

Combine that with the fact that a huge percentage of Americans live paycheck to paycheck--and the profits of these corporations are directly tied to the amount and quality of the food they sell--and you get to the heart of the issue.

So how should the country go about solving this problem?

Should the government regulate "portion size," as New York City is now trying to do? Should it ban all potentially unhealthy foods--a list that would include not just "soda" but ice-cream, alcohol, bread (high in carbs), pasta, and almost all forms of fast food? Should it tax sugar? Should it make fat people pay more for health insurance and healthcare (many insurance companies already do).

Should corporations solve the problem, by serving only smaller sizes and using healthier ingredients?

Should Americans just accept responsibility for themselves, developing the discipline necessary to eat less and exercise more?

Let us know what you think below.

SEE ALSO: Obesity To Cost Taypayers 'Billions of Dollars': Weight Watchers CEO

Political Punch : What is a 'bundler'?

source: yahoo news

In politics, a bundler plays a critical role in providing the life blood of a campaign: money.

Bundlers raise money, in chunks of $2,500, which is the maximum any individual can contribute to a campaign by law.  But bundlers raise a lot of campaign cash; with enough friends and colleagues contributing $2,500 each, the bundler can help bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars —even more — for the campaign.

Of President Obama's top 350 bundlers, Bill Allison, Editorial Director at the Sunlight Foundation, says Obama's list includes 68 who serve on some kind of government board. Obama's bundlers include George Kaiser, the single largest investor in Solyndra.

"Kaiser and folks from his foundation had a number of meetings at the White House," says Allison. "There's email traffic that shows that Solyndra was discussed at some of these meetings. So clearly…the bundlers get in the door and get the chance to present their priorities and their interests."

When President Obama was running for office he implied he would lower the number of political appointees to embassies. But a 2011 study by the American Foreign Service Association concluded that he has actually appointed more than any president in the last 20 years.

And while we're dissecting the President's bundlers, we should note we cannot do the same for his rival, Republican Mitt Romney.

Because Romney keeps his bundlers' names secret. Why not disclose? His Republican predecessors, George W. Bush and John McCain disclosed the names of their campaign bundlers.

"Romney has not made transparency an issue the way that Obama did," Allison notes. "There's always the factor for potential embarrassment when you have a bundler."

A good way to avoid embarrassment is to avoid accountability and transparency wherever possible, a calculation Romney has clearly made.

Obama has not lived up to his rhetoric on transparency, Allison says, but Romney is a completely different category.

"The way that he's running his campaign, he's doing the absolute minimum that he has to do by law, and he does not seem to be at all enthusiastic about transparency," Allison says. "All of the email traffic from when he was governor has disappeared; he has not been the most open of politicians."

Dividen ANTM 16 Juli 2012

source: http://www.britama.com/index.php/2012/06/jadwal-dividen-tunai-antm-2012/

Dividen Tunai sebesar Rp90,99,- per saham akan dibayarkan kepada pemegang saham PT Aneka Tambang (Persero) Tbk / ANTM, dengan jadwal pelaksanaan dan tata cara pembayaran sebagai berikut:

No.	Kegiatan	Tanggal
1	Cum dividen tunai pada Pasar Reguler dan Pasar Negosiasi	27 Jun 2012
2	Ex Cum dividen tunai pada Pasar Reguler dan Pasar Negosiasi	28 Jun 2012
3	Cum dividen tunai pada Pasar Tunai	02 Jul 2012
4	Ex Cum dividen tunai pada Pasar Tunai	03 Jul 2012
5	Tanggal Pencatatan Pemegang Saham Yang Berhak Menerima Dividen Tunai(Recording Date)	02 Jul 2012
6	Tanggal Pembayaran	16 Jul 2012

Dividen ANTM Rp 90,99 per saham

Why it is just 90,99......?

I don't understand with this company PT ANTM.....since April 2011 the price stock keeps decreasing from 2400 to 1160 today.... it sucks

Btw, this cmpany is going to give you a cash divident UDR 90,99 (71 lot)

source: http://investasi.kontan.co.id/news/antm-membagikan-dividen-sebesar-rp-9099-per-saham/2012/05/31

Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham Tahunan PT Aneka Tambang Tbk (ANTM) memutuskan membagikan dividen sebesar Rp 90,99 per saham. Total dividen yang dibagikan sebesar Rp 876,55 miliar atau 45% dari laba bersih 2011 lalu.

Direktur ANTM Alwiansyah Lubis mengaku sebelumnya mengusulkan membagikan dividen sebesar 50% dari laba bersih 2011 lalu. "Namun karena kami sepertinya memerlukan pendanaan dari laba bersih maka diputuskan 45%," ujarnya, Kamis (31/5).

Tahun 2011 lalu, ANTM mencetak laba bersih sebesar RP 1,91 triliun. Angka itu naik 13,5% jika dibandingkan laba bersih tahun 2010 sebesar Rp 1,68 triliun. Kenaikan laba bersih perusahaan pelat merah tersebut terutama disebabkan peningkatan penjualan komoditas feronikel, bijih nikel, dan emas.