Trading Speeches can be difficult, 1 comment can be bullish then next phrase bearish. However language algorithms can process the tone of the entire message before you can read the first word or have even finished downloading the text of the statement.  The biggest news is the 1st Friday of the month, the non-farm payrolls out of the USA.  You used to be able to get the news before the price moved, but high-frequency algos changed all that, essentially the exchanges get quote stuffed, so good luck unless you are using a bucketshop. Better to wait for a pull back from the initial reaction if the numbers are good, otherwise you will get a fill at the peak. If the numbers are a big deviation from expectations then you can just jump in.  Back in 2006 the Bank of England raised interest rates when it wasn't expected and the GBPUSD flew 500 pips.   This Forex calendar has charts of every news release, so you can see what to expected based on what has happened in the past with a certain bit of economic news. http://www.fasteconomicnews.com/fx_calendar.aspx


I don't even use change any more unless I absolutely have to. I hate having it in my pocket so it just goes in the jar at home. Usually I just tell them to keep the change because 99% of the time I pay by credit.


"I was thinking the same thing, which is why they were for January, but I got nervous. I bought them for 1.20 (strike price of 15) and sold them for 2.35.   I know it isn't sound financially, but I have a separate account for wallstreetbets style gambling apart from my ""main"" investment account, and I treat them very differently.  I also won't dip into my main investment account to pay off my ""gambling"" account, so that SNAP position actually took up a majority of that smaller account, which is why I got nervous.   (On the other hand, if I made the same investments in my real account that I have in my gambling account, I'd be well on my way to a million right now, the gambling account is up 300% in the past 2 years, ""real"" account is up like 25%)"


For simplicity, I would subtract the expense from the gross income before accounting for taxes. Using your example, if g is gross income, r is your tax rate, and e is your deductible expense: You got the same answer because of the distributive property of multiplication, but I believe conceptually it makes more sense to deduct the expense before accounting for taxes.


The 1-yr bond has a higher interest rate, but it's only guaranteed for a year. This means it is subject to reinvestment risk.  Suppose you're investing in 1981. Which sounds better? I've not looked up the precise interest rates but I'm guessing the former option leaves you with more money in 1991. It should be no surprise that investors were willing to pay more for it++, even if they couldn't have been totally sure in advance. :) (++ Remember, a bond is like a coupon for a certain percentage off of future-money. If the coupon offers you fewer percent off, you're paying more present-money for each dollar of future-money you buy.)


"What is my best bet with the 401K? I know very little about retirement   plans and don't plan to ever touch this money until I retire but could   this money be of better use somewhere else? If you don't know your options, I would suggest reading some material on it that might be a little more extensive than an answer here (for instance, http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/ has some good and free information about a myriad of financial topics).  With retirement accounts you can roll it over or leave it in the current account.  Things to look at would be costs of the accounts, options you have in each account, and the flexibility of moving it if you need to.  Depending on what type of retirement account it is (Roth 401K, Traditional 401K, etc, you may have some advantages with moving it to another type). The student loans.... pay them off in one shot? I have the extra money   and it would not be a hardship to do so unless that money can be best   used somewhere else? Unless I was making more money in a savings/investing/business opportunity, I would pay off the student loans in a lump sum.  The reason is basic opportunity cost (economics) - if a better opportunity isn't on the horizon with your money, kill the interest you're paying because it's money you're losing every month. With the money just sitting in the bank I get a little sick feeling   thinking that I can be doing something better with that. Outside of general savings you could look at investing in stocks, ETFs, mutual funds, currencies, lending club loans (vary by state), or something similar.  Or you could try to start a business or invest in a start up directly (though, depending on the start up, they may not accept small investors).  Otherwise, if you don't have a specific idea at this time, it's best to have money in savings while you ponder where else it would serve you. Keep in mind, having cash on hand, even if it's not earning anything, can bail you out in emergencies or open the door if an opportunity arises.  So, you're really not ""losing"" anything by having it in cash if you're patiently waiting on opportunities."


It seems like a lot of hassle to make a few bucks.  $1,000 in nickels would weight 100kg.  I'd rather put my money in ING or into a bond mutual fund like VBMFX.


And just as easily, someone could find a reason for such a derivative to exist.  Let's say I'm a vendor of memorabilia for a given sports team, but unlike most vendors I'm only a vendor for a particular team.  Given that there is a large lead time between orders placed and memorabilia received (perhaps on the order of a month between order and receipt), it is inherently risky to order large orders towards the end of a season.  However, if they're going to be in the playoffs, there's a huge opportunity to sell, but if they don't, you'd be left with tons of surplus inventory.  So, wouldn't it be handy for there to be a way to hedge that risk?    We've actually seen times when such things aren't unreasonable.  Large risks are [hedged away](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303877604577380593015786140.html), even in sports.


Nowtoday, There are many online stores that only dedicated to selling vintage spare parts for motocycle. Every store tends to specialize in a number of different brands and some will allow you to place a product request. GelomanIndianSpares is specialized of the Indian Motocycle spare parts and reproduction. We have a big online store for spare parts. Try to purchasing Motocycle spares parts online at our company website. You can get all Indian Motocycle spare parts in our online store through the web.


Before the financial crisis it was all the rage with Sears being another controversial one. Sears Canada shareholders were upset that that company sold off all of its flagship stores and then distributed the cash via dividends to shareholders (in particular Lampert). Unsurprisingly with no reinvestment in the business, they declared bankruptcy recently. The US Sears is going through this selling stores to a separate real estate holding company.


"**NOWHERE**.  You're using an extremely restrictive definition of ""rather"" that precludes the glaringly obvious *correct* interpretation of what I said.   Free hint - If someone you're conversing with makes ""no sense"" only under an extremely specific definition of one key word they used (with mutliple other possible meanings that make them basically correct)... *You're* probably the one torturing the language to fit your meaning."


Contrato de arrendamiento también es conocido como contrato de alquiler y consiste en el acueEjemplos de contrato de arrendamientordo entre el arrendador y arrendatario, donde el arrendador surrender durante un tiempo determinado el uso y disfrute de un bien. contrato de arrendamiento se comprometerá a realizar los pagos por el uso de la propiedad.Un Contrato de Arrendamiento es documento legitimate que se firma cuando se va a rentar algo. La persona que es dueña de un bien tiene el derecho de ceder temporalmente su uso an alguien más. La persona que renta su bien toma el nombre de arrendador, aquel que va a rentar recibe el nombre de arrendatario.


"I cannot answer the original question, but since there is a good deal of discussion about whether it's credible at all, here's an answer that I got from Bank of America. Note the fine difference between ""your account"" and ""our account"", which does not seem to be a typo: The payment method is determined automatically by our system.  One of   the main factors is the method by which pay to recipients prefer to   receive payments.  If a payment can be issued electronically, we   attempt to do so because it is the most efficient method.   Payment methods include: *Electronic:  Payment is sent electronically prior to the ""Deliver By"" date.  The funds for the payment are deducted from your account on the   ""Deliver By"" date. *Corporate Check:  This is a check drawn on our account and is mailed to the pay to recipient a few days before the ""Deliver By"" date.  The   funds to cover the payment are deducted from your account on the   ""Deliver By"" date. *Laser Draft Check: This is a check drawn on your account and mailed to the pay to recipient a few days before the ""Deliver By"" date.  The   funds for the payment are deducted from your account when the pay to   recipient cashes the check, just as if you wrote the check yourself. To determine how your payment was sent, click the ""Payments"" button in   your Bill Pay service.  Select the ""view payment"" link next to the   payment.  Payment information is then displayed.  ""Transmitted   electronically"" means the payment was sent electronically.  ""Payment   transaction number"" means the payment was sent via a check drawn from   our account.  ""Check number"" means the payment was sent as a laser   draft check. Each payment request is evaluated individually and may change each   time a payment processes.   A payment may switch from one payment   method to another for a number of reasons.  The merchant may have   temporarily switched the payment method to paper, while they update   processing information.  Recent changes or re-issuance of your payee   account number could alter the payment method. In my case, the web site reads a little different: Payment check # 12345678 (8 digits) was sent to Company on 10/27/2015 and   delivered on 10/30/2015. Funds were withdrawn from your (named)   account on 10/30/2015. for one due on 10/30/2015; this must be the ""corporate check"". And for another, earlier one, due on 10/01/2015, this must be the laser draft check: Check # 1234 (4 digits) from your (named) account was mailed to Company on   09/28/2015. Funds for this payment are withdrawn from your account   when the Pay To account cashes the check. Both payments were made based on the same recurring bill pay payment that I set up manually (knowing little more of the company than its address)."


One can pay via Indian Credit Card. The card company will convert the USD and charge you in Rupees.  And when there are enough Indian websites that do domain name registering, any specific reason you are looking at eurodns.


It depends to some extent on how you interpret the situation, so I think this is the general idea. Say you purchase one share at $50, and soon after, the price moves up, say, to $55. You now have an unrealized profit of $5. Now, you can either sell and realize that profit, or hold on to the position, expecting a further price appreciation. In either case, you will consider the price change from this traded price, which is $55, and not the price you actually bought at. Hence, if the price fell to $52 in the next trade, you have a loss of $3 on your previous profit of $5. This (even though your net P&L is calculated from the initial purchase price of $50), allows you to think in terms of your positions at the latest known prices. This is similar to a Markov process, in the sense that it doesn't matter which route the stock price (and your position's P&L) took to get to the current point; your decision should be based on the current/latest price level.


No, you can't. The limits are contribution limits, not limits on the value of the investment.  If you contributed $5,500 for 2015, you are done contributing for that tax year. You are free to contribute another $5,500 for 2016.


You keep claiming higher taxes will do X when history shows you that's not entirely true.       We need to both rein in spending and change where the remaining money is spent in the budget. We also need to take the wealthy at a higher rate so that the 'burden' is equal to the proportion of wealth in this country that they own. Framing it as an either/or is a logical fallacy.


You should look at consulting firms or quant type roles. I'm not a consultant but I have friends at all of the major firms and I know they recruit PhDs though, admittedly, its usually right out of school or soon there after. There are also more niche consulting firms (I'm thinking econ consulting though that could be misguided, someone else will have to chime in) that would appreciate the intellectual rigor of your background.   You could also do something in the Pharma space covering biotech and/or drug companies.


You also may want to consider how this interacts with the stepped up basis of estates.  If you never sell the stock and it passes to your heirs with your estate, under current tax law the basis will increase from the purchase price to the market price at the time of transfer.   In a comment, you proposed:   Thinking more deeply though, I am a little skeptical that it's a free lunch: Say I buy stock A (a computer manufacturer) at $100 which I intend to hold long term. It ends up falling to $80 and the robo-advisor sells it for tax loss harvesting, buying stock B (a similar computer manufacturer) as a replacement. So I benefit from realizing those losses. HOWEVER, say both stocks then rise by 50% over 3 years. At this point, selling B gives me more capital gains tax than if I had held A through the losses, since A's rise from 80 back to 100 would have been free for me since I purchased at 100. And then later thought  Although thinking even more (sorry, thinking out loud here), I guess I still come out ahead on taxes since I was able to deduct the $20 loss on A against ordinary income, and while I pay extra capital gains on B, that's a lower tax rate. So the free lunch is $20*[number of shares]*([my tax bracket] - [capital gains rates]) That's true.  And in addition to that, if you never sell B, which continues to rise to $200 (was last at $120 after a 50% increase from $80), the basis steps up to $200 on transfer to your heirs.   Of course, your estate may have to pay a 40% tax on the $200 before transferring the shares to your heirs.  So this isn't exactly a free lunch either.  But you have to pay that 40% tax regardless of the form in which the money is held.  Cash, real estate, stocks, whatever.  Whether you have a large or small capital gain on the stock is irrelevant to the estate tax.   This type of planning may not matter to you personally, but it is another aspect of what wealth management can impact.


"SECTION | CONTENT :--|:-- Title | The more you know Description | ""The More You Know"" logo from NBC Length | 0:00:07           ****   ^(I am a bot, this is an auto-generated reply | )^[Info](https://www.reddit.com/u/video_descriptionbot) ^| ^[Feedback](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=video_descriptionbot&subject=Feedback) ^| ^(Reply STOP to opt out permanently)"


"Where did I suggest otherwise? What are you talking about?  Prossesing aids that exist in small quantities don't count against the 100%. There are limits in place to prevent abuse. 99.98% is close enough.  That pic is dumb too. It says ""100 juice,"" not ""100% strawberry kiwi juice."" The latter is impossible anyway. Fortunately, ingredients are listed right there for anyone to see, thanks to Federal labeling laws. It even says ""Flavored blend of... with other natural flavors and ingredients"" on the front. Not sure how anyone could really be confused.   It is pretty telling that there's more ""natural flavors"" than strawberry or kiwi juice concentrate. Just how concentrated are they? But again, fortunately it is clearly labeled."


I think you're missing a couple of things. First - why do you think its a reverse mortgage? More likely than not its a regular mortgage - home equity loan. If so, if they expect the stock market to rise significantly more than the amount of interest they pay on the loan - then its a totally sensible course of action. Second - the purchase in cash only to take out a loan later can definitely be a sensible way to do things. For example, if the seller wants to close fast, or if there are competing offers where not having a contingency is the tipping point. Another reason might be purchasing in an entity name (for example holding the title as an LLC), and in this case it is easier to get a loan if you already have the house, since the banks see the owner's actual commitment and not just promises.


"I don't think this is news.  We all know that banks were taking advantage of people.  This guy only said what we all knew already.  It's a shame that the banks are ""too big to fail"" while the government thinks that the people aren't."


If the customer pays 20% of the payment in advance, then he is he owns 20% of the house and the bank owns 80%. Now they say he pays the rest of the amount and also the rent of the house until he becomes the sole owner of the house.


> or requiring a telephone number (that can subsequently be banned)  The article states:  >One Lyft passenger, identified by seven different Lyft drivers as an Uber recruiter, canceled 300 rides from May 26 to June 10. That user's phone number was tied to 21 other accounts, for a total of 1,524 canceled rides.  So Lyft already knows the phone number. The bigger question is why they allow the same number to be used for so many different accounts in the first place. And why didn't they ban the accounts tied to it at least after the first 100 or so cancelled trips.


"Yes, but it's also this. ""Investors in stocks these days are expecting far too much, and I'm going to explain why. That will inevitably set me to talking about the general stock market, a subject I'm usually unwilling to discuss. But I want to make one thing clear going in: Though I will be talking about the level of the market, I will not be predicting its next moves"". He can, and does, make two unrelated points"


Pay them off immediately. But, as I note in my article Too Little Debt?, a zero utilization is actually a negative hit. So you want to just use the cards to get over 1%. i.e. if the lines add to $38K, just charge say, gas and some groceries, $100/wk. Pay in full every month. It's the amount on the statement that counts, not the amount carried month to month accruing interest, which, I hope is zero for you from now on.


From what I have heard on Clark Howard if you pay your balance off before the statement's closing date it will help your utilization score.  He has had callers confirm this but I don't have first hand knowledge for this to be true.   Also this will take two months to make the difference.  So it will be boarder line if you will get the benefit in time.   Sign up for credit karma if you like.  You can get suggestions on how to help your score.


"So, I've been actively looking for work in my field (Education) since graduation (2013) with little success. But I'll give it a shot since no one else has yet, some 'tricks' I've picked up along the way....with little success mind you ;)  Nothing ventured nothing gained. If you don't acutally do 'the work' and begin the process of applying and feeling out their interest for a candidate you won't learn how much they are willing to buy your labor for.   They have a price in mind before you apply. They look at your credentials and determine if you will do the job and exceed expectations based on your 'status'. Age, current position, other known facts of your life, married, mortagae, kids, they all bring babggage and expectations to the table, that they may or may not consider or know but can affect yours and their expectations and bring a heathly or unheathly dynamic to the table depending on the realtionship at hand, do you like them, and can you see yourself liking to work for them?  SO what kind of comapny do they want to be? Most likely they want to be on the bleeding edge if their new and cut away from the flock. But realistically they can probably hardly afford to pay for a mosquito's portion of your current position without some heavy hitters backing them. Who is backing them?  SO you will need to go in expecting a dollar gained for the company is a dollar given (to you hopefully, down the road). If you take 5% pay cut this year you better be getting a 5-20% increase in the following 5 years based on performance, but how do you sell yourself as a facet of the team that achieves these longterm goals, how do you fit? Therefore if you don't gain anthign this round, make sure you have verible or written affirmation of compensation in the future to follow up with when due.  On top of this 'dynamic' look at similar positons advertised recently on various other websites to anchor your asking price, aim 10%-15% higher and you'll hopefully land on the moon if not the stars. Normally I would go to linkedin to check out the excecs history and glassdoor but not sure thats needed in this case since you know them already and its a newer company. With that in mind, ask yourself, ""Is this a job I would and could see myself eager to be challenged by the next 3 years."""


As much as I understand you friend is giving you $100 [Say Rs 6000] as gift.  There are 2 taxes;   Service tax: If your friend is using Remittance service. Around 0.12% of amount Rs 6000/-. Around Rs 7.20/-. Normally deducted from Rs 6000.   Gift Tax: The transfer is treated as Gift to you as its from Non-Relative, without any occasion. If the amount of Gift is more than Rs 50,000 a financial year, then you have to pay tax as per your tax slab for the entire amount. As the transfer in question is less than Rs 50,000 there is no tax liability. Further you are paying this to your friend, which again is looked upon as a Gift and if you friend receives more than the specified amount.


"The error in the example is here: ""Now, if you contribute 5% to a Roth 401(k), your employer would match your after-tax 5% contribution. If the tax rate is 25%, that would be 5% of $60,000, which is $3,000. However, that $3,000 is put in to a traditional 401(k), so it is taxed when withdrawn. Assuming the tax rate is still 25% when you withdraw, you are only getting $2,250. Essentially you are giving up $750 of free money in this case."" You set your contribution to Roth 401k as a function of the gross, 80,000.  You choose 5% and contribute 4000 Your employer matches 4000. At the end of the year, your taxable income to the IRS is 80000, and you pay 30% or 24000.  You have 80K-4K-24K to live on, or 52K If you chose the alternate regular 401k,then you contribute 4K, your income to the IRS is (80-4=) 76k, and you pay 30%, 22.8K in tax.  You have 80-4-22.8 or 53.2K to live on. Or, to come at it the other way, you have 4000*30% =1200 extra tax reduction in your income this year.   If the extra income in 401k versus extra current year tax in Roth IRA means you have to reduce less, like 2800K to the roth so you maintain a 53.2K lifestyle, then yes, the Roth IRA match is reduced.  If you have the cash flow to prepay the current year tax and maximum-match contribution, you will get the full match based on your gross income."


I am a bit at a loss as to how you can read the same book, that inspired Warren Buffet, and take away that trading 600 contracts per month is a way to prosperity.  As a fellow engineer I can say with assurance this speculation scheme is doomed to failure.  Crossing out the word gamble was a mistake.   Instead you should focus on two things.  The first is your core business, which is signal processing.  Work and strive to be the best you can.  Seek out opportunities to increase your income while keeping your costs low.  As an engineer you have an opportunity to earn an above average salary with very low costs. Second would be to warehouse some of those earning and let others who are good at other things work for you.  You may want to read the Jack Bogle books and seek an asset allocation model.  I tend to be more aggressive then he would suggest, but that is a matter of preference.    You don't really have the time, when you focus on your core business, to manage 6 trades a month let alone 600.  Put your contributions on auto pilot and a surprisingly short time you will have a pile of cash.


#####&#009;  ######&#009;  ####&#009;  [**Progress and Poverty**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress%20and%20Poverty): [](#sfw)   ---  >  >___Progress and Poverty: An Inquiry into the Cause of Industrial Depressions and of Increase of Want with Increase of Wealth: The Remedy___ was written by [Henry George](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George) in 1879. The book is a [treatise](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise) on the [cyclical](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle) nature of an industrial [economy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy) and its remedies.  >====  >[**Image**](https://i.imgur.com/b8JhYJK.jpg) [^(i)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Henry_George2.jpg) - *Henry George, author of Progress and Poverty.*  ---  ^Interesting: [^Henry ^George](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George) ^| [^Georgism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism) ^| [^Climate ^change ^and ^poverty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_poverty) ^| [^Business ^cycle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle)   ^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cjg6y18) ^or[](#or) [^delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&message=%2Bdelete+cjg6y18)^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| [^(FAQs)](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/wiki/index) ^| [^Mods](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1x013o/for_moderators_switches_commands_and_css/) ^| [^Magic ^Words](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1ux484/ask_wikibot/)


Technically, yes but, in practice, no.  I use a card for everything and pay it off every month. Sometimes, several times a month depending on how the month is going. In the last 10 years, I've paid a total of $8 in interest because I legitimately forgot to pay my balance before the statement came out when I was out of town. I wasn't late, I just didn't beat the statement and had a small interest charge that I couldn't successfully argue off.  In the same time period, I've had one card cancelled at the banks request. The reason was that I hadn't used it in two years so they cancelled me.  I never pay annual fees, I get cards with great rewards programs and I (almost) never pay interest. If your bank cancels your card because you're too responsible, find a better bank.


You have great intentions, and a great future. As far as investing goes, you're a bit early. Unless your parents or other benefactor is going to pay every dime of your expenses, you'll have costs you need to address. $1000 is the start of a nice emergency fund, but not yet enough to consider investing for the long term. If you continue to work, it's not tough to burn through $200/wk especially when you are in college and have more financial responsibility.


If you are looking for the most and the very popular inspection team in Australia, now you have reached the right place, because we have a good experienced team of building inspection. We provide an affordable inspection service their clients. We identify the potential issue and out a residential or a commercial asset, it is inevitable to rent a building inspector. You don’t want to waste your cash in an investment as a way to now not prosper.  As you know, there are so many issues, creating in the building but, you don't need to worry in that case we will help, it is a most trusted building inspections in Australia. We investigate  the building securely and use better equipments in the inspection process. It is necessary to identify  a building is fit for use before buy the property.


"This quote kind of shocked me:   ""A well-run organization turns over 10% of their organizations, including senior leadership.""  I'm not in management, but I have *never* heard anyone say before that employee churn is a good thing. And wanting fully 10 % of all employees to resign every year? That sounds completely insane to me. Is that really normal? Am I not getting something?  My current employer works hard on trying to retain employees. When employees quit, we need to train the replacement, it's probably going to take 6 months until the new employees is reasonably productive. Employees are actively encouraged to find new positions within the company and we have actually rehired several employees that quit to do something else and then decided they want to come back. This all seems logical and normal to me.  The mindset of wanting to push a significant portion of your workforce away each year is utterly alien to me. Would somebody elucidate me?"


You say: Every time it seems the share price dips. Does it?  Have you collected the data?   It may just be that you are remembering the events that seem most painful at the time. To move the market with your trade you need to be dealing in a large amount of shares.    Unless the stock is illiquid (e.g most VCT in the UK), I don’t think you are dealing in that large a number; if you were then you would likely have access to a real time feed of the order book and could see what was going on.


I'm sorry for your situation.  If 15 years of maximum savings only has you at $60K, I'm going to assume you are currently in the 15% bracket. A withdrawal will cost you 15% (and maybe push you into the 25% bracket) as well as the 10% penalty, and state tax. Don't do it. Be sure your 401(k) has listed beneficiaries. Your wife will be able to take an annual withdrawal, and pay very little, probably 10%, maybe 15% worst case.  You reference that she'd have a lump sum. Yes, but she won't have to take it all at once. She should be able to transfer the funds from the 401(k) to an IRA, and withdraw small amounts each year.  It's a very rare circumstance where an early 401(k) withdrawal actually makes any real economic sense.


Samuel Strauch received a B.A. from Hofstra University and received degrees from Erasmus University in Rotterdam and Harvard University. His first interest was to pursue a career in banking but joined his family’s real estate business. After working as a banker, he decided to join his family’s South Florida real estate business.


The Avant-Garde experts from mortgage refinancing Delaware will contrive one to one conversation between the mortgage planning expert and customer. Furthermore, dedicated educational workshops and conferences are also designed. Not only has that but, proficient do use their expert knowledge to arm the customers about the credit score.


The plan is perfectly valid and legal as tax rules currently stand. There is no limit to the amount you can rollover or convert to Roth. Assuming your 401(k) is traditional pre-tax, you'll have to pay income taxes on the amount you convert above personal exemption + standard deduction, which is currently about $10k/year for single filers. The other caveat is you'll need funds to live off of while your conversion money is seasoning for 5 years in your Roth IRA. If you start the conversion while you are still working, you'll be paying taxes on it in your marginal bracket, which will negate much of the benefit of the pre-tax 401(k). If your living expenses are low, you can convert about $10k/year without federal income taxes, while living off capital gains from a taxable account which have a 0% rate in the 15%  income tax bracket (goes up to about $37k/year).


'If i co-sign that makes me 100% liable if for any reason you can't or won't pay.  Also this shows up on a credit report just like it's my debt.  This limits the amount i can borrow for any reason.  I don't want to take on your debt, that's your business and i don't want to make it mine'.


"Things very similar to the idea of a ""future"" that routinely apply to single stocks are ""warrants"" and ""options""."


"A good time to invest in gold WAS about ten years ago, when it had reached a 20-year bottom around $300 an ounce. That's when I was buying (gold stocks, not physical gold). Since then, it's gone up 5-6 times in ten years. It might continue to go up of course, but it also has long way down to go, because it has come up ""too far, too fast."" I have since sold my gold stocks. Alternatives to gold include other metals such as silver and copper (which actually belong in the same chemical family) as well as platinum and palladium. But they, too, have run up a lot in price over the past ten years."


"Banks make less profit when ""long"" rates are low compared to ""short"" rates. Banks lend for long term purposes like five year business loans or 30 year mortgages. They get their funds from (mostly) ""short term"" deposits, which can be emptied in days. Banks make money on the difference between 5 and 30 year rates, and short term rates. It is the difference, and not the absolute level of rates, that determines their profitability. A bank that pays 1% on CDs, and lends at 3% will make money. During the 1970s, short rates kept rising,and banks were stuck with 30 year loans at 7% from the early part of the decade, when short rates rose to double digits around 1980, and they lost money."


Debt creates risk.  The more debt you take on, the higher your risk.  What happens if you lose your job, miss a payment, or forget to write the final payment check for the exact amount needed, and are left with a balance of $1 (meaning the back-dated interest would be applied)?  There is too much risk for little reward?  If you paid monthly at 0% and put your money in your savings account like you mentioned, how much interest would you really accrue?  Probably not much, since savings account rates suck right now. If you can pay cash for it now, do it.  So pay cash now and own it outright.  Why prolong it?  Is there something looming in the future that you think will require your money?  If so, I would put off the purchase. No one can predict the future.  Why not pay cash for it now, and pay yourself what would have been the monthly payment?  In three years, you have your money back.  And there is no risk at all. Also, when making large purchases with cash, you can sometimes get better discounts if you ask.


It's not just the executives.  Many of these companies are franchises and are also public, so they have shareholders.  When corporate, franchisees and shareholders all compete to make the most money, things turn to shit.  Look at McDonald's.  The food is total garbage, some of the worst in the fast food business.  They aren't particularly good to their employees, either.  That's because you have corporate, franchisees and shareholders squabbling over every last cent.  Now look at In-N-Out.  It is a privately held company and the food costs almost the same as McDonald's.  Except In-N-Out has good food and they are pretty good to their employees.  That's because In-N-Out doesn't have as many greedy, grasping hands as McDonald's.  These shitty fast food and fast casual places are doomed.  You can't have that many people demanding a piece of the profits.  That turns the food to complete shit and employees are underpaid and stop caring.


">Darden, based in Orlando, Fla., has made cost cutting a priority in recent years as sales growth and traffic have stalled at its flagship chains...  > Given the challenging job market, Darden has been able to offer lower pay rates to new hires. Bonuses for general managers have been reduced as sales have stagnated. Servers at Red Lobster are handling four tables at a time, instead of three.  >And last year, the company also put workers on a ""tip sharing"" program, meaning waiters and waitresses share their tips with other employees such as busboys and bartenders. That allows Darden to pay more workers a far lower ""tip credit wage"" of $2.13, rather than the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.    So their food sucks and they're cheap."


You can do it, provided that the bedroom is ONLY set up as an office. That is, no bed, TV or other stuff. You can stretch it a bit, considering a TV is also a monitor, a couch is also a visitor couch. Whatever route you choose you have to be able to justify what everything is doing there in case of a visit from the authorities. I am (was) in exactly the same situation for two years and had no problem deducting ~30% of the housing costs. That is, the usage of bathroom and utilities is calculated as proportional to the surface area given to the office. It might make more sense to move into a larger apartment just so you can have one designated office room. Edit: the above applies in Germany, YMMV, IANAL, etc. EU is pretty consistent though in regulations and as far as I know the above aplies in most EU countries.


Don't take it personally, take their money, hombre. There is no way they start WW3 when China is trying to take top spot and stabilize it's economy, Russia is playing siege mode with neighbors under sanctions, and the Middle East is still embroiled in who owns what after the Arab Spring blew itself up, and Europe is fighting off countries leaving the EU. No one has the ability to wage a real concentrated war.


"Serious answer: This would be a horrible idea for you, so don't do it.  Theoretical answer:  This gets more complicated.  If you are refusing to pay your student loans, this is bad for the economy because you just destroyed the value associated with that payment.  You essentially robbed the person holding the debt (since you promised to pay it off).    However, you also stimulate the economy by buying goods.  I'm just an armchair economist, but I would say that the detriment of not paying your debt is higher than the benefit of paying for the goods.  Now, lets say you never say your not paying of your loans, and instead just pay the minimum payment and buy the goods.  Now you are helping the economy because your debt is still generating money *and* you are injecting real money through your payment.  So you essentially made more money for the economy.  So long as the ""system"" believes you can pay of the debt, the ""system"" is able to hold more money.  This is actually why most credit companies *want* you to pay the minimum balance (that, and the interest earns them far more money than you borrowed)."


The line you are referring to says 5 U.S. taxpayer identification number (SSN or ITIN), if required (see   instructions) It does not appear to be required in your case.


"And of course the same goes for a ""specific portion"" of profits for Oil companies.  Their ENTIRE profit structure isn't based on weather, but absolutely a specific portion is.  So, if you happen to be the guy in charge of 'oil that heats homes department' you very much want a cold winter..."


You can do this via many online FOREX brokers. All you need to do is set up and fund an account with them and then trade via their online platform. Some examples of brokers that do this are:


It turns out that in this special case for New York, they have a law that says that if you are changing your filing status from resident to nonresident, you must use the accrual method for calculating capital gains. So in this case, the date on the papers is the important one.


A basement is the only place in your entire home area which can get easily cooled and easily heated. It is probably the most comfortable living space in your entire home if has been properly remodeled using the proper materials. A well remodeled basement can indeed contribute to it becoming the most pleasant place in your home.


While it's wise, easier and safer to check your transactions online a few times a month, I opt to receive and file paper statements as a hard copy back up of account history. Any reconciliation I perform is a quick glance to make sure the numbers sound right. It's probably a small waste of time and space, but it settles some of my paranoia (due to my training as a computer engineer)  about failure of electronic banking systems. If someone tampers with bank records or a SAN explodes and wipes out a bunch of account data, then I will have years worth of paper statements to back up my numbers.  Having years worth of statements printed on the banks stationary will have better credibility in court than a .pdf or printout thereof that could have been doctored, in case I ever needed to take my bank to court. A little piece of mind for the price of a letter opener, a square foot file box and a couple of minutes a month.


"It's not consistent across the states. Most states have some implementation of these functions but fully regulated states don't have all of them and many are ""functions"" but are owned by the same entity.  Look at the southeast, the rockies, the PNW, AZ there are zero or few opportunities for merchant anything."


I am afraid that raising revenue will do two things.  1. It will reduce the money that creates jobs in the real economy and create incentives to protect wealth rather than to use capital for economic expansion  2. It will convince politicians and bureaucrats in the Imperial City that budgets don't have to be cut since revenue is increasing


Hey thanks for all of this info! I've been here with the owners since they've opened and I'm slowly rising to the top, I think they'll offer me management soon because they need someone but I'm really in no rush to offer any personal business ideas to them. I'd like to learn all I need before I even consider it. As I said elsewhere I'm only 20 so this is still early days I would just like a good grasp of what to expect and you've certainly delivered that.  I'll definitely check that movie out


> Yeah but they don't go to work high. > Exactly.  Meant to say that they DO go to work high. Plenty of them.  > I actually have several medical conditions that justify it, but that's beside the point that marijuana should simply be legal. Alcohol is legal even though it is a far more dangerous substance than pot.  The difference between alcohol and pot is that there are restrictions on alcohol. You can't drink in the street, you can't be publicly intoxicated, you can't drive while high (most pot smokers do if not all)  > You don't have to be a daily smoker to test positive. People who only smoke once a week are likely to fail a drug test. There's no reason to think that those people are unhappy, unsuccessful, can't unwind without drugs, or any other negative generalization you might want to impose.  I was talking about daily smokers. Many are.  > I don't dispute those statistics, but they're about Millennials, not pot smokers.   Sure, its probably even higher for pot smokers.   > Millennials' economic difficulties are more likely to be caused by the economy than they are by any widespread drug abuse, which allegation I have no reason to think is supported. And even if Millennials do use crazy amounts of drugs, so did the Baby Boomers, whose economic prosperity does not seem to have been impaired in the slightest.  Economy is ok, its the dumb decisions they made. Plenty are uneducated, then you have them fighting for high minimum wage and letting illegals stay. Both reduce the number of jobs or destroy them.  The pot these days is MUCH stronger. Then you have all kinds of other shit like edibles, oils, etc..


K thank you for the first part. I'm not antagonistic towards Tesla or the role the government played in their success- and I understand the gubment is all up in a lot of things, and I don't see that as being implicitly wrong.


"I dunno why I clicked on this stupid baity bullshit. You know this stuff only gets clicks because it's about millennial killing the ____ industry. I don't do ""casual dining"" because if I wanted a microwaved meal handed to me by a dispassionate waitress I'd just ask my ex roommate to make me a lean cuisine. No one wants to eat at a place that sells $20 burgers that are still somehow worse than the ones at jack in the box. These places only exist to serve families and millennials aren't eating there because we don't have a bunch of shitty kids and if we're eating somewhere it's probably going to be local or home cooked."


Specific stock advice isn't permitted on these boards. I'm discussing the process of a call spread with the Apple Jan 13 calls as an example.  In effect, you have $10 to 'bet.' Each bet you'd construct offers a different return (odds). For example, If you bought the $750 call at $37.25, you'd need to look to find what strike has a bid of $27 or higher. The $790 is bid $27.75. So this particular spread is a 4 to 1 bet the stock will close in January over $790, with a $760 break even.  You can pull the number from Yahoo to a spreadsheet to make your own chart of spread costs, but I'll give one more example.  You think it will go over $850, and that strike is now ask $18.85. The highest strike currently listed is $930, and it's bid $10.35. So this spread cost is $850, and a close over $930 returns $8000 or over 9 to 1.  Again, this is not advice, just an analysis of how spreads work. Note, any anomalies in the pricing above is the effect of a particular strike having no trades today, not every strike is active so 'last trade' can be days old.   Note: My answer adds to AlexR's response in that once you used the word bet and showed a desire to make a risky move, options are the answer. You acknowledged you understand the basic concept, but given the contract size of 100 shares, these suggestions are ways to bet under your $1000 limit and profit from the gain in the underlying stock you hope to see.


It is very difficult in New York City to evict a tenant. The tenant-landlord laws require that the tenant be taken to housing court. The time between filing a case for eviction and having the case heard is often five to six months. During this time, the tenant is allowed to live in the rental property. Note that this situation is independent of any rent stabilization or rent control aspects of the lease. If either of those issues are involved, there may be additional complications. I know that this is true based on first-hand experience. I was the leaseholder in my apartment, and rented out the extra room to a woman who worked with me. Even though we did not have a formal lease agreement, I was still considered her landlord. I consulted with a real-estate attorney in Manhattan, who told me that the situation was no different whether I was a property owner and rented to tenants, or whether it was a sublet/ roommate situation such as what I was doing. Regardless, the entire process of filing and having a hearing in Housing Court was necessary for eviction. In Florida, as else where, laws vary by county or even at a more local level. I know that the landlord files a notice and arranges for the Marshal's office to remove the tenant. Procedures and law in Miami-Dade County need to be checked on the official county website.


Zero percent interest may sound great, but those deals often have extra margin built into the price to make up for it. If you see 0%, find it cheaper somewhere else and avoid the cloud over your head.


An offset account is simply a savings account which is linked to a loan account. Instead of earning interest in the savings account and thus having to pay tax on the interest earned, it reduces the amount of interest you have to pay on the loan. Example of a 100% offset account: Loan Amount $100,000, Offset Balance $20,000; you pay interest on the loan based on an effective $80,000 loan balance. Example of a 50% offset account: Loan Account $100,000, Offset Balance $20,000; you pay interest on the loan based on an effective $90,000 loan balance. The benefit of an offset account is that you can put all your income into it and use it to pay all your expenses. The more the funds in the offset account build up the less interest you will pay on your loan. You are much better off having the offset account linked to the larger loan because once your funds in the offset increase over $50,000 you will not receive any further benefit if it is linked to the smaller loan. So by offsetting the larger loan you will end up saving the most money. Also, something extra to think about, if you are paying interest only your loan balance will not change over the interest only period and your interest payments will get smaller and smaller as your offset account grows. On the other hand, if you are paying principal and interest then your loan balance will reduce much faster as your offset account increases. This is because with principal and interest you have a minimum amount to pay each month (made up of a portion of principal and a portion of interest). As the offset account grows you will be paying less interest, so a larger portion of the principal is paid off each month.


People are downvoting you, but the reality is that a cushion isn't a bad idea.  Not a perpetual thing, but until the OP gets set up with a job place to live etc.  They know the job is going to work out etc., they might want to have some cash, as they are likely not going to forgo eating etc... that said I would treat it as money to be used in place of a credit card (with the high rates) etc...   Again I am not saying spend the money, I am being realistic, that it takes money to secure an apt, and unless you can borrow cheaper than 6% elsewhere (I know I could probably get unsecured money cheaper than that where I live, but I don't know the OPs situation).  I wouldn't invest it given the situation personally.  If you have a great job, it won't matter, you will build up past 1200 soon and can then start to invest a portion of that cash.  If you don't, then you shouldn't be risking debt money, especially if your level of sophistication in the market has you here asking the question.  That 6% savings is tax free as well, so you need to gross it up based on your tax situation.  Also make note of any currency conversions that would need to happen, so depending on what you want to invest in, currency risk could be a real concern as well.  One other reason I think getting down at least a portion of the debt could be good is simplification.  Can't spend money you don't view yourself as having.  Some people might be more disciplined to reign in spending when they see a lower number in their account.  I'm personally not one of those people, but again, I would likely kill the debt off now just to have one less thing on my mind... but only as soon as I am stable (know where I am going to live, have enough to eat, and relatively sure that will continue in the future...)


It shouldn't, really. Investors and companies thinking about an IPO shouldn't be scared.  I mean, Facebook is a company with no real way to profit from its technology. They have the user base, but has no way of profiting off them. Yet anyways. For them to come out with a near $100 bln valuation, only making a few bln in revenue last year (and little profit), it seems that the market is just adjusting to their respective value to investors.  Now, if a company wants to IPO that's awesome, just make sure:  * The company will be relevant to daily life in 10-25-50-100 years, etc. * The company can turn a profit without uncertainty. * A company that can grow. Meaning if you buy into a $100 bln valuation, that it can be realistically seen as to growing into a $200 bln company in the next few years. * Preferably, traditional investors like companies that make or deal with a physical product.  * The company has leadership. CEO Zuckerberg of (FB) may have created the social network technology, but that doesn't mean he's fit to run a $100 bln public company. I mean, the guy couldn't even dress in a suit for his important meetings pre-IPO. * Preferably companies that can/will enter emerging markets. Cue Coca-Cola and bottlers. * The list goes on but I'm bored of typing. Anyone can add/argue or critique anything if they would like to.  If you have all that, you shouldn't be scared of IPO'ing or investing in at IPO.


I doubt it has to do with the check though. Old people can be slow sometimes. I bet a younger person could write the check in a Reasonable amount of time. I lost my debt card a while back and needed groceries before I got my replacement it only added about a minute of transaction time for $200 in groceries which already takes a few minutes just to ring up.


First, can I even roll any my profits into a 529 plan to avoid taxes. No. 529 plans are not pre-tax (except for State taxes in certain States, where 529 contributions are deductible. Ohio is such a State, with certain conditions). For Federal taxes - funding a 529 with yourself as a beneficiary doesn't change a thing on your taxes. Is there any special requirements for the state of Ohio. Yes, see the link above. Essentially you'll be carrying the deduction forward for years until you exhaust it, $2000 at a time. Is there a better solution that I am overlooking. No. If it was easy to avoid income taxes - everyone would be doing it.


People who are angry at some businesses never mention the owners name because they are too angry to find out.  I take all horrible reviews to task for this, as typically ex employees go out of their way to name and insult staff.


One way is to compare the implied volatility with the realised volatility over a period similar to the time left to expiry. However there are plenty of reasons why the implied may be higher than the historical, for example because the market volatility has increased overall or because the underlying company is going to report their results before the option expires.


"Every company has ""capital"". Even if you have a one man company, you probably stated something like ""100 shares of $1 each"", which means you had to take that $100 out of your own private pocket and pay it into the company.  When the company loses money and runs out of cash, they have the possibilities of (1) borrowing some money from the bank, or from a loan shark, (2) borrowing some money from the company owners, or (3) increase the share capital, for example by increasing the number of shares to 10,000 and each share holder pays his part of the $9,900. That's the case that you have here.  However, it is only a ""liability"" in the sense that it isn't money the company earned, it is money that the owners paid in. They have no right to get the money back; the paid-in capital is actually what the owners lose if a limited company goes bankrupt."


Says someone with no evidence to backup a claim that any troll on the Web can make.  Reality in even a major city like Las Vegas:  [Nevada has one of the lowest resident-to-physician ratios in the country, which puts it in a uniquely vulnerable position to respond to large-scale emergencies.](http://www.governing.com/topics/health-human-services/gov-las-vegas-shooting-trauma-center-doctor-shortage.html)


Think about it from a more pragmatic POV -- on what basis would you levy taxes on money that is lost? If your house were robbed, should you have to pay taxes based on the money stolen from you? What if your car breaks down? Income in its simplest form is revenue - cost of goods sold. So if I buy a car for $10,000 and sell it to you for $8,000, I have negative income.


The main points shine a very bright light on the need for healthcare policy reform, FIR EVERYONE, not just the poor.   - Using a conservative deﬁnition, 62.1% of all US bankruptcies in 2007 were medical.  - Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations.  - Three-quarters **had health insurance**.  - Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies.


GnuCash—Great for the meticulous who want to know every detail of their finances. Pros: Cons:


"I know of a manufacturer who will not use products not manufactured outside of the states... So we ship them to someone else who ""adds value"" to the product so we don't have to stamp ""Made In China"" to it. They simply tear off the perforated components and place them back into the box. Lots of jobs being produced."


When I called Navient about this exact question last year they told me that my loan is a term length loan; so if I were to make extra payments on one of my dozen loans then my total monthly payment would be adjusted (go down) in order to make sure that my loans would still be paid off in x months.   It is very important to note however that Navient has at least 4 loan payment types that I know of so I can make no assurances that yours will work the same way.  The only way to get an absolute answer to this is going to be to Call Navient and ask them.


This guy whines like a stepped on puppy.  While all his friends were out partying, he was having no fun building his business.  After all his workers go home and whoop it up, he's all alone at the office signing paychecks.  He sounds like some miserable SOB.  I own a business, I try to have fun doing it.  Obama's not going to stop me!  Actually, I try not to base decisions on growing the business on Washington, DC.  That'd truly be stupid.  I can make all the stupid decisions I need on my own.


"The answer, as usual, is ""it depends"". Essentially, you'll have to pay VAT on your turnover, and if you have a million turnover, you'll have to be VAT registered. In that case, you'll either charge VAT on top of the million, or you'll have to send 200k to HMRC straight away. OTOH, being VAT registered means you can offset the VAT on company expenditure against the VAT on the company's income. After that, you'll deduct all allowable expenditure from the income of the company. That doesn't include your living expenses (those are your problem, not the company's) but basically anything that makes the company tick. Company expenditure also includes salaries paid to the company's employees etc. The company will then pay corporation tax on the remainder. Oh, and once all that's done and you get some dividends from the company on top of your salary, you get to pay income tax on those, once it becomes your money. But the money in the company isn't yours, it's the company's. Big difference."


>Only a fool would make the connection between white supremacists and the president.   He literally has bannon at the top level of his administration in addition to jeff sessions as AG. Theyre publicly avowed white supremacists with a history of supporting white supremacist causes. Its not a hard connection to make.   His voting block cumbles entirely without them which is why he is so slow to criticize.   >But I suppose there's lots of consumers in America that don't think for themselves.    You may be one of them!


I would put it under advertising. Technically the domain name should be amortized over its useful life... you can't really expense it all in the first year, unless it fits within Section 179.


"Create one account.   You can change the beneficiary of the plan (even to nephews, nieces, yourself or your wife) as many times as you need so long as you are spending the money on valid educational expenses. Are you 100% sure both of your kids are going to college?  If you aren't really 100% sure, a single account that you can move between them is the best bet. Also, having recently looked in 529 plans, here are some things you have probably already thought about. Look up good 529 plans here: http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/education/preparing-for-college/clarks-529-guide/nFZS/ EDIT: I don't think you can worry about fairly dividing the money up.  I can see your wanting to be fair but what is more important, school or fairly dividing the money?   A 529 is money only for school.  Assuming your kids aren't the same age and won't go to the same school, their expenses will likely be different.  The younger kid will benefit from more interest from a longer investment, but suffer from having higher costs. So if you want to insure both kids got $50K (for example) from you by the time it is all said and done, I think you would have to make that up from your own pocket.  If only one child goes to school, any money you give the other for starting their own business couldn't come from the 529 without big tax penalties. Depending on your position and finances you could state something like ""I will cover your college expenses up to $50K"" and then that is that.  Just monitor your 529 and shoot for having $100K in the account by the time they are both college age.  That runs a risk though, because if one child doesn't go to school your money is locked up for a while or will have tax issues."


"It's popular because there's not much to it. It's open enough that other messengers can access the network, and it just works for what it is without being super invasive.  It's hard to monetize for the same reason it's popular: Ads are hard to make work because 3rd party apps accessing the network could simply block them. Allowing easy account creation without any real personal info means they can't sell user info very well. There's not really any ""premium"" content to sell without intentionally gutting features that draw people to the service.  The best they'd ever do would be limited advertising with a fairly low saturation rate and add-on services for cheap -- maybe offering a subscription that included some cloud storage and an email address, but those are easy to get, so the margins would be pretty low.  All the modern competitors have some pretty serious drawbacks, so I wonder what's going to happen here."


1469 was started by creative director, Mr. Harinder Singh, and the brand is now competing with international brands. The Punjabi T Shirts from 1469 are made of fine quality, creativity as well as precision. The company has nearly 5 exclusive stores in the cities of Delhi, Amritsar as well as Chandigarh.


Open a dispute for the preauth. It is effectively a double charge, since you have already paid for the item. You can provide evidence of the other transaction. This forces them to go through some hassle and waste some time on the issue.


Interesting, I actually didn't know some bankers ended up going to jail, wondering why there's so much misinformation about that..   I guess after seeing numerous times, high level executives and bankers get away with enormous crimes, people are simply out for blood.   You can't legally go after economists or home buyers (unless they lied about their income but with ninja loans, they didn't even need to have an income, so why lie about one?), but there were bankers who were betting against the very financial instruments they were selling to clients. There were the credit rating agencies who had a fiduciary responsibility to provide accurate ratings of these mortgage-backed securities. You can definitely make the claim that at least in these two instances, people acted outside of the law.


"Two main points to answer this in my opinion. First, most people don't start with say half a million dollar to buy all the stocks they need in one shot but rather they accumulate this money gradually. So they must make many Buys in their lifetime. Similarly, most people don't need to withdraw all their investment in one day (and shouldn't do this anyway as it cuts the time of investment). So there will be many Sells. Performing a single buy or sell per year is not efficient since it means you have lots of cash sitting doing nothing. So in this sense, low cost indexing lets you quickly invest your money (and withdraw it when needed after say you retire) without worrying about commission costs each time. The second and most important point to me to answer this is that we should make a very clear distinction between strategy and outcome. Today's stock prices and all the ups and downs of the market are just one possible outcome that materialized from a virtually uncountable number of possible outcomes. It's not too hard to imagine that tomorrow we hear all iPhones explode and Apple stock comes crashing down. Or that in a parallel universe Amazon never takes off and somehow Sears is the king of online commerce. Another item in the ""outcome"" category is your decisions as a human being of when to buy and sell. If that exploding iPhone event does occur, would you hold on to your stocks? Would you sell and cut your losses? Does the average person make the same decision if they had $1000 invested in Apple alone vs $1M?  Index investing offers a low cost strategy that mitigates these uncertainties for the average person. Again here the key is the word ""average"". Picking a handful of the heavyweight stocks as you mention might give you better returns in 30 years, but it could just as easily give you worse. And the current data suggest the latter is more likely. ""Heavyweights"" come and go (who were they 30 years ago?) and just like how the other 450 companies may seem right now as dragging down the portfolio, just as easily a handful of them can emerge as the new heavyweights. Guaranteed? No. Possible? Yes.  Jack Bogle is simply saying low cost indexing is one of the better strategies for the average person, given the data. But nowhere is it guaranteed that in this lifetime (e.g. next 30 years) will provide the best outcome. Berkshire on the other hand are in the business of chasing maximum outcomes (mid or short term returns). It's two different concepts that shouldn't be mixed together in my opinion."


401(k) can come in traditional and Roth forms, as can IRAs. Roth IRA money is not locked away for 40 years, only the earnings are locked away, and earnings can also be withdrawn for special cases. You might not be able to invest in an IRA if your income is too high, and if you don't get a match for your 401(k), that might not be the best option either. The biggest advantage of the 401(k) is the match (if it exists) if there's no match, the second biggest advantage is the tax deferral. If you are in a low tax bracket, that isn't as big of an advantage either. I would say that there are plenty of reasons why you might not max out the 401(k) for savings, but it's pretty easy to max out the Roth IRA if that makes more sense, so there aren't a lot of reasons why not.


My post has, as of this very moment, 58 votes, with 88% up votes.  Vocal frustrated and disappointed anti-Trumpers can't change that.  Anyway, why are you so upset that Trump reduced the debt?  Maybe you should be happy for this and upset on other things Trump did that are not good? Any of those?


Public transportation is generally a lot slower and not a whole lot cheaper. By car, my commute to the Bronx would take me 20 minutes, but if I took train/bus/subway it would take 90 minutes. Now I'm working in Manhattan again and public transportation costs me over $300/month just to get to the city and back, and still takes over an hour.  And on top of all that, the IRS is cutting the 2012 limit of pre-tax income that can be allocated to public transportation commuting expenses from $225 to $125 per month. Interestingly, the limit of pre-tax income that can be used to pay for commuter parking is not being reduced. I guess the government wants us to stop using public transit?


What angers you specifically though? they offered an additional car model at a lower price that you could upgrade whenever you wanted, and it was only for their 1 cheapest model to reach more people before the model 3 release. What's wrong with that?


so... asset price inflation decoupled from fundamentals (thank you QE) along with rise in ETF (notorious depressant on volatility) means options trader are underestimating volatility? Who calculates the daily spreads between HV and IV, anyone? Im new to this.


I am sure some studios at some point in time cook their books for one reason or another but the example given is a really bad one.  If the movie sites did $150m in box then I can see why it didn't net anything.  Movie theaters keep about half the box, so the net revenue is $75m.  The average marketing budget is $37m for a movie, so it wouldn't surprise me if they spent $30m on marketing.  That leaves $45m.  Then the studio needs to charge the production company for all of their services.  For instance for a third party movie they often charge 15% of net revenue for distribution.  So that would leave about $32m.  Then there are financing charges and all kinds of what are effectively rental charges for use of the lot, studio time, etc.  Point is that it is actually quite easy to see how this movie had a zero net.


These are increasingly popping up at Universities and other types of large campuses where space allocation is an important and often touchy subject between departments and how they utilize their assigned space.  I suspect to see this grow considerably as many large campuses with space concerns will start looking at this kind of technology as a way to better manage their facilities.  Another variation in use is stereoscopic sensors that track room occupancy in real time, something particularly useful for managing shared meeting spaces that are being improperly utilized.


Disappointing this is just an advertisement. I was hoping for a discussion on paying rent online. The online portal the property manager I rent from uses is horrible. They charge at 5% fee for processing payments online (which increases my rent by $45/mo).


"> As I currently understand, we owe much of our national debt to ourselves.   Debtors owe creditors. Creditors are, by and large, the banks. Forget about we/ourselves.  One thing we are taught in school is that banks earn money on the spread between what a creditor pays, minus what a saver earns in interest on his deposit. In reality, such private savings pretty much do not exist. When someone borrows from the bank, they mostly aren't borrowing another person's savings. The bank is creating *new* currency through the issuance of debt.  > The reason for this is that people are being charged interest that does not exist in the system.   I'm not sure what you mean by ""does not exist in the system"". The way it works is you borrow a dollar, and now you owe a dollar plus the interest on the dollar. Since each new loan creates more debt than currency, the monetary system can never shrink or it implodes. If you mean that the currency is unbacked by any objective measure of value, that is correct.   > Therefore, if we tried to pay the debt (like some conservative politicians are fighting for) it would be a massive transfer of wealth from the 99% to the 1%, since most of the debt is owed to the 1% (banks).  There is no possibility of repaying it. Both the Red Team and the Blue Team are in on this. If you're worried about the 99% you should be advocating commodity money, because that is the only way to stop theft by inflation. If you're worried about yourself, get informed as to how these plans have played out in history and how you might protect yourself."


The below assessment is for primary residences as opposed to income properties. The truth is that with the exception of a housing bubble, the value of a house might outpace inflation by one or two percent.  According to the US Census, the price of a new home per square foot only went up 4.42% between 1963 and 2008, where as inflation was 4.4%.  Since home sizes increased, the price of a new home overall outpaced inflation by 1% at 5.4% (source).  According to Case-Shiller, inflation adjusted prices increased a measly .4% from 1890-2004 (see graph here). On the other hand your down payment money and the interest towards owning that home might be in a mutual fund earning you north of eight percent.  If you don't put down enough of a down payment to avoid PMI, you'll be literally throwing away money to get yourself in a home that could also be making money. Upgrades to your home that increase its value - unless you have crazy do-it-yourself skills and get good deals on the materials - usually don't return 100% on an investment.  The best tend to be around 80%. On top of the fact that your money is going towards an asset that isn't giving you much of a return, a house has costs that a rental simply doesn't have (or rather, it does have them, but they are wrapped into your rent) - closing costs as a buyer, realtor fees and closing costs as a seller, maintenance costs, and constantly escalating property taxes are examples of things that renters deal with only in an indirect sense. NYT columnist David Leonhart says all this more eloquently than I ever could in: There's an interactive calculator at the NYT that helps you apply Leonhart's criteria to your own area. None of this is to say that home ownership is a bad decision for all people at all times.  I'm looking to buy myself, but I'm not buying as an investment.  For example, I would never think that it was OK to stop funding my retirement because my house will eventually fund it for me.  Instead I'm buying because home ownership brings other values than money that a rental apartment would never give me and a rental home would cost more than the same home purchase (given 10 years).


Reinvestment creates a nightmare when it comes time to do taxes, sadly. Tons of annoying little transactions that happened automatically... Here's one article trying to answer your question: http://www.smartmoney.com/personal-finance/taxes/figuring-out-your-cost-basis-when-youve-lost-the-statements-9529/ You could also try this thing: http://www.gainskeeper.com/us/BasisProIndividual.aspx But I couldn't tell you if it would help. If it makes you feel better, brokerages are now required by the IRS to track your basis for you, so for new transactions and assets you shouldn't end up in this situation. Doesn't help with the old stuff ;-)


It might be possible to sue you successfully if someone brought evidence that your brother was absolutely totally unsuitable to drive a car because of some character flaw, and without your financial help he wouldn't have been able to afford a car. So helping a brother to buy a car, if that brother is a drinking alcoholic, or has only a faked driver's license and you know it, that could get you into trouble.  A not unsimilar situation: A rental car company could probably be sued successfully if they rented a car to someone who they knew (or maybe should have known) was disqualified from driving and that person caused an accident.


It's illegal to discriminate against a borrower based on age, just like it is skin color, ethnicity, etc.  Plus if/when the borrower dies a life insurance policy is likely in place to cover the mortgage, or the house will be sold, etc.


AAA Tours offers a very organized and affordable vacation planning service. With our free vacation planning service we can create a very personalized tour and vacation packages that will take care of your individual needs. With so many years of vacation planning, we can create the perfect vacation for you whether you want a family vacation, honeymoon or with friends or work or your business. http://www.aaatourcostarica.com/private-transportation-for-every-day/


"If this is your friend, and he that convinced he will ""get rich"" from this then there's really nothing you CAN do.  You've obviously done your best to explain the situation to him, but he's been caught up in their sales pitch, and that's more convincing to him. I worked in sales for many years, and the answers he gives you (the one about not needing to know the details of how your smartphone works is a classic variation of typical objection-handling that salespeople are taught) proves that he has been sucked in by their scheme. At this stage, all you're going to do is ruin your friendship with him if you continue to press the matter, because he has made it clear he can't be convinced that this is anything other than legitimate.  The reality is, he is probably in too deep at this stage to just walk away from it, so he has to convince himself that he made a wise choice. Schemes like this use a ""scarcity"" approach (there's only so much to go around, and if you don't get yours now then someone else will get it) coupled with ego-boosting (boy, Mr. Prospect, this is such a great opportunity, and you're one of only a few who are sophisticated enough to understand and take advantage of it) to get people to lower their guard and not ask a whole lot of probing questions. Nobody wants to feel stupid, and they don't want others to think they're stupid, so these schemes will present the information in such a way that ordinarily prudent questions come across as sounding dumb, making the questioner seem not so smart.  Rather than walking away from it, peoples' pride will sometimes make them double down on it, and they'll just go along with it to come across as though they get it, even when they really don't. The small payouts at early stages are a classic sign of a Ponzi scheme.  Your friend will never listen to you as long as those little checks continue to come in, because to him they're absolute proof he's right and you're wrong.  It's those checks (or payouts, however they're doing it) that will make him step up his efforts to recruit other people into the scheme or, worse yet, invest more of his own money into this. Keep in mind that in the end, you really have no power to do anything in this situation other than be his friend and try to use gentle persuasion.  He's already made it clear that he isn't going to listen to your explanations about why this is a scam, for a couple reasons.  First (and probably greatest), it would be an admission that he's dumb, or at least not as smart as you, and who wants that?  Second, he continues to get little checks that reinforce the fact this must be ""real"", or why else would he be getting this money?  Third, he has already demonstrated his commitment to this by quitting his job, so from his point of view, this has become an all-or-nothing ticket to wealth.   The bottom line is, these schemes work because the sales pitch is powerful enough to overcome ordinary logic for people who think there just has to be an easy way to Easy Street. All you can do is just be there as his friend and hope that he sees the light before the damage (to himself and anyone else) gets too great.  You can't stop him from what he's doing any more than you can stop the sun from rising as long the message (and checks) he's getting from other people keep him convinced he's on the right path. EDIT After reading the comments posted in this thread, I do want to amend my statements, because many good points have been raised here.  You obviously can't just sit by and do nothing while your friend talks others into taking the same (or worse) risks that he is.  That's not morally right by any measure At the same time however, be VERY careful about how you go about this.  Your friend, as you stated, sounds pretty much like he's all in with this scheme, so there's definitely going to be some serious emotional commitment to it on his part as well.  Anyone and everything that threatens what he sees as his ticket to Easy Street could easily become a target when this all comes crashing down, as it inevitably will.  You could very well be the cause of that in his eyes, especially if he knows you've been discouraging people from buying into this nightmare. People are NOT rational creatures when it comes to money losses.  It's called ""sunken costs"", where they'll continue to chase their losses on the rationale they'll make up for it if they just don't give up.  The more your friend committed to this, the worse his anxieties about losing, so he'll do whatever he has to in order to save his position.  This is what gamblers do and why the house does so well for itself. Some have suggested making anonymous flyers or other means of communicating that don't expose you as the person spreading the message, and that's one suggestion.  However, the problem with this is that since the receiver has no idea who sent the message, they're not likely to give it the kind of credibility or notice that they would to something passed to them by a person they know and trust, and your anonymous message will have little weight in the face of the persuasive pitch that got your friend to commit his own money (and future). Another problem, as you've noted, is that you don't travel in the same circles as the people he's likely to recruit, so how would you go about warning them?  How would they view their first contact with you when it comes with a message not to trust what someone else they already know is about to tell them?  Would they write it off as someone who's butty?  Hard to tell. Another huge ploy of these schemes is that they tend to preemptively strike at what you propose doing -- that is, warning people to stay away.  They do this by projecting the people giving the warnings as losers who didn't see the opportunity for themselves and now want to keep others away from their own financial success.  They'll portray you as someone who isn't smart enough to see this ""huge opportunity"", and since you can't understand it, you don't think anyone else does either.  They'll point out that if you were so good with finances, why aren't you already successful? These guys are very good, and they have an answer for every objection you can raise, whether its to them or to someone else.  They've spent a long time honing their message, which makes it difficult for anyone to say something persuasive enough to sway others away from being duped.  This is a hard path, no doubt. I hope you are able to warn others away.  Just be aware that it may come at a cost to you as well, and be prepared for what that might be. I hope this helps. Good luck!"


But they were spending on things that people didnt need, ie tanks, guns, bombs. Not things a consumer would want or could use. This is the difference between productive work and the hole diggers I was illustrating before. Govt spending for the sake of spending does not create wealth, it on redirects capital from more productive avenues. Sure the govt needs to spend on war items if there's a legitimate threat of us being attacked. But govt spending should always be kept to a minimum so that the private sector can achieve the highest level of productivity with the scarce resources we have.


"There's a lot of personal preference and personal circumstance that goes into these decisions.  I think that for a person starting out, what's below is a good system.  People with greater needs probably aren't reading this question looking for an answer. How many bank accounts should I have and what kinds, and how much (percentage-wise) of my income should I put into each one?  You should probably have one checking account and one savings / money market account.  If you're total savings are too low to avoid fees on two accounts, then just the checking account at the beginning.  Keep the checking account balance high enough to cover your actual debits plus a little buffer.  Put the rest in savings. Multiple bank accounts beyond the basics or using multiple banks can be appropriate for some people in some circumstances.  Those people, for the most part, will have a specific reason for needing them and maybe enough experience at that point to know how many and where to get them. (Else they ask specific questions in the context of their situation.) I did see a comment about partners - If you're married / in long-term relationship, you might replicate the above for each side of the marriage / partnership.  That's a personal decision between you and your partner that's more about your philosophy in the relationship then about finance specifically. Then from there, how do I portion them out into budgets and savings?  I personally don't believe that there is any generic answer for this question.  Others may post answers with their own rules of thumb.  You need to budget based on a realistic assessment of your own income and necessary costs.  Then if you have money some savings.  Include a minimal level of entertainment in ""necessary costs"" because most people cannot work constantly.  Beyond that minimal level, additional entertainment comes after necessary costs and basic savings.  Savings should be tied to your long term goals in addition to you current constraints. Should I use credit cards for spending to reap benefits? No. Use credit cards for the convenience of them, if you want, but pay the full balance each month and don't overdo it.  If you lack discipline on your spending, then you might consider avoiding credit cards completely."


Wait until the open and currently running investigation about illegal voting in California and other states - millions of illegal votes, for DNC only of course.  I am 100% sure that, just statistically, at least 4.5 million illegal votes just in California.


The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Colorado, argues that Denver-based Chipotle deceived both investors and customers into believing that the chain had fixed its food safety issues, and in doing so kept its stock price artificially high; now, they’re losing money thanks to the falling stock.


I'm confused... Berkshire is entirely independent from AIG. Are you saying that Berkshire would have gone bankrupt had AIG gone under? That doesn't make any sense... AIG and Berkshire were performing the same function during the financial crisis - they were market makers for CDS/CDO's. AIG needed the money. Berkshire didn't.  Please explain.


They're basing it off data from Seattle, [where a minimum wage increase was approved in 2015](http://www.seattle.gov/laborstandards/ordinances/minimum-wage), and has not been fully implemented yet (and won't be until 2021, although large employers will hit $15 before then).    Seems a bit premature to me.


"From Wikipedia: Usage Because EV is a capital structure-neutral metric, it is useful when   comparing companies with diverse capital structures. Price/earnings   ratios, for example, will be significantly more volatile in companies   that are highly leveraged. Stock market investors use EV/EBITDA to compare returns between   equivalent companies on a risk-adjusted basis. They can then   superimpose their own choice of debt levels. In practice, equity   investors may have difficulty accurately assessing EV if they do not   have access to the market quotations of the company debt. It is not   sufficient to substitute the book value of the debt because a) the   market interest rates may have changed, and b) the market's perception   of the risk of the loan may have changed since the debt was issued.   Remember, the point of EV is to neutralize the different risks, and   costs of different capital structures. Buyers of controlling interests in a business use EV to compare   returns between businesses, as above. They also use the EV valuation   (or a debt free cash free valuation) to determine how much to pay for   the whole entity (not just the equity). They may want to change the   capital structure once in control. Technical considerations Data availability Unlike market capitalization, where both the market price and the   outstanding number of shares in issue are readily available and easy   to find, it is virtually impossible to calculate an EV without making   a number of adjustments to published data, including often subjective   estimations of value: In practice, EV calculations rely on reasonable estimates of the   market value of these components. For example, in many professional   valuations: Avoiding temporal mismatches When using valuation multiples such as EV/EBITDA and EV/EBIT, the   numerator should correspond to the denominator. The EV should,   therefore, correspond to the market value of the assets that were used   to generate the profits in question, excluding assets acquired (and   including assets disposed) during a different financial reporting   period. This requires restating EV for any mergers and acquisitions   (whether paid in cash or equity), significant capital investments or   significant changes in working capital occurring after or during the   reporting period being examined. Ideally, multiples should be   calculated using the market value of the weighted average capital   employed of the company during the comparable financial period. When calculating multiples over different time periods (e.g. historic   multiples vs forward multiples), EV should be adjusted to reflect the   weighted average invested capital of the company in each period. In your question, you stated: The Market Cap is driven by the share price and the share price is   determined by buyers and sellers who have access to data on cash and   debts and factor that into their decision to buy or sell. Note the first point under ""Technical Considerations"" there and you will see that the ""access to data on cash and debts"" isn't quite accurate here so that is worth noting. As for alternatives, there are many other price ratios one could use such as price/earnings, price/book value, price/sales and others depending on how one wants to model the company. The better question is what kind of investing strategy is one wanting to use where there are probably hundreds of strategies at least. Let's take Apple as an example. Back on April 23, 2014 they announced earnings through March 29, 2014 which is nearly a month old when it was announced. Now a month later, one would have to estimate what changes would be made to things there. Thus, getting accurate real-time values isn't realistic. Discounted Cash Flow is another approach one can take of valuing a company in terms of its future earnings computed back to a present day lump sum."


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/fiscal-contraction-boost-south-america-growth-by-andres-velasco-2017-06) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot) ***** > SANTIAGO - Europe&#039;s recent experience suggests that a fiscal contraction cannot be expansionary.  > Fiscal contraction can be expansionary if markets expect that tightening today will prevent larger and more disruptive budget cuts in the future.  > Despite the International Monetary Fund&#039;s mea culpa for underestimating the short-run adverse effects of fiscal austerity on European growth, over the longer term, Fund studies make clear, &quot;Reducing government debt is likely to raise output, as real interest rates decline and the lighter burden of interest payments permits cuts to distortionary taxes.&quot; One does not have to stick to the controversial 90%-of-GDP threshold identified by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff to believe that a stronger fiscal position can help long-term growth - especially in perennially low-savings, high-interest economies like Brazil.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6erhxk/can_fiscal_contraction_ever_boost_growth/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~134464 tl;drs so far."") | [Theory](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31bfht/theory_autotldr_concept/) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **fiscal**^#1 **rate**^#2 **growth**^#3 **currency**^#4 **interest**^#5"


As in most anti-living wage  editorials, there is a lot of sketchiness here.  First, the workers are not minimum wage in the sense that increasing the minimum wage will not increase *their* wages.  Second, the article cites that one worker claimed to be making $2 and hour less in tips *before* the law was enacted (with wages unchanged). That seems like pretty strong evidence that tipping behavior is ultimately independent of the minimum wage.  Finally, the article cites studies that show that workers that rely on tips have higher poverty levels than those that don't.  So, while the article appears to be an editorial opposed to increasing minimum wage, a more objective look at the evidence presented suggests that the minimum wage should be increased and that Buckwalter is either a bit of an idiot or he recognizes that, as a non-minimum wage earner, he benefits from the inequality of a lower minimum wage.


I hate attributing an event like this to a single cause.  That implies that the market is an orderly system where everything operates smoothly.  I prefer to see it as much chaotic. When I see a drop like that happen, I'd say that there were a lot of sellers of stocks and all the buyers were bidding less and less for those few minutes.  Perhaps the catalyst for that was a typo or a strange order.  But in the end all the participants in the market responded by bidding down stocks, not just one person.  It takes sides to complete a trade. I know my model is a bit simplistic...  I'd be happy if someone corrected me :-)


https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/inequality/the-effects-of-raising-the-minimum-wage      They still have to have the same amount of people. Just because your bottom line swells 3% doesn't mean that traffic slows down, and you were already on a flex schedule in your example, so there is already nowhere to cut if you intend on keeping the same level of services. You would actually inject more money into a community, so you would probably see an uptick if you were in an industry like Wal-Mart.


As pointed out, these machines are hardly new and in wide use by other carriers/airports. Staff are still needed as some boarding passes may not be readable (mobile phone one's for example) and they still have the bag nazis to ensure only one carry-on in economy. The turnstiles can even issue seat changes and upgrades.


"Most online ""high yield"" savings accounts are paying just above 1%.  That would be 1.05% for American Express personal savings, or 1.15% for Synchrony Bank (currently). Depending on the length of the season, you might want to work in some CD's.  Six months CDs can be had at 1.2%, and 9 month at 1.25%.  So if you know you won't need some of your earnings for 9 months, you could earn 1.25% on your money. However, I would proceed with caution on anything other than the high yield savings account.  With your one friend having such a low emergency fund, there is very little room for error.  Perhaps until that amount is built up into something significant, it is just best to stick with the online savings. Of course, one solution would be to find a way to create income during the off season.  That will go a long way into helping one build wealth."


"There is a substantial likelihood over the next several years that the US Dollar will experience inflation. (You may have heard terms like ""Quantitative Easing."") With inflation, the value of each dollar you have will go down. This also means that the value of each dollar you owe will go down as well.  So, taking out a loan / issuing a bond at a very good rate, converting it into an asset that's a better way to store value (possibly including stock in a big stable company like MSFT) and then watching inflation reduce the (real) value of the loan faster than the interest piles up... that's like getting free money. Combine that with the tax-shelter games alluded to by everyone else, and it starts to look like a very profitable endeavour."


You are asking 'what if', do you have some anticipated answers? Having volume smaller than open interest is the norm. As far as I can tell, having only one trading day and no previous open interest only affects someone trying to sell a contract they are holding.  Meaning that if you only have one day to sell your contract then you need to offer it 'at market' or at the bid price (or even lower than the bid price). If you cannot sell your contract then you have to let it expire worthless or you have to exercise it. Those are your three options: let it expire, sell it (perhaps at a loss), and exercise it.  Edit: be careful about holding an in-the-money option. Many brokers will automatically exercise an in-the-money contract if you hold it till expiration date.


Most answers to this question only address the issue of providing personal information to a scammer. But considering that a lot of questions without the personal information addition get closed as duplicates of this one, I would like to answer the question in the subject: There are several criminal schemes which involve this.


I could see them taking over the old Intel campus in Hudson, or Suffolk Downs.. if there's space for an enormous casino, there's space for Amazon. the Globe speculated today they could also do something like the old NAS South Weymouth.  I think they will be tempted by the high end talent coming out of MIT, Harvard and the other top schools. Tufts and WPI are great engineering schools. Not just for engineering, but HBS, Sloan, and beyond that BC/BU/NU all have good management programs. There is also already a large footprint for Amazon here, particularly in the speech recognition area.  With GE, Massachusetts has already signaled willingness to commit to tax breaks to lure prestige businesses.  Realistically Boston and Toronto are the only places that checks all their boxes, short of Silicon Valley. Austin, Denver and Minneapolis might also compete if the public transportation requirement isn't strict.


I know you've already lost interest, but i just wanted to respond to this:  >money is a store of value  No, it is not. Money is a very poor store of value. Money is intended as a means to transfer value from one to another.   >You appear to be afraid of what would happen if people were allowed to voluntarily choose what money to use, without government interference.  I repeatedly encouraged you to use alternative currencies, i don't know where you get this from.


"Taxing. Paperwork (ie. time spent filling out useless forms while I can't work for my business). Other costs just to satisfy whatever they want/need (accounting, auditing, licensing, etc...). I think some of it is necessary, but they take it to the full extent in the sense of someone just trying to justify their job. ""Well, where did this 21 cents go?!?!?""  Um, up your ass?"


In addition they had won several awards from the government in food safety and innovation.     Maybe they shouldn't have.  But it's confusing to be working with regulators to improve food processing, get accolades for your work,  then destroyed for that same work.