Sometimes it seems to me that investors overlook some potentially high returns by overlooking "boring" companies. Occasionally I even find myself overlooking such companies. I think it's easy to get lost in the exciting share price swings of a company like Apple (AAPL) and while there is great money that can be made by taking advantage of such volatile price swings, it is important to recognize that there are other less "sexy" ways to make a healthy return.

It might seem unbelievable to you when I say that a fundamentally sound company with solid, consistent and guaranteed revenues can be an overlooked stock that trades below $30 dollars a share. However, the Corrections Corporation of America (CXW) is such a company.

I was recently looking for an inspiring topic to write my next article about when I turned to a collegiate textbook from the first finance class that I ever took. I turned to the chapter about bear markets and recessions and tried to find a topic that I thought would be applicable to current market conditions.

As I read, I was shocked about how many times I found myself in absolute disagreement with the author of the textbook. There were two topics in particular that I, with now actual market experience behind me, take issue with. These topics are the textbook's notions of consumer behavior and diversification.

I have found that one of the hardest things to do in the financial markets is to trade drug/biotech companies. I always like to play the markets based upon my perception of the underlying market psychology, but the problem with the drug/biotech companies is that they mostly trade upon hype about new drugs and clinical trials. This hype can be immediately killed by one negative trial result or one adverse FDA decision.

The problem with this is that it is virtually impossible to predict for anyone and, on the surface, doesn't that just mean that investors are just rampantly guessing and gambling when they put money into these stocks?

While I was waiting in line on a recent visit to Starbucks (SBUX), I couldn't help but notice a woman behind the counter who, with notebook in hand, was hawkishly observing every move that the baristas and food handlers made. Intrigued, I took a quick glance at the logo on this woman's shirt. It read "Ecosure". My brain ran through all of its stored files, but was just drawing a blank on the name Ecosure. I quickly jotted down a note in my phone and looked Ecosure up as soon as I could get to a computer.

Come to find out, Ecosure is a division of the Company Ecolab (ECL). Ecolab produces various products specifically geared toward ensuring sanitary conditions at all types of food service establishments. They provide, among other things, dishwashing equipment, hand care products, surface cleaners, cleaning systems and antimicrobial products all mainly geared toward usage in the food service and hospitality industries.

Those of you who follow the company Lamar Advertising (LAMR) know that, with only two exceptions (one rather brief and one lasting roughly two years), the company's stock price has been extremely range bound. That range has been, more or less, between $30 and $40. After a recent bull run, which saw Lamar's share price touch $70, the stock has recently entered this range again.

With the shares trading at $37.53 as of Aug. 4, 2008, it is actually at the high end of this range and I think that Lamar's upcoming earnings report on August 6 may disappoint and send the share price back down to the low end of this range. This could give traders a chance to pick up some puts or short some of Lamar's shares and make what could potentially be a quick profit.

I am a frequent visitor of Las Vegas, and in my most recent visit I noticed that, despite the recent poor performance of the share prices of such companies as MGM Mirage (MGM), Boyd Gaming (BYD) and Las Vegas Sands (LVS), every single casino was still just as crowded as ever. In fact, I think that every time I go, regardless of what the economic cycles may be, the casinos are even more crowded than the time before. The waits at the restaurants are still an hour and sometime more, people fight for seats at $25 minimum blackjack tables, and the Price is Right slot machines which I so love are always being played by Bob Barker admiring retirees.

I have noticed a change in the crowd in the past year though. There is an influx of foreign visitors, easily identifiable from their various accents. Even with this inordinately high amount of foreign visitors helping to fill the void left by a weakened American consumer base, the clientele of the casinos is still predominantly composed of Americans.

I am a big believer that the markets, especially in the short term, aren't moved by company fundamentals or any of the other logical indicators. These indicators certainly play a role, but they don't move share prices in and of themselves.

There are certain catalysts that can move a share price (such as an FDA decision for a drug company), but there is another force at play that can move share prices significantly one way or the other without one of these catalysts. To understand this force it is important to understand that the market is very much a human driven entity and thus it can be psychologically studied.

Thus far it's been a rough year for telecommunications companies like Verizon (VZ), Sprint Nextel (S) and AT&T (T). As of July 23rd they have all seen their share prices plummet by greater than 20%. Recently it looked like that trend may have been coming to an end and the share prices of their were set to recover. They still may recover, but if so, it won't be thanks to a warning from the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute.

According to a story written by the Associated Press on July 23, 2008, Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, who is the director of the University of Pittsburgh's Cancer Institute, issued a warning to faculty and staff: "limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer." Herberman goes on to note that he perceives cell phone usage to be most dangerous in children because their brains are still developing and he even warns that using a cell phone in public places could be dangerous because of the risk of exposing others to the cell phone's electromagnetic radiation.

One thing I've noticed among college students, academics and business professionals alike is that the name Goldman Sachs (GS) turns heads. People react with a sense of awe toward Goldman and most of these people probably could not even explain the first thing about Goldman outside of the fact that they are an investment bank. (Score one for Goldman's marketing and branding efforts.) It had me thinking that if everyone reacted this way to Goldman, are there perhaps boatloads of people that put money into Goldman's stock not based upon a fundamental understanding of Goldman's business, but based upon their name. 

With all the talk of recession, of manipulation in the financial markets, of hedge funds short selling the brokers and of oil hovering around all time highs, sometimes it seems that investors get too caught up in the fast paced world of Wall Street. Sometimes people forget about the "old-timers," the companies that are responsible for making Wall Street what it is today. Companies that saw the Great Depression come and go, saw two world wars pass and saw times when titans like J. Pierpont Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Charles Schwab, and so many other notables ruled the Street.

Perhaps I'm just being a little nostalgic for a simpler, more gentlemanly time, but it just seems like today's Wall Street players, people like Vikram Pandit, Jamie Dimon, Lloyd Blankfein and Jeffrey Immelt can't quite stand up to the caliber of their predecessors. I'm not doubting the intelligence of these individuals nor do I mean to diminish their accomplishments, but what I am saying is that I think they're caught up in a Wall Street that just over-complicates things.

Here in the United States whenever we turn on the tap on our sinks, bathtubs, etc. out comes a flow of water. The United States is a water rich nation compared to many others, and a developed nation at that. This means that for now, water resources have been adequate to meet demand.

It is estimated that of the over six billion people in the world though, one billion lack access to potable water. Most of these people are in underdeveloped nations that lack the resources to develop new potable water sources. But for the average American, these problems are miles and worlds away right? Well, perhaps for now, but is it possible that water shortages may be arriving to the world's richest nation? The signs of shortage are already beginning to show and something will have to be done in order to stop it.

With all of the major indices now in bear market territory it seems as though the best way for a long investor to play this market is to avoid the losing stocks and switch into the winners. I sometimes liken investing to gambling, but the advantage of investing over gambling is that you can change your bet at any time. Imagine if you were playing blackjack only to find that you had a very weak hand. But in this particular game of blackjack you can swap cards with the person sitting next to you and as luck would have it, that person has a very strong hand that looks very likely to win. Now, you could always risk going bust and take another card to try to strengthen your hand, but given the option virtually any gambler would take the bet that is closer to a sure thing. Unfortunately, when gambling a player doesn't have the option to change his/her hand, but an investor can change investments at any time.

So, my question to all of the investors out there is simple. Would you rather risk your money in the struggling industries of the market or would you like to put your money in an industry that is actually making money in 2008? Or for those of you who enjoyed my gambling analogy above, would you rather hold the cards that lose more often than not or the cards that have won more than not?

With the price of living on an ever-increasing trend, Americans are having to find more resourceful ways of cutting costs. They are cutting discretionary spending and forgoing large purchases such as new automobiles.

The one problem that inherently comes with Americans opting out of a new automobile purchase and sticking with an aging automobile is that the aging automobile, more often than not, will need several repairs done. These repairs also represent significant costs to American families as having a mechanic repair an older vehicle for which a warranty has expired can be quite costly.

No one can ignore the push in the United States and elsewhere across the globe to move away from a dependence on fossil fuels and into a more environmentally friendly, low carbon emission means of producing energy, and in particular electricity. Feeling this push, politicians are moving to formulate plans by which electricity can be produced in an environmentally sound manner.

Despite the recent advancements in clean coal technology, coal fired power plants are still targeted as public enemy number one by the environmental movement. The United States, however, is still very much dependent upon coal as its primary supplier of electricity and no other environmentally friendly sources have proven that they are capable of supplying even close to as much energy as coal at a price that is cost feasible. But there is perhaps an exception that is becoming more cost feasible. That is nuclear power.

Jim Cramer has said it, the Wall Street analysts have said it and some of the most respected money managers have said it: Don't own an airline stock! Apparently people are listening. They are listening so attentively that the airline prices have fallen drastically. Possibly even too drastically.

That's not a very popular train of thought right now with oil prices nearing $150 a barrel. However, with the prices of the airline stocks so low, it is hard for the long term investor not to consider purchasing them.

We all know that the brokers play an integral part in both trading and investing. Everyone who trades needs a brokerage account, and some people have multiple accounts with various brokers. These brokers make their money based upon the commissions that they receive, generally on a per trade basis. This has been a profitable model for these brokers, as the market conditions of years past have been bullish, which encourages people to put their money to work in the financial markets. The more money people put to work in the markets, the more commissions the brokers can earn.

But with thoughts of a recession looming, a recent rash of people pulling money out of play in the markets should mean that the brokers' main source of revenue, their commissions, will fall drastically.