But today I'm going to tell you about a NASA-related tech program that led to a big payoff. In fact, investors who knew what to look for could've turned $10,000 into $41,900 - a 319% return - in just 29 months.
I'm relating this story for a couple of reasons. It shows you why I spend so much time looking at the research that's underway in labs at both the university and national level.
And it also explains why I write to you so frequently about cutting-edge science where I believe there's a big potential payoff.
My ultimate goal, you see, is to tell you about profit opportunities like this one before they occur.
Between 2006 and 2009, we sold more than $50 billion worth of weapons systems and related hardware to Middle East nations, according to the Congressional Research Service. The value of annual military contracts in the region has quadrupled since 2000, according to CNN.com.
And it doesn't look like things are slowing down - at least, not yet.
India is negotiating with Boeing over the purchase of 10 C-17 Globemaster III aircraft, which would be the largest defense order from India for Boeing, the second-largest U.S. defense contractor. India's Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said in February the government would spend $33 billion on defense in the fiscal year starting April 1.
The Asian country's "defense procurement budget is quite huge," Laxman Kumar Behera, a research fellow at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses in New Delhi, told Bloomberg. "The U.S. arms industry has become quite interested in the Indian defense market."
Boeing expects to bid for as much as $31 billion of military contracts in the next 10 years as India looks to replace aging Russian-made equipment.
Granted, we're getting used to seeing budget deficits expand at a pretty quick pace these days. But even by government standards an increase of nearly $290 billion in less than a week is almost too much to bear!
All kidding aside, $105 billion of this $287 billion increase came about mostly because of a change in "assumptions." The CBO budget assumed that all the 2001 Bush tax cuts would be reversed, whereas the Obama budget reverses only those that applied to the rich (those with incomes above $250,000).
The CBO budget also made the ridiculous assumption that the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) would be allowed to revert to its 2001 level, forcing 25 million taxpayers to calculate their taxes twice - and to then pay the higher of the two estimates. That was never going to happen, and the Obama budget finally abandons that idiotic piece of fiction.
The disparity in deficit projections between the CBO and the Obama administration weren't limited just to fiscal 2011. For the period from 2011 to 2020, the CBO forecasted a budget deficit of $6.047 trillion, while the Obama budget released just days later projected a shortfall of $8.532 trillion - a difference of $2.485 trillion.
The difference in assumptions between the CBO and Obama projections explains nearly half of that difference. Of course, that still leaves the other half.
And a troublesome half it is.
To find out how these numbers may forecast a U.S. bankruptcy, read on...
The budget blueprint for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 reflects the administration's struggle to find a balance between containing the spiraling federal deficit with the need to boost the economy and create jobs - both of which figure to be political bombshells in the upcoming 2010 elections.
"We're trying to accomplish a soft landing in terms of our fiscal trajectory," Peter Orszag, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said at a press briefing.
But the budget is certain to add fuel to the debate over the size and scope of government. As expected, Republicans railed against the administration's big spending programs and tax increases.