I do have an agenda. Or at least a question: Is the apparrel industry in the US dying? Is it being sent overseas thanks to 'free trade'/globalization laws?  >A recent study released by IBISWorld identifies ten dying US industries. Among these top industries is apparel manufacturing. http://blog.zintro.com/2011/04/12/is-the-apparel-manufacturing-industry-in-the-us-dying/  I am against globalization. It puts all the eggs in one basket. We are seeing again and again when one country has a crisis it threatens to engulf, first, all of Europe, then the US, then the world. This is the price of globalization, which mainly profits the very wealthy. Aside from my objection to who profits, I think it's stupid to...put all our eggs in one basket. Let different countries do things differently, then evaluate which works best for the greatest number of people. Don't just make every country to everything the same, the neoliberal/neoconservative policy.


Yes, rebalancing with new money avoids capital gains taxes and loads (although if you're financially literate enough to be thinking about rebalancing techniques, I'm surprised to hear that you're invested in funds with loads). On the other hand, if it's taking you years to rebalance, then: (a) you are not rebalancing anywhere near frequently enough.  Rebalancing should be something you do every 6 months or 1 year, such that it would take only a few weeks or maybe a month of new investment to get back in balance. (b) you will be out-of-balance for quite a long time, while the whole point of the theory of rebalancing is to always be mathematically prepared for swings in the market.  Any time spent out of balance represents that much more risk that an unexpected market move can seriously hurt your portfolio. You should weigh the time it will take you to rebalance the long way (i.e. the risk cost of not rebalancing immediately) vs. the taxes and fees involved in rebalancing quickly.  If you had said that it would take you only a couple weeks or a month to rebalance the long way, I would say that the long way is fine.  But the prospect of spending years without a balanced portfolio seems far more costly to me than any expenses you might incur rebalancing quickly. Since it's almost the end of the calendar year, have you considered doing two quick rebalances, one this year, and another in January?  That way half of the tax consequences would happen in April, and the other half not until the next April, giving you plenty of time to scrounge up the money.  Also, even if you have no capital losses this year with which to offset some of your expected capital gains, you would have all of next year to harvest some losses against next year's half of the rebalancing gains.


"Why do stock markets allow these differences in reporting? The IRS allows businesses to use fiscal calendars that differ from the calendar year. There are a number of reasons a company would choose do this, from preferring to avoid an accounting rush at end of year during holiday season, to aligning with seasonality for their profits (some like to have Q4 as the strongest quarter). Smaller businesses may prefer to keep the extra stress of year end closeout to a traditionally slower time for the business, and some just start their fiscal calendar when the company starts up. You'll notice the report dates are a couple weeks after fiscal quarter end, you would read it as ""three months ended...,"" so for Agilent, three months ended October 31, 2017, so August, September, October are their Q4 months."


Don't feel bad.  The last time I did this was 2008.  It was an inter-office competition.  We started a 6 month run around July.  $100,000 each.  Same rules as this game only longer.  Well this thing happening around September/October in 2008 that caused all hell to break lose on the markets, you might have heard about it.  The winner at the end only lost $20,000.  I had lost $60,000.  We had one guy who only had around $10,000 LEFT.    Playing this game while the whole market imploded really drove home how royally FUCKED a lot of people were.  Made for a tangible experience of all the junk you saw on the news.


Most people are under educated on the health benefits of certain foods and the drawbacks of others. I for one love the organic Capri suns, they taste way better! Natural fruit juices destroy these artificial flavors all day. The natural sweetness and sugars still maintain that energy inducing taste.


sheegaon's reply looks fine to me, a HELOC can usually be set up for a minimal ($50?) fee, and is currently a pretty low rate, mine is 2.5%.  If this doesn't appeal to you, my other suggestion is a 401(k) loan. While this is usually a last resort and 'not' recommended, a short term use may make sense. The rate is low, and you can pay in back in full after moving into the new house.


Don't panic this happens all the time. I looked online for a form that can be used to redeposit funds back into the HSA. This form can be used to redeposit funds withdrawn in error and cannot   be used to correct an Excess Contribution Return. Funds will be posted   as a correction and not as a contribution. The deposit will be entered   for the year the distribution occurred. It allows you to specify the year the incorrect distribution occurred. I authorize Optum Bank to make the withdrawal correction indicated   above. I have enclosed a check made payable to Optum Bank for the   amount I’d like redeposited to my account. I understand that this can   result in a possible corrected 1099-SA for the tax year indicated   above. Of course you need to get the forms for your account.


"Situation #1: I keep playing, and eventually earn 1000 PED. I withdraw   this. Will I get taxed? If so, by how much? This is probably considered an ""award"", so whatever your country taxes for lottery/gambling winnings would be applicable. If there's no specific taxation on this kinds of income - then it is ordinary income. Situation #2: I deposit $5000, play the game, lose some money and   withdraw PED equal to $4000. Will I get taxed? If so, by how much? Since it is a game, it is unlikely that deducting losses from your income would be allowed.  However, the $4000 would probably not be taxed as income (since you are getting your own money back). Situation #3: I deposit $5000 and use this to buy in-game items. I   later sell these items for massive profits (200%+, this can happen   over the course of 2 years for sure). I withdraw $10000. Will I get   taxed? If so, by how much? Either the same as #1 (i.e.: ordinary income) or as capital gains (although tax authority may argue that this was not a for-profit investment, and capital gains treatment shouldn't be applicable). Will I get taxed on withdrawals from Real Cash Economy games? And do   the taxes apply to the full withdrawal, or only on the profits? Or   only on the profits above a certain amount? Generally income taxes only apply on income. So if you paid $10000 and got back $12000 - only the $2000 is considered income. However some countries may tax full amounts under certain conditions. Such taxes are called ""franchise taxes"". For a proper tax advice consult with the locally licensed tax adviser."


Thanks for clarifying.  Also, I know Goodwill, and most likely the others, aren't technically one entity, but rather many entities under the same operating name, so there are many CEOs that work for Goodwill.  Maybe there is one that heads the whole thing, but I wonder how much is going to all the C-levels?


Lots of good answers.  I'll try and improve by being more brief.  For each option you will pay different taxes: Index Fund:   Traditional IRA Roth IRA You can see that the Roth IRA is obviously better than investing in a taxable account.  It may not be as obvious that the traditional IRA is better as well.  The reason is that in the traditional account you can earn returns on the money that otherwise would have gone to the government today.  The government taxes that money at the end, but they don't take all of it. In fact, for a given investment amount X and returns R, the decision of Roth vs Traditional depends only on your tax rate now vs at retirement because X(1-tax)(1+R_1)(1+R_2)...(1+R_n) = X(1+R_1)(1+R_2)...(1+R_n)(1-tax) The left hand side is what you will have at retirement if you do a Roth and the right hand side is what you will have at retirement if you do traditional.  Only the tax rate differences between now and retirment matter here.  An index fund investment is like the left hand side but has some additional tax terms on your capital gains.  It's clearly worse than either.


The banks will love you as you pay your debts on time; although they make interest money on people that don't pay full on time, they lose money on those who never pay. In overall, you will be their preferred customer. Also, they make a more than enough money on you using your credit cards, you are basically a nearly risk-free money making machine for them. Aside from those arguments, as a 'proof of concept': I do the same thing for 10+ years and have ~840 rating. You can't get much better.


The long term growth is not 6.5%, it's 10% give or take. But, that return comes with risk. A standard deviation of 14%.  Does the 401(k) have a match? And are you getting the full match? If no match, or you already top it off, the 6.5% is a rate that I'd be happy to get on my money. So, I would pay it off faster.  My highest rate debt is my 3.5% mortgage, which is 2.5% after tax. At 2.5%, I prefer to be a borrower, as that gap 2.5%-10% is pretty appealing, long term.


My Prediction: Expect to see a lot more automation of check out stands for big brand retail stores as employees are let go to save on health insurance costs and many brick&mortar stores will accelerate their extinction pace.   The era of big online stores with huge warehouses fulfillment centers (again more automation will make its way here as well) will be the new and dominate trend when high volume b&m do not meet the ability to compensate this added tax burden placed onto them by Obamcare and thus unemployment will again surge. The big winner though in all of this will be health insurance companies who have figuratively been given a license to print money by this mandate.


I haven't read the manifesto, but it's clear to me that this is a classic case of Heresy. Free speech is a myth, since we are free only so long as we don't express an opinion that disagrees with the state religion. The author of this piece clearly violated one of the core doctrines of our current religion - namely that there are no biologically-caused mental differences between males and females.


In the United States there are some specific savings accounts, some of which have rules from the federal government (education) and some that are setup by the bank/credit Union. Some institutions have a Christmas club, where money is set aside each week or each month and then you are given access at the end of the time period. Some institutions have accounts that pay CD rates but allow you to add funds during the period. They will have some flexibility in setting the time period. I have seen accounts that are designed to save up for a big purchase, or for a specific time period (summer vacation) Ask your bank. Or better yet look at a variety of banks websites for their rate sheet. That will explain all the different account types, rates, and rules. My credit Union allows a large number of sub accounts so that you don't have to commingle the funds.


"I don't agree that the market as a whole is a ponzi scheme, but there are some ponzi-like aspects to it. If you buy high quality stocks like Coca Cola, Johnson and Johnson, AT&T, Verizon, Kraft, Wells Fargo (the vanilla bank, not one of the crazy ones), IBM, Berkshire Hathaway etc and simply hold onto them for the next 10-20 years, you will make money. Even over the last decade, when stocks ""went nowhere"", you still came out ahead through the dividend payments. It was just at an unsatisfactory rate of return. Also ""the market"" consists of a lot more than just stocks. Corporate bonds are a big market and I always recommend people to look at bonds. If you cannot judge whether a company is credit worthy, how can you invest in the common stock? I've made a lot more money myself in the bond market than in the stock market.  However, for many stocks, they do look a lot like ponzi schemes. This is true, in particular, with many of the tech stocks (Cuban was a tech investor, so that is probably where his sentiment is coming from). You have many of these companies that create great products. However, they never have positive cash flow because all the money is spent to develop new products. As the share price goes up, the company issues new shares to fund research, stock options to employees to enrich them, etc. However, eventually, they run into a string of bad research that do not yield a new product and the share price plunges. Perhaps the company goes bankrupt. So you have a company that developed great products, but the shareholders never got a penny in dividends and the final shareholders have paper worth zero.  Take a look at Research in Motion for example. Creating the Blackberry has to be one of the biggest successes in tech over the last decade. However, has the shareholders gotten any richer? Only if they traded amongst themselves, nobody got a dividend. What happened to the many billions of dollars they made during the peak popularity years of Blackberry? It went to executives, employees, and was squandered on development that did not effectively defend the phone's dominant market position. Now the stock price is back down to the pre-prime years, and if a shareholder held onto it throughout the entire period, he would not have received a single penny. And this is a profitable enterprise, things look even more bizarre when you start looking at the tech companies that have NEVER had a positive earnings quarter and no plans to ever have positive earnings (something like Pandora comes to mind). Often, management at these more bizarre companies run the company as a toy - to play with their own ideas and to issue themselves stock as compensation. And of course, they sell a lot of the stock to cash in before they delve into the next risky venture. They have no intention of ever enriching anybody who holds into the stock in the long run. If for some reason they make money, they will put it all into their next toy project until one of them fails and wipes everything out.  If you invest in a profitable business with reasonable management, you will generally come out ahead. Some businesses get displaced by unpredictable circumstances and they go bankrupt. But on average, if a company is good at doing something and they pay out the earnings, you come out ahead. You get in trouble when businesses are good at something, and they take all the money they make and put it into doing something they are not good at. A business might only provide good cashflow for 10-20 years when the product is popular and before competitors cut into margins. If that money is squandered, the long term shareholder may ultimately have very terrible results. The long term shareholder ends up being the guy who keeps going all-in on a 80%-chance-to-win bet (that is what management is doing when they bet the company on the next unproven product), but eventually he gets zeroed out on one loss.  This is why if you look at Buffett's investments, they are all in simple businesses that spits off cash to the owner/shareholder. Businesses like soft drinks, snacks, rail roads, vanilla banking, utility-like energy companies, insurance, etc. You might be good at judging the odds of whether a business will succeed or not (aka make more money than your original investment or not). But you don't want management of that company to make a wildly different bet for you. Just because they are great at operating a company doesn't mean they are good enough at judging odds or disciplined enough to make those bets for you. I may have predicted accurately that Business X will be a great success, but if manage takes those profits and goes all in on Business Y, without giving me a chance to cash out, that may have disasterous results."


My father owns a small business that employees ~50 people. He's been in business for over thirty years as an agricultural establishment. Because the threshold on Obama care for small businesses to pay for employee coverage is 50+ employees we will have to fire people who don't deserve to be fired - all because we could not possibly afford an additional 50-60k per month expense for covering all employees healthcare


I wouldn't call him a charlatan. What he says is true but it's not easy to change your subconscious programming so most people don't change. I mean at the end of the day anything is possible and it's all in your mind. People don't want to put in the work


"value slip below vs ""equal a bank savings account’s safety"" There is no conflict.  The first author states that money market funds may lose value, precisely due to duration risk.  The second author states that money market funds is as safe as a bank account.  Safety (in the sense of a bond/loan/credit) mostly about default risk. For example, people can say that ""a 30-year U.S. Treasury Bond is safe"" because the United States ""cannot default"" (as said in the Constitution/Amendments) and the S&P/Moody's credit rating is the top/special. Safety is about whether it can default, ex. experience a -100% return.  Safety does not directly imply Riskiness. In the example of T-Bond, it is ultra safe, but it is also ultra risky. The volatility of 30-year T-Bond could be higher than S&P 500.  Back to Money Market Funds.  A Money Market Fund could hold deposits with a dozen of banks, or hold short term investment grade debt. Those instruments are safe as in there is minimal risk of default. But they do carry duration risk, because the average duration of the instrument the fund holds is not 0.  A money market fund must maintain a weighted average maturity (WAM) of 60 days or less and not invest more than 5% in any one issuer, except for government securities and repurchase agreements.  If you have $10,000,000, a Money Market Fund is definitely safer than a savings account.  1 Savings Account at one institution with amount exceeding CDIC/FDIC terms is less safe than a Money Market Fund (which holds instruments issued by 20 different Banks).  Duration Risk Your Savings account doesn't lose money as a result of interest rate change because the rate is set by the bank daily and accumulated daily (though paid monthly).  The pricing of short term bond is based on market expectation of the interest rates in the future. The most likely cause of Money Market Funds losing money is unexpected change in expectation of future interest rates.  The drawdown (max loss) is usually limited in terms of percentage and time through examining historical returns.  The rule of thumb is that if your hold a fund for 6 months, and that fund has a weighted average time to maturity of 6 months, you might lose money during the 6 months, but you are unlikely to lose money at the end of 6 months. This is not a definitive fact.  Using GSY, MINT, and SHV as an example or short duration funds, the maximum loss in the past 3 years is 0.4%, and they always recover to the previous peak within 3 months. GSY had 1.3% per year return, somewhat similar to Savings accounts in the US."


think of all the stuff the average 10 yr old would buy! Advertisers would love to flood their impressionable little minds with messages!  But srysly.... it sounds fucking pointless. It's just so FB can inflate their memebership numbers. Gotta push for that 1 billion....


"Actually in Finland on some bank + debit/credit card + online retailer combinations you type in your card details as you normally do, but after clicking ""Buy"" you get directed to your own bank's website which asks you to authenticate yourself with online banking credentials. It also displays the amount of money and to which account it is being paid to. After authentication you get directed back to the retailer's website. Cannot say why banks in US haven't implemented this."


SEMMco is the leading brand of handmade chocolate machinery in China. Our company is a unique distributor for GAMI Srl in China. Gami is an Italian company that manufacturer of tempering machines for chocolate in large scale. If you are looking handmade chocolate machine and chocolate temperer, then you can contact us. More information about chocolate machinery, please visit our company website.


"In some sense, the share repurchasing program is better if the company does not foresee the same profit levels down the road.  Paying a dividend for several years and then suddenly not paying or reducing a dividend is viewed as a ""slap in the face"" by investors.  Executing a share repurchase program one year and then not the next is not viewed as negatively. From an investor's standpoint, I would say a dividend is preferred over a share repurchase program for a similar reason.  Typically companies that pay a dividend have been doing so for quite some time and even increasing it over time as the company increases profits.  So, it can be assumed that if a company starts paying a dividend, it will do so for the long-run."


"Everyone who was told by (and I'm being loose with terminology here) ""professionals"" whose job it is to supposedly know things about money and valuation. I think it's because accountants and scientists sound about the same in terms of professionalism and how they deal with facts."


Fungible means that any gold is as good as any other gold. It has nothing to do with being able to form, shape, combine or divide it.  If I borrow an ounce of gold from you, you want an ounce of gold returned. You don't care which chunk of gold I bring you as long as it's the same weight and purity. If I owe you a dollar, you don't care which specific dollar bill I hand you.


Buying a property and renting it out can be a good investment if it matches your long term goals.  Buying an investment property is a long term investment.  A large chunk of your money will be tied up with the property and difficult to access.  If you put your money into dividend producing stocks you can always sell the stock and have your money back in a matter of days this is not so with a property. (But you can always do a Home equity line of credit (HELOC)) I would also like to point out landlording is not a passive endeavor as JohnFx stated dealing with a tenant can be a lot of work.  This is not work you necessarily have to deal with, it is possible to contract with a property management company that would place tenants and take care of those late night calls.  Property management companies often charge 10% of your monthly rent and will eat a large portion of your profits.  It could be worth the time and headache of tenant relations.  You should build property management into you expenses anyway in case you decide to go that route in the future. There are good things about owning an investment property.  It can produce returns in a couple of ways. If you choose this route it can be lucrative but be sure to do your homework.  You must know the area you are investing very well.  Know the rent, and vacancy rates for Single family homes, look at multifamily homes as a way of mitigating risk(if one unit is vacant the others are still paying).


In almost any jurisdiction, the restaurant will pay tax on the amount after the discount. Discounting is just a selective way to reduce prices for particular clients and thus achieve some degree of price discrimination. It's no different in principle to cutting prices for everyone or having a sale or similar. It would be very strange for a tax jurisdiction to work any other way, because businesses would end up being taxed on money they never actually got. While tax systems often have that kind of anomaly in rare cases at the edge of the system, discounting via vouchers is extremely common. For example, here are the rules in the UK.


If we hadn't blockaded Cuba for 60 years, it would likely look a lot like China, albeit not as overall productive.  Keep in mind both nations had communist revolutions at roughly the same time, the main difference being the US effectively shut out all trade with the island nation.


Last I checked, southerners were Americans, even though a lot of them are acting like traitors lately. There's no unifying aspect that's the same for all southerners, like there is for other protected classes, and no biological difference to protect.


"IRA contributions are limited; you cannot ""dump the excess into a retirement account like an IRA"" if the excess is more than $5500. Furthermore, as @firefly points out, you need to have earned income (technical term is compensation and it includes self-employment income, not just wages) to contribute to an IRA, and the limit mentioned above is actually the lesser of your earned income and $5500. (There are other limitations for people with high gross income, but these likely will not affect you) On the positive side, if your earned income is small, you can contribute your entire taxable earned income including the money withheld by your employer for Social Security and Medicare tax and Federal, State and local income taxes to an IRA, not just your take-home pay. For example, if your earned income is $5500 and take-home pay after tax withholding is $5000, you are still entitled to contribute $5500. So, where do you get that withheld money from so that it can be put into your IRA? Well, it can come from the student loan or interest earned from a bank or from the dividends and capital gains on your investments, etc. Money is fungible; it is not the case that only the cash received (or deposited into your bank account) as your take-home pay can be contributed. Subject to other limitations mentioned, your earned income can be contributed, not just your take-home pay."


"The root of the advice Bob is being given is from the premise that the market is temporarily down.    If the market is temporarily down, then the stocks in ""Fund #1"" are on-sale and likely to go up soon (soon is very subjective).     If the market is going to go up soon (again subjective) you are probably better in fictitious Fund #1.    This is the valid logic that is being used by the rep.   I don't think this is manipulative based on costs.    It's really up to Bob whether he agrees with that logic or if he disagrees with that logic and to make his own decision based on that. If this were my account, I would make the decision on where to withdraw based on my target asset allocation. Bob (for good or bad reasons) decided on 2/3 Fund 1 and 1/3 Fund 2. I'd make the withdraw that returns me to my target allocation of 2/3 Fund 1 and 1/3 Fund 2. Depending on performance and contributions, that might be selling Fund 1, selling Fund 2, or selling some of both."


"This, oddly enough, reassures me.  With all the American debt, dollars in reserves, and now American real estate that China owns, the US is the one true ""too big to fail"" institution as far as China is concerned.  Like they say: if I owe you a million dollars, I have a problem; if I owe you a trillion dollars, **YOU have a problem**."


First, read my answer here: Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing For me, the answer to your question comes down to how badly you want to get rid of your student loan debt. I recommend that you get rid of it as fast as possible, and that you sacrifice a little in your budget temporarily to make that happen. If that is what you want, here is what I would do. Following the steps in my other answer, I would pay off the student loans first. Cash out your non-retirement growth fund to jump start that, then challenge yourself to take as much of your paycheck as you can and throw it at the debt. Figure out how many months it will take before the debt is gone.  Once the debt is gone, you won't have those monthly payments anymore and you won't be continually losing money in interest to the bank. At that point, you can build up your cash savings, invest in your employer's 401(k) plan for retirement, and start saving toward other long-term saving goals (car, house, etc.) To address some of your other concerns: If you cash out the non-retirement fund, you'll probably owe some capital gains tax. (Although, on a $3k investment, the long term rate won't add up to very much, depending on your tax bracket and cost basis.) You can't use the money from your non-retirement fund to invest in your 401(k).  You can only contribute to your 401(k) via payroll deduction.  To explicitly answer your question, your non-retirement fund is not bound by the limitations of retirement funds, meaning that you can cash it out and use it however you like without penalty, only paying perhaps a few hundred dollars of capital gains tax at tax time next year. Think of it as another source of cash for you.


This is just the latest...  http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02/16/samsung-boss-arrested-in-south-koreas-explosive-corruption-scandal/  The Samsung CEO, several years ago, was convicted of tax fraud involving millions of dollars. He bribed the system by giving money to South Korea's International Olympic Commission. In return, the judges in S. Korea forgave him and placed him on their board of the IOC.   Samsung is not a corporation in the traditional sense. They are run like a monarchy. The corporate management is being handed down from Father to Son.  Rotten to the core.


"You're right about your suspicions. I'm not a professional (I suggest you talk to a real one, a one with CPA, EA or Attorney credentials and license in your State), but I would be very cautious in this case. The IRS will look at all the facts and circumstances to make a claim, but my guess would be that the initial claim would be for this to be taxable income for your husband. He'd have to prove it to be otherwise. It does seem to be related to his performance, and I doubt that had they not known him through his employment, they'd give him such a gift. I may be wrong. So may be an IRS Revenue Officer. But I'd bet he'd think the same. Did they give ""gifts"" like that to anyone else? If they did - was it to other employees or they gave similar gifts to all their friends and family? Did those who gave your husband a gift file a gift tax return? Had they paid the gift tax? Were they principles in the partnership or they were limited partners (i.e.: not the ones with authority to make any decision)? Was your husband instrumental in making their extraordinary profit, or his job was not related to the profits these people made? These questions are inquiring about the facts and circumstances of the transaction. Based on what he can find out, and other potential information, your husband will have to decide whether he can reasonably claim that it was a gift. Beware: unreasonable claims lead to equally unreasonable penalties and charges. IRS and your State will definitely want to know more about this transaction, its not an amount to slide under the radar. This is not a matter where you can rely on a free opinions written by amateurs who don't know the whole story. You (or, rather, your husband) are highly encouraged to hire a paid professional - a CPA, EA (enrolled agent) or tax attorney with enough experience in fighting gift vs income characterization issues against the IRS (and the State, don't forget your State). An experienced professional may be able to identify something in the facts and the circumstances of the situation that would lead to reducing the tax bill or shifting it to the partners, but it is not something you do on your own."


I'm assuming if Greece were to leave or be asked to leave to EMU/EURO currency, they would have to negotiate some kind of a FX Rate. I'm just taking a wildly uneducated stab at this, but i would bet they would negotiate for x% devaluation and then let the market do what it will.


"Completely ignoring the impact of the government on supply and demand.  If welfare and unemployment paid $40/hr, no one would take your hypothetical job either.   Side note - this author is embarrassingly devoid of basic economics.  They don't understand how increased tax brackets could demotivate further investing in time and capital?  It ""escapes"" them?  Is this a blog piece?"


If you are looking to analyze stocks and don't need the other features provided by Bloomberg and Reuters (e.g. derivatives and FX), you could also look at WorldCap, which is a mobile solution to analyze global stocks, at FactSet and S&P CapitalIQ.  Please note that I am affiliated with WorldCap.


The problem with rate of return calculation on short positions is, that the commonly used approach assumes an initial investment creating a cash outflow. If we want to apply this approach to short selling, we should look at the trade from another perspective. We buy money and pay for this money with stock. Our investment to buy 50$ in your example is 1 share.  When closing the short position, we effectively sell back our money (50$) and receive 2 shares. Our profit on this position is obviously 1 share. Setting this in relation to our investment of 1 share yields a performance of 100%   in reality, we do not sell back the entire cash but only the amount needed to get back our investment of 1 share. This is actually comparable to a purchase of stock which we only partially close to get back our invested cash amount and keep the remaining shares as our profit


"In some cases perhaps, but in others not.  Several homes near me were sold over and over again during the bubble years (at incrementally higher and higher sale prices) -- the last owners in nearly all cases defaulted and the banks (after dragging their feet for a couple of years) finally foreclosed and sold the homes off cheap.  In all but one of the ""distressed sale"" cases, the people buying the houses now ARE in fact moving into them as their primary home (the exception being a current resident who bought the adjacent home with the intentions of fixing it up & renting it out, I believe at least initially to a family member); but in ALL cases (in no small part due to the fact that they were able to purchase the properties cheap) these new owners are investing substantial money into fixing them up (new roof & gutters, new windows & doors, paint and/or siding, often all new carpeting, some landscaping, etc).  Also, from the perspective of our homeowners association, all of these new people think our annual HOA fees are a ""bargain"", whereas the previous bubble-era ""homeowners"" (if, having invested almost nothing, they could truly be called that) did nothing but whine and complain (well, and once they began defaulting on their mortgages, they also defaulted on their HOA fees).  So it's a win-win for our neighborhood. We're getting good, solid residents who are planning on taking care of their properties... the exact opposite of what you are claiming.   (The ""house-flippers"" you decry were the ones buying with ""no money down"" during the bubble era -- and they nearly killed the neighborhood.)"


Basically, you answer client questions on the valuation, generally speaking the P/L values for liquid equities you won't have much problems with, however for credit is where all the fun is as its OTC especially OTC derivatives. You're gonna argue with a lot of hedge funds over CDS prices and illiquid credit.  Hedge fund A will call you: Yo, why are you booking a loss of -50 bps on bond X.  You: Our end market median price of (10 providers) @ 4pm is 101.5.  Hedge fun A: Post market its at 102.  You: Sorry, can't help you as the NAV is out at 4pm.  A lot of fund managers will rage at you guys over these things as it fucks up their NAV's.  disclaimer: I used to be in the position of hedge fund A.


Every brokerage is different, on all of their websites they have an actual list of fees. There are tons of different charges you may encounter.


"As you've observed, when you're dealing with that amount of money, you're going to have to give up FDIC guarantees. That means that keeping the money in a bank account carries some risk with it: if that particular bank goes bust, you could lose most of your money. There are a few options to stretch the FDIC limit such as CDARS, but likely can't handle your hypothetical $800 million. So, what's a lucky winner to do? There are a few options, including treasury securities, money market funds, and more general capital investments such as stocks and bonds. Which one(s) are best depend on what your goals are, and what kind of risks you find acceptable. Money in the bank has two defining characteristics: its value is very stable, and it is liquid (meaning you can spend it very easily, whenever you want, without incurring costs). Treasury securities and money market funds each focus on one of these characteristics. A treasury security is a piece of paper (or really, an electronic record) saying that the US Federal Government owes you money and when they will pay it back. They are very secure in that the government has never missed a payment, and will move heaven and earth to make sure they won't miss one in the future (even taking into account recent political history). You can buy and sell them on an open market, either through a broker or directly on the Treasury's website. The major downside of these compared to a bank account is that they're not as liquid as cash: you own specific amounts of specific kinds of securities, not just some number of dollars in an account. The government will pay you guaranteed cash on specified dates; if you need cash on different dates, you will need to sell the securities in the open market and the price will be subject to market fluctuations. The other ""cash-like"" option is money market funds. These are a type of mutual fund offered by financial companies. These funds take your money and spread it out over a wide variety of very low risk, very short term investments, with the goal of ensuring that the full value will never go down and is available at any time. They are very liquid: you can typically transfer cash quickly and easily to a normal bank account, write checks directly, and sometimes even use ""online bill pay""-like features. They have a very good track record for stability, too, but no one is guaranteeing them against something going terribly wrong. They are lower risk than a (non-FDIC-insured) bank account, since the investments are spread out across many institutions. Beyond those two somewhat ""cash-like"" options, there are of course other, more general investments such as stocks, bonds, and real estate. These other options trade away some degree of stability, liquidity, or both, in exchange for better expected returns."


"Time-Barred Debts and STATE STATUTES OF LIMITATION ON COLLECTING DEBTS are good places to start on the issues of what can be collected and for how long. What seems to be at issue is bankruptcy vs. time-barred debts vs. what creditors (original debt owners, not collection agencies or those who buy debt) can do. You should also check out The Fair Credit Reporting Act which governs some of the question.  The Fair Credit Reporting Act and the section on time-barred debts applies to collection agencies, etc. (so-called debt owners as pointed out by @littleadv, since they buy debt from the creditors) not actual creditors (those the debt is/was originally owed to). Creditors (those to whom the debt was originally owed) have different rules than debt collectors and can do things debt collectors can't. State law generally governs what creditors, as original owners of the debt, can do legally and for how long. Bankruptcy Bankruptcy is a legal action that frees someone from paying all or part of debt owed (they are crying ""Uncle!"" and stating they don't have enough money to pay their creditors). On a credit report, accounts will generally be updated to show “included in bankruptcy"" or similar. Debt that is determined to still be owed often will be reduced in amount/payments. Time-barred Debts Time-barred debts are debts that are still owed, but cannot be collected through direct legal action (suing). Each state has its own statute of limitations on how long different types of debt can be collected by suing after initial default before being considered time-barred. This period is typically 3-6 years but a few states such as Kentucky allow much longer time periods (up to 15 years). Being a time-barred debt does NOT prevent a collector from contacting someone about a debt. Collectors can still try to collect a debt forever -- and probably will -- but they can't normally sue and collect payment once the statute of limitations period has passed. There are gotchas with time-barred debts regarding collection, however, which can make them still legally actionable. Making any payment, no matter how small, making a verbal commitment to pay or even acknowledging the time-barred debt is often enough to make the debt legally collectable, even if it would normally be past the statute of limitations for collection. This is again state-dependent, but it is a pitfall for many people. The process of making a debt collectable again is often called ""re-aging"". Re-aging essentially means the clock starts anew on the statute of limitations, extending the time that a creditor may use the courts to collect that debt. If someone is taken to court over a time-barred debt that is legally noncollectable (has not been legally re-aged), nothing happens to them. However, being time-barred does not prevent legal action in the sense that you still have to prove the debt is time-barred and noncollectable in court if your sued over it.  Being time-barred does not mean the debt ""dissolves"". A debt is always owed unless the debt has been forgiven or discharged in bankruptcy court. This means that, combined with the ability of debt collectors to contact someone about out of statute debt and the pitfalls of re-aging, it is entirely possible for a debt collector to get a 20 year old debt actionable again. Also note that while someone is trying to dodge a debt to make it time-barred (e.g. by not paying anything), creditors and debt collectors can still take legal action to sue over the debt, and if they get a judgment against someone, this can extend the debt indefinitely. Judgements will eventually lapse, but often only after 10 years or more, and many states allow dormant judgements to be ""revived"" within that time period. Credit Reports  Regarding credit reports, whether someone owes a debt and whether it appears on a credit report are two separate things. As previously stated, no debt ""dissolves"" or goes away unless some sort of legal action makes it so.  As far as reporting is concerned, however, most ""bad"" credit stops being reported after seven years (by federal law). That is, accounts on a credit report will be deleted seven years from the original delinquency dates of the accounts regardless of being included in bankruptcy or as time-barred debt. This assumes no legal process allows the account to continue being reported (as is often the case with re-aging). As an FYI, a bankruptcy discharge date has nothing to do with when account information will be removed from your credit report.  Note that some debts, such as tax liens, can be reported indefinitely. Should bankruptcy be considered? The decision to do bankruptcy is mostly a matter of how severe the debt is. If it is an extremely large amount and assets are very small, bankruptcy is a good route in so far as it will legally take care of a lot of loose ends and likely relieve most or all of the burden of actually owing the money. Credit-wise, 10 years is the maximum a bankruptcy (specifically) will appear on a credit report. Accounts may drop off a credit report before bankruptcy because they are past the seven years they can be legally reported. Debts owed to the state such as child support, student loans, income tax, etc. generally cannot be written off and aren't subject normal debt statute of limitations on collection.  Finally, bad credit is bad credit -- there is likely to be little difference in terms of ability to get loans between bankruptcy and attempting to dodge legal action to make debts time-barred. If the debt is significant, bankruptcy may be the only sensible option."


Sort of yes, sort of no. All Teslas actually claim to be completely out of charge while there is actually still a bit of juice in the battery. They do this because fully draining the battery damages it and shortens its life span significantly. But that's just a few percent of full battery capacity, and not what's being discussed in this article.  The thing being discussed in this article is that Tesla used to sell one specific model that had about 15 % of it's normal battery capacity artificially locked away. You could pay Tesla a bit extra at any time and they would unlock the full potential of the battery via a remote software update. That particular model sold pretty poorly, unclear if it's because customers didn't like the artificial restriction or if the range on that model was simply too short, but either way Tesla stopped selling it not long after introducing it.


here is the list from the article:  *  Amateurs chase knowledge. Professionals develop skills. *  Amateurs try to fast-forward to the final destination. Professionals enjoy the process. *  Amateurs look for inspiration. Professionals take action. *  Amateurs brag about their small victories. Professionals let people talk about their massive wins. *  Amateurs avoid the difficulties. Professionals embrace them. *  Amateurs rely on luck. Professionals work hard. *  Amateurs give up should they face an obstacle. Professionals stay determined whatever it takes. *  Amateurs never do what say they want to. Professionals are consistent. *  Amateurs settle for mediocrity. Pros always strive to be the best.


Engineers cannot run companies, I'm sorry but that's just an opinion that is widely regarded as true in business. And it's true in my experience also.  Having said that, I don't view business graduates particularly highly, neither do a lot of business owners.


"A word of caution about betting against an entrenched technology/way of doing things.  In the 80's there was a battle for PC operating systems market share. (Microsoft won). You would think that this new breed of computers (desktop PCs) would be bad for those selling the old type of computers (mainframes) - and it was. However I read somewhere that IBM still makes something like *$8 billion* per year selling obsolete mainframe computers - mainly to the likes of banks where there is no obvious advantage to upgrading to newer systems (and there is the risk that if they do, customer deposits go up in smoke or whatever).    So I guess the lesson is to think of reasons why people won't all upgrade from their existing way of doing things:  - afraid of technology  - lack of broadband/ too slow internet connections   - those who paid for an expensive TV in the last few years and don't want to buy a newer ""smart tv""  - those terrified of complex UIs for using the various streaming services - think of the classic example of those who can't program a VCR, now imagine them with a qwerty keyboard trying to watch something  etc."


Are there any advantages to layaway? There are two main advantages. First, when you pay the initial deposit the seller reserves the item for you at a given price. This is helpful with unique products, like a high-end custom-made watch. If there is only one of those watches in the entire world, then it's nice to know that the seller won't sell it to anyone else while you're getting together the remaining funds and the price you're paying is locked in. Second, layaway agreements often allow for a payment plan. This is helpful for people who have a hard time saving up money. For many, it's easier to make smaller monthly payments than a large one-time payment. Of course the cost of layaway is that you're $30,000 short for up to 6 months. This money could be generating a significant amount of interest during a half-year period. You'll need to make sure that reserving the item and locking in the price are worth this cost.


Assuming you and your family always get along and everyone is happy with the situation... Should you become ill, die, or go on government benefits for some catastrophe, the government will look at all those funds as YOURS, and now your wonderful family is hurt by the estate tax and/or expectations of how much of the bill you handle before support kicks in. Additionally, should you ever reach a point where you are married and then facing divorce (even if no fault of your own), all that investment is now up for grabs in equitable distribution.  So your family's entire investment fund is at risk.


Well obviousafuckingly . . .it does not take a genius to figure out you don't fuck with some one who can fuck you up.  Ok poppets . .we are bored with North Korea, thats done.  Lets move on to the Nuclearization of the Middle east . . that is going to be so much more entertaining.


>The starving man has no means with which to attain a million dollars because he is incapable of contributing to society on that scale, the same would be true whether he was cast out to antarctica with a million dollars in a suitcase or put out on a curbside with nothing.  You failed to ask any necessary questions to establish context.  You made your assumptions on his value based on the notion that a starving MUST not have a way to contribute to society.  That same man may have been a scientist studying in the Antarctic when circumstances created by a storm caused him to lose sight of his base, and unable to make contact with anyone via his satellite phone.  The storm lasts for 5 days, the last 3 of which he is starving.  He survives and makes it back to base, but during those last days, he would have given anything for an egg.  This is caused circumstantial value.  His circumstances, no matter how temporary, added value to that egg that would not exist otherwise.  He was and is still a valuable asset to the world.  But he was economically dismissed by /u/rdrptr because of shortsitedness.  Tell me again how a mother’s love has no bearing on economic systems?  How can my system be more flawed than yours, when you fail to recognize influences that shaped your own perceptions of economics, values, and life in general?  I’m not tossing out age old, established, economic theories.  I’m disagreeing with your interpretation of those theories.


No, it's worse than that by far. LEGO was formerly so aggressive in its patent trolling that they were slapped with an injunction which threatened huge fines for the next time they attempted to enforce patents that had expired decades ago. It was only quite recently that they gave up decided to put on this new face.   It's unfortunate to see how gullible the community here is towards this patent troll.


"I would change that statement to ""very few people can CONSISTENTLY beat the market "". Successful strategies will get piled into and reduce returns. Markets will pick up inefficiencies, but at the same time they do exists. Tons of interesting reading especially in regards to value. Is there a risk premium that we don't know for value? Or is it a market behavior thing?"


"A free solution that I've been using is Task Coach. It has tasks, subtasks, categories, and all the stuff you would expect from a time tracking program. It also counts each distinct period spent on a task as a separate ""effort"" that you can add comments, for example to remind you what that chunk of time was spent on."


"At this point, I want to tell you two things:  1. I truly believe that you are very concerned about racial hate and damage to society. You truly want Germany to help those in serious need. You are a fine person! I have the same concerns and approach.  2. I am a Jew, with many original family members in Germany now (almost all my family ran away from Germany and Czech Republic before WWII, few got hurt, and after WWII, some returned back, and to Germany).  So all this argument I have with you is not so much about Germans, who some of them risked their lives to save few members of my family. Yes, Germans almost died to saved some of my family.   It's about a concern for a misguided policy in Germany to allow AGAIN the rise of intolerance and racial problems, of which, for sure, Jews will be the victims again, but mostly other minorities, but not (!) Muslims.   If you did not know, the word ""anti-semitism"" was invented by Germans, and it is supposed to be against the semite race. European Jews are hardly semite but all Muslims and Arabs are pure true semites. Yet, Hitler and Muslims worked together and collaborated against Jews. Muslims were not killed by Germany.  (If you did not know, yes, all Jews were semites, but 2000 years in Europe, after expelled from ancient Israel 2000 years ago by the Romans, made the Jews in Europe hardly semite. Meanwhile, most Jews (60%) in Israel are not of European descent as they ended up in northern Africa and Asia and ALL(!) of them expelled from the Arabs/Muslim countries when Israel was established in 1948. Do you know that Hitler sent the Jews of Libya and other north Africa Arab/Muslim countries to concentration camps? But not any Libyans or other Arab/Muslims?)  SO, ALLOW me go the other direction with you now: do migrants get fined, houses raided and sent to jail over racist and intolerant sayings and actions? How about their religious leaders?  Sheikh Abu Bilal Ismail, speaking at the Al Nur mosque in Berlin, called upon Allah to “destroy the Zionist Jews”. And nothing was done to him by the German government.  However, an old German lady was fined and her house was raided.  Think about it.  This will not end good with Germany!!!! Think it's early 1930 in Germany. Nobody could predict what happened 10 years later.  **I highly(!!!) respect Germans as they have very high and good standards in every respect. Something to admire! But, because of that, shown many times in the past, not only the 1930s, Germany is the last country that should be experimented in regards to racial tensions and rising problems (crime, intolerance, fanatic religious people, etc).**  Crime by migrants in Germany is up considerably, [Read here](https://counterjihadreport.com/2016/02/page/8/)   Read about Sheikh Abu Bilal Ismail in Germany [here](http://forward.com/news/world/202751/germany-warns-against-hate-speech-after-imam-calls/)"


Quite the Paradox this nation if you look from afar, but if you look closely you come to realize what you see is what you get.  A darling of Israel because it echos its hatred for Muslims and is willing  to eagerly spread anti-Muslim propaganda. It also is the closest to Pakistan which is the thorn in Israels anti-muslim ribs, a muslim country with a nuclear bomb, so it arms India with as much as it can and has deep ties. Rumor has it that the Hindus are actually the 13th lost tribe who worshiped the calf.  America would woo India as a counter Balance to China and Russia in the region, as an added bonus, perhaps a smaller wheel to power America's funny money economy though that will burn out the Indian economy a lot faster, and its effects are visible already.  In an effort to please India has made an attempt to restructure it central bank, but it has gone as well as a pile of shit in the open, with badly time rate decisions and demonetization debacles, not to mention deep corruption and a culture of graft.  China looks at India as a reluctant partner in BRICS, while Russia looks at India as a long time but extremely unreliable partner. They both recognize that BRICS cannot continue in this vain with India playing the American agenda in a unity that is supposed to directly confront IMF and world bank control of the region.  Its economy has been talked up by the US but has deep structural and systemic weakness and is folded over like bubble wrap. It has made arms deals it wont be able to pay for and its just a matter of time before the consequences of being openly promiscuous hit home hard.  They have a space program, but no toilets, pretty girls though . .very very pretty girls.


Question for peiple in the industry already! Just completed an 8 month work term at an energy trading firm as a quant  Got offered a permanent in risk doing the same thing. Salary of 70,000, so not great but can lead to a transition into trading. Question is do i put off school and take it since its permanent? Or would you go back to school knowing that you had gained great experience and try the job market after completion of the degree? Thanks also thinking of doing cfa level while in school.  Tldr: finish temaining seven classes or take a full time position where i did a student term?


I think I see why we have a divide in this country.  Given that we're growing at the same rate as at the end of the Obama presidency, you don't think Hillary would've delivered the same results (or Bernie, Ted, Marco, Evan, or whoever)?  6 months is really too short a time to see the effect of economic policies.


It depends on the terms of the lease, but it's hard to imagine a lease that would allow to do this unilaterally with no strings attached.  That means it actually depends not on how much you like your landlady, but on how much she likes you. In general, by signing the lease you assume a contractual obligation to pay the rent every month for the entire term of the lease.  In theory, you can be sued if you don't do that. In practice, a lot depends on your relationship with your landlord, as well as the rental market in your area.  If the landlord can easily find a replacement tenant, they may be willing to allow you to leave early.  If the rental market is slow, they will be more likely to hold you to the agreement.  Obviously, if you have a good relationship with the landlord, they may be more inclined to go easy on you. As far as telling your landlady you want to terminate the lease early, unless she's a particularly nasty person, you can just go ahead and tell her you'd like to leave early.  What you can't do is actually stop paying rent.  If you're on reasonably good terms with your landlady, you could just tell her your situation and say you'd like to move out.  She may be willing to work out an arrangement where she lists the apartment while you're still living there, allows prospective tenants to view it while it's occupied, and then has you move out if and when someone else wants to move in (e.g., at the end of the month).  Again, exactly how this works will probably depend on the rental market. Assuming you're in the USA, here is a useful page with some info on breaking a lease.  As mentioned there, the legal details vary by state.


I don't honestly understand my country's fascination with Tim Horton's coffee.  It's horrible.   It's hard to drink in the car with those shit lids they use too.   The trucker trick helps mitigate it some, but seriously 7-eleven coffee is even better than Tim Horton's.


Honestly, 10 wash trades is next to nothing.  I run a small automated trading firm and I get maybe 20-30 wash trades per quarter.  You get fined for them but it's not a big deal, preventing wash trades can be pretty hard and sometimes it's entirely out of your control.  Canada has much stricter rules about wash trading, the U.S. has more lenient rules on them, and in Europe you can wash trade all you want because honestly it doesn't make much of a difference.  Anyhow, just trying to give some perspective that 10 instances of wash trading is not unusual/uncommon, won't have any market impact one way or another, and often happens by accident.  If anything wash trades are just a pain in the ass, you end up paying transaction costs for nothing.


Well, modern satellite tv systems use mircowaves.   Of course, random things can affect the signal, but it usually is pretty stable, or Dish Network would be out of business, much less be able to provide hd content.  Sending information about stock trades wouldn't need nearly as much bandwidth, they're mainly shooting for low latency.  But sometimes there will be a bad signal that interferes with communication.  It would be interesting to see how they account for any trades that are lost in the air.


If you're paying a foreign person directly - you submit form 1042 and you withhold the default (30%) amount unless the person gives you a W8 with a valid treaty claim and tax id. If so - you withhold based on the treaty rate. From the IRS: General Rule In general, a person that makes a payment of U.S. source income to a   foreign person must withhold the proper amount of tax, report the   payment on Form 1042-S and file a Form 1042 by March 15 of the year   following the payment(s). I'd suggest to clarify this with a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) who's familiar with this kind of issues, and not rely on free advice on the Internet or DIY. Specific cases require specific advice and while the general rule above holds in most cases - in some there are exceptions.


The only reason they didn't go bankrupt 20 years ago is because old people shop there. No joke, 50+ year olds have a mysterious allegiance to Sears where price etc. doesn't matter to them, they shop there anyway.  As soon as all the oldies die off, Sears will too.


Too much infrastructure (brand new waterfront promenade and  A LOT of new homes).  Apparently Stockton is the second hardest hit city in the USA from the 2007 housing crisis. Lots of foreclosures. They were betting that people would move out to Stockton from the Bay Area for housing price relief. Obviously they bet wrong.


I will be messaging you on [**2018-09-13 22:07:37 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2018-09-13 22:07:37 UTC To Local Time) to remind you of [**this link.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6ztraf/bitcoin_fell_below_4000_overnight_continuing_its/dmyvv1h)  [**7 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=[https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6ztraf/bitcoin_fell_below_4000_overnight_continuing_its/dmyvv1h]%0A%0ARemindMe!  One Year  ) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.  ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete Comment&message=Delete! dmyvvpb)  _____  |[^(FAQs)](http://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/24duzp/remindmebot_info/)|[^(Custom)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=[LINK INSIDE SQUARE BRACKETS else default to FAQs]%0A%0ANOTE: Don't forget to add the time options after the command.%0A%0ARemindMe!)|[^(Your Reminders)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List Of Reminders&message=MyReminders!)|[^(Feedback)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBotWrangler&subject=Feedback)|[^(Code)](https://github.com/SIlver--/remindmebot-reddit)|[^(Browser Extensions)](https://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/4kldad/remindmebot_extensions/) |-|-|-|-|-|-|


Economics, the only field that you can be wrong more than you're right and still have credibility with mainstream society. Imagine if doctors, engineers or accountants were wrong more than they were right, what kind of a society would that create? Maybe we should expect more from people in a field who influence our economic futures.


$60-$100 US is typical for US 1099 contract IT work, but it varies quite a bit by location and industry. Contract agencies can charge more (sometimes significantly more), but you probably don't have the clout to ask for rates that are on par with those. $85 per hour might be a good starting point.   Here are some factors to consider: I am not qualified to comment on the Canadian vs US legal and tax aspects fo your situation. Good luck


"ok dude.  reality check.  the koch brothers pay more in taxes in a day than you will in a lifetime.    but if you can back up your statements my mind is open.    but what it sounds like is you have ""reddit front page sub bias disorder""."


"You're calculating it exactly right. I wrote about this one on my blog a while ago. Lesson learned is that nothing comes for free, and you can take the saying ""there are no free meals"" quite literally in this case. edit To address the comments about tips... I don't believe tips should be compulsory. Its my reward to the server for outstanding service. Not part of the cost of the meal. If its part of the server's salary - then I prefer not to dine in such a place (and at least in some places its illegal to consider tips as part of the salary). The coupon in question explicitly requests tipping the server. Thus, the tips with or without the coupon are still expected, and that's why I'm not taking them into the consideration. According to the laws of the State of California (where I live), mandatory charges, such as the 18% gratuity charge required by the coupon, are not tips, and don't have to be passed on to the employees. Thus, employees will still expect my tips on the bill, so I'm basically required to tip twice, when using the coupon."


Determining on what is the best pirate telescope to spend in will surely be reliant on what you’d love to utilize it for. Spending your money in the finest telescope will let you to relish several years and also decades of pleasure from astronomy, whilst purchasing inexpensive designs might lead to dull star gazing and aggravation.


"I am very late to this forum and post - but will just respond that I am a sole proprietor, who was just audited by the IRS for 2009, and this is one of the items that they disallowed.  My husband lost his job in 2008, I was unable to get health insurance on my own due to pre-existing ( not) conditions and so we had to stay on the Cobra system.  None of the cost was funded by the employer and so I took it as a SE HI deduction on Line 29.  It was disallowed and unfortunately, due to AGI limits, I get nothing by taking it on Sch. A.  The auditor made it very clear that if the plan was not in my name, or the company's name, I could not take the deduction above the line.  In his words, ""it's not fair, but it is the law!"""


As the other answers indicate, if you look only at the clear mathematical formulas regarding your debts and their interest rates, then you'll see that it's better (less expensive) to pay off your student debt first.  However, you must also take into account the value of your car, as it is an asset. The older your car gets, the less it's worth. The more your car gets used and worn out, the less it's worth. Cars depreciate at about 15% per year on average. However, you're continuing to pay the same amount of money to keep a decreasingly valuable asset. Now, you also have to include the fact that you may be required to carry full-coverage car insurance, versus liability insurance. This can represent an increase in spending if you'd prefer to have liability only. With insurance in the picture, you should also be thinking about the possibility that something could happen to your vehicle that causes it to be worth less than you owe, or just worthless. If such an event happens, then you may have more difficulty acquiring a replacement vehicle. I, personally, don't find the increase in total interest paid on student loans to offset the other consideration regarding the value of a car. I'm in a similar situation as you (except your values are all about double what mine are). The peace of mind I gain from being able to pay off the car more quickly, and use that money towards loans or whatever I want, is worth the interest I'll earn by not putting that money into the student loans instead. I also prefer the idea of being able to more easily use my vehicle as a trade in, in case I need to get a different vehicle to better suit my family size.


"The flaw in your reasoning is that you are assuming that renting a house is easy and automatic. Who is going to manage the property? Your parents? What are you going to do if the tenants burn the place down, start having drug parties there, or secretly have 6 cats who piss everywhere so noone will ever want to rent it again? What are you going to do when the house goes unrented for a year and you have to pay a year's worth of mortgage payments with no rental income? What are you going to do when some deadbeat decides to stop paying the rent, but won't move out, and when you try to evict him, he goes to court to stop you? You going to fly to NJ to make the court appearances? Unless you sell your existing house, or your parents buy you out, then you need to stay. You should not attempt to own two houses at once with one of the houses located not where you are at. That will not turn out well. Also, just as an aside, 30-year mortgages are not an ""investment""; they are a way to lose money. Usually people get them because they want a big beautiful house that they cannot afford, so they borrow the money. That is not ""investing"", that is wasting money to live in luxurious circumstances. If you want to become wealthy, buy a property you can afford, not something that you have to string out payments for 30 years."


This afternoon I used an ANZ ATM inside the Branch on Lane Xang Avenue. The ATM tells you the maximum. Pro tip: If the wad of bills is too thick you can change it at the teller to bills of 100,000 kip each to slim it down a little. I read on a forum that most other banks' ATMs in Laos have a maximum of 1,000,000 LAK but that ANZ's fees are a bit higher than the other ATMs.


Your experience may be unique to you but the Chipotle I go to has a multi-racial group with people of varying ages. In some ways I like that younger people are working those places because that's what you do when you're young. In fact I prefer the staff to be younger because that's a group that needs money the most. I don't get the same level of hopeful cheeriness with a staff that's much older. Fast food jobs belong to the youth.


A lot of people on here will likely disagree with me and this opinion.   In my opinion the answer lies in your own motives and intentions.   If you'd like to be more cognizant of the market, I'd just dive in and buy a few companies you like.  Many people will say you shouldn't pick your own stocks, you should buy an index fund, or this ETF or this much bonds, etc.  You already have retirement savings, capital allocation is important there.  You're talking about an account total around 10% of your annual salary, and assuming you have sufficient liquid emergency funds; there's a lot of non-monetary benefit to being more aware of the economy and the stock market.  But if you find the house you're going to buy, you may have to liquidate this account at a time that's not ideal, possibly at a loss. If all you're after is a greater return on your savings than the paltry 0.05% (or whatever) the big deposit banks are paying, then a high yield savings account is the way I'd go, or a CD ladder. Yes, the market generally goes up but it doesn't ALWAYS go up.  Get your money somewhere that it's inured and you can be certain how much you'll have tomorrow. Assuming a gain, the gain you'll see will PALE in comparison to the deposits you'll make.  Deposits grow accounts.  Consider these scenarios if you allocate $1,000 per month to this account.   1) Assuming an investment return of 5% you're talking about $330 return in the first year (not counting commissions or possible losses). 2) Assuming a high yield savings account at 1.25% you're talking about $80 in the first year.   Also remember, both of these amounts would be taxable. I'll admit in the event of 5% return you'll have about four times the gain but you're talking about a difference of ~$250 on $12,000.  Over three to five years the most significant contributor to the account, by far, will be your deposits.   Anyway, as I'm sure you know this is not investment advice and you may lose money etc.


Talking to Siri doesn't really look much different to an observer than when you're talking to a human on the other end of the phone, does it?  We are in the infancy of voice control, and that stigma will go away in short order.


The bottom line is you have an income problem.  Your car payment seems very high relative to your income and your income is very low relative to your debt.  Can you work extra jobs or start a small business to get that income up?   In the US it would be fairly easy to work some part time jobs to get that income up about 1000 per month.  With that kind of difference you could have this all knocked out (except for the car) in about a year.  Then, six months later you could be done with your car. Most of the credit repair places are ripoffs in the US and I suspect it is similar around the world.


Run the numbers in advance. Understand what are the current rates for an additional 2nd mortgage, what are the rates for a brand new mortgage that will cover the additional funds. Understand what they are for another lender.  Estimate the amount of paperwork involved in each option (new first, new 2nd, and new lender). Ask the what are the options they can offer you. Because you have estimated the costs in money and time for the different options, you can evaluate the offer they make. What they offer you can range from everything you want to nothing you would accept. What they offer will depend on several factors: Do they care to keep you as a customer?; Do they expect you to walk away?; are they trying to get rid of mortgages like the one you have?; Can they make more money with the plan they are offering you? You will be interested in the upfront costs, the monthly costs, and the amount of time required for the process to be completed.


> I believe he thinks that it cannot be racist if it is the truth, when in reality it's not true.   It is very sad if you really believe this  > I think that a large part of the reason white people were successful in the United States was because of the massive wealth of resources.  Zimbabwe is very rich in resources.


What's also interesting is that JP Morgan is heavily involved in the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, to the point of sponsoring conferences and developing their own client [software](https://www.jpmorgan.com/global/Quorum).  Initially this is for private networks but they say they plan to connect to the public chain once it scales better and has stronger privacy features.


"How can one offset exposure created by real-estate purchase? provides a similar discussion. Even if such a product were available in the precise increments you need, the pricing would make it a loser for you. ""There's no free lunch"" in this case, and the cost to insure against the downside would be disproportional to the true risk. Say you bought a $100K home. At today's valuations, the downside over a given year might be, say, 20%. It might cost you $5000 to 'insure' against that $20K risk.  Let me offer an example - The SPY (S&P ETF) is now at $177. A $160 (Dec '14) put costs $7.50. So, if you fear a crash, you can pay 4%, but only get a return if the market falls by over 14%. If it falls 'just' 10%, you lose your premium.   With only 5% down, you will get a far better risk-adjusted return by paying down the mortgage to <78% LTV, and requesting PMI, if any, be removed. Even if no PMI, in 5 years, you'll have 20% more equity than otherwise. Over the long term, 5 year's housing inflation would be ~ 15% or so. This process would help insure you are not underwater in that time. Not guarantee, but help."


ULIP insurance plan ULIP is Unit Linked Insurance Plan. The premium you pay, a small part goes towards covering life insurance. The Balance is invested into Stock Markets. Most ULIP would give you an option to choose from Debt Funds [100% safe buy low returns 5-7%] or Equity [High Risks, Returns can be around 15%]. Or a mix of both. ULIP are not a good way to save money. There are quite a few hidden fees that actually reduce the return. So notionally even if returns shown are great, in effect it is quite less. For example the premium you pay in first year, say Rs 10,000/- Rs 2,500/- goes towards commission. And say Rs 100 goes towards insurance. Balance Rs 7,400/- units are purchased in your account. Even if these grow by 20%, you are still in loss. Ofcousre, the commissions go down year after year and stop at 5%. Then there is fund management fees that you don't get to see. There is maintenance fee that is deduced from your balance.  Thus the entire method of charging is not transparent. Life insurance from LIC There are broadly 2 types of Life Insurance plans Money Back / Endowment Plan. The concept here is again same, you pay a premium and part of it goes toward Insurance. The balance LIC invests in safe bonds. Every year a bonus is declared; generally less than Bank rate. At the end of the plan you get more than what you paid in premium. However if you had kept the same in Bank FD, you would have got more money back. So if you die, your nominee would get Insurance plus bonus. If you survive you get all the accumulated bonus. Pure Term Plan. Here the premium is quite less for the sum insured. Here if you die, your nominee would get insurance. If you survive you don't get anything.


There is no magic bullet here.   If you want professional management, because you think they know more about entry and exit points for short positions, have more time to monitor a position, etc... (but they might not) try a mutual fund or exchange traded fund that specializes in shorts. Note:  a lot of these may not have done so well, your mileage may vary


I would prefer a dividend paying company, rather than share appreciation. And I would prefer that the dividends increase over time.


"From a talk by entrepreneur and investor Gary Vaynerchuk: @2:37: Look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself: ""What do I want to do every day for the rest of my life?"" Do that. I promise you can monetize that shit. @12:04: I don't want to hear about this ""9 to 5, I don't have time"" thing. If you want this, if you have a passion, work 9 to 5, spend a couple hours with your family, 7[pm] to 2 in the morning it's plenty of time to do damage. But that's it; it's not gonna happen any other way. @You work 9 to 6, you get home, you kiss the dog, and you go to town. Everybody has time. Stop watching fucking Lost. If you want this, if you want bling-bling, if you want to buy the Jets, work. That's how you get it."


Can this be possible that I wish to convert some amount of INR to USD and keep USD in my bank account? This is not possible the way you have described. A resident Indian can hold a Foreign Currency account designated in USD. The deposit into this accounts are only due to specified transactions. One cannot directly convert INR to USD. Read the RBI guideline here. A simplified info is also available on ICICI Bank site.


How S&P 500 returns are calculated is jotted down here. You should follow the same methodology i.e. base-weighted aggregate methodology to calculate your own returns. Anything different and it would be an incorrect comparison.


"There is no ""should"", but I am strongly of the view that if you have savings of several months' salary or more, they should not only be in a separate account, but with a separate financial institution, or even split between two others. A fraction of a percent of extra interest is scant reward for massively increased personal risk.  The reason for this is buried in the T&Cs. There is almost always a ""right of set off"": if one account is overdrawn, the bank reserves the right to take money from your other accounts. Which sounds fair enough, until you consider the imbalance of power. Maybe your salary account gets hacked? Maybe that's the bank's fault? Maybe the bank has made an accounting error? Maybe the bank has gone bust? Maybe you need to employ a lawyer to act on your behalf? Oh dear, you no longer have any savings. (*) This cannot happen if your savings are with a completely separate institution. Then, the only way that the salary account bank can touch your savings is by winning in the courts. If you split the savings two ways, you have also given yourself the reassurance that in the worst case only half your savings have been affected. ""Don't put all your eggs in one basket"" is proverbial. And there's a folk song that's lodged in my memory...  ""As through this world I wander, I've met all kinds of funny men. Some rob you with a six-gun, some with a fountain pen. Yet as far as I have wandered, as far as I have roamed, I've never seen an outlaw drive a family from their home"".  I've never been in this sort of trouble and the UK's laws tend to favour the banks' customers. I don't even hate bankers. Yet even so, why take this risk when it can so easily be reduced? (*) If this sounds far-fetched, read the news, for example https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/02/hbos-manager-and-other-city-financiers-jailed-over-245m-loans-scam"


Agreed.  Its speculative and not worth the time for now. In the past few months, Bitcoin has transformed into a BottleneckCoin with transaction time taking days (unless you pay a premium to miners to process it ASAP) and previously attractive processing-fee has skyrocketed.  Lastly, there is also a real threat that Bitcoin might bifurcate into two versions by August 2017.   Why?  Miners want to increase the size of Bitcoin blocks and the core developers who are the defacto ‘overseers’ do not welcome this. Likewise, the de facto overseers that are instrumental in upholding Bitcoin’s bug-proof software, want to manage some of its data outside the main network to reduce congestion and allow projects such as smart contracts to be built on top of Bitcoin.


To calculate any daily return, all one need do is divide the final value by the initial value, subtract 1, and multiply by 100%: This can be applied to either the futures alone, the investments used as margin collateral alone, or all together. Margin collateral as a factor of a derivative's return Collateral can take many forms. Many suggest that cost and revenue for a derivative trade should also take into account margin requirements.  This can become problematic. If a futures position moved against the trader, yet the margin was secured with equities at the maximum, and the equities moved with the trader, the futures trade could be interpreted as less of a loss because the collateral, which is probably totally disassociated with the futures position, increased in value. Then again, if a futures position moved with the trader, yet the margin collateral moved against the trader then taken together, the futures trade would look less profitable. Furthermore, most likely the result of a futures position and its collateral would never produce the same result, so extrapolation would become ever more difficult. For ease of analysis, a position's cost and revenue should be segmented from another unless if those positions are meant to hedge each other.  Margin is not a cost, but it is a liability, so margin will affect the balance sheet of a futures trade but not its income statement, again unless if the collateral is also used to hedge such futures position.


What is scary about Amazon is that they don't need to make a profit. Grocery stores that have higher profit margins (Publix) are going to struggle to compete with a company that has made it's name not really making money. IMO it's very scary to be up against competition that gives no fucks about making money.


I use two different brokerages, both well-known. I got a bit spooked during the financial crisis and didn't want to have all my eggs in one basket. The SIPC limits weren't so much a factor. At the time, I was more worried about the hassle of dealing with a Lehman-style meltdown. If one were to fail, the misery of waiting and filing and dealing with SIPC claims would be mitigated by having half of my money in another brokerage. In hindsight, I was perhaps a bit too paranoid. Dealing with two separate brokerages is not much of an inconvenience, though, and it's interesting to see how their web interfaces are slightly different and some things are easier to do with one vs the other. Overall, they're really similar and I can't say there's much advantage (other than my tin-foil hat tendencies) to splitting it up like that.


Banks in New Zealand tend to take a lien that is higher than the amount of the loan, so that your only option for a second mortgage is with them. ASB wanted 50% more than the value of the loan when I had my mortgage with them. Of course, with house price inflation the way it's been in NZ, the value of your house may have outstripped the lien anyway, and you can mortgage the rest of it with anyone you like. I suspect your lawyer will need to inform the other lienholder, but you don't need their permission.


"The ""pure play"" would be using interest rate options.  http://www.cboe.com/Products/InterestRateOptionsSpecs.aspx"


You are young so you have time on your side. This allows you to invest in more aggressive investments. I would do the following 1) Contribute at least what your company is willing to match on your 401k, if your company offers a Roth 401k use that instead of the normal 401k (When this becomes available to you) 2) Open a Roth IRA Contribute the maximum to this account ~$5500/year 3) Live below your means, setup a budget and try and save/invest a minimum of 50% of your salary, do not get used to spending more money. With each bonus or salary increase a minimum of 75% of it should go toward your savings/investment. This will keep you from rapidly increasing your spending budget.  3) Invest in real estate (this could be its own post). Being young and not too far out of college you have probably been moving every year and have not accumulated so much stuff that it makes moving difficult. I would utilize your FHA loan slot to buy a multifamily property (2-4 Units) for your first property using only 3.5% down payment (you can put more down if you like). Learn how to analyze properties first and find a great Realtor/Mentor. Then I would continue as a NOMAD investor. Where you move every year into a new owner occupied property and turn the previous into a rental. This allows you to put 3-5% down payment of properties that you would otherwise have to put 20-25% and since you are young you can afford the risk. You should check out this article/website as it is very informative and can show you the returns that you could earn. Young Professional Nomad Good luck I am in a very similar situation


Five years is too short to be able to safely invest the money in any productive manner. You're saving, not investing. Part of the problem is that you don't have all the money right now, and you'll need to add to it over the next few years until you have enough for a down payment. See the notes under CDs and bonds below for why this is a problem. The universe of options: As for the Roth, as duffbeer703 said, I'm not sure it's worth the hassle and risk that you'll want the money sooner and be forced to wait. (E.g. you end up with enough money in 4.25 years for a house that you want but you have to wait 9 months to be able to tap the Roth.) As noted above, the yields are so low that the losses to taxes aren't really going to amount to much. On $10k you're looking at $150 max earnings, and losing maybe $40 of it to taxes (annually). So avoiding taxes won't shrink your time horizon by any meaningful amount. I'd just open a high yield savings account and start dumping money in. Keep an eye on shorter term (1yr) CD rates and if they go above the savings yield and the timing is right then take advantage of it.


"Yeah, I sent an email about it 9 months ago:  ""I am interested in getting a plan for unlimited NYTimes.com access *without* a Smart Phone or Tablet app. Right now the only plans I see include either of those or both. I just wanted to express my consumer interest in such a plan, I hope you offer one in the future.""  They replied:  >Thank you for contacting NYTimes.com.  >You are correct. We currently offer a web & smartphone subscription, a web & tablet app subscription and an all digital access subscription. We do not currently have a web only subscription.  >We appreciate your feedback and have passed it along to the appropriate department. Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance to you."


"While I know some people prefer handling things more ""manually"", I really like automating everything possible. To the greatest extent possible, my deposits automatically go into my Checking account and my bills automatically withdraw from it. That way, I never have to worry about accidentally paying a bill late, and my financial life just runs mostly on its own. There are a couple things to be wary of when automating one's financial life:"


The fact that you are planning to move abroad does not affect the decision to contribute to a 401(k). The reason for this is that after you leave your employer, you can roll all the money over from your 401(k) into a self-directed traditional IRA. That money can stay invested until retirement, and it doesn't matter where you are living before or after retirement age.  So, when deciding whether or not to use a 401(k), you need to look at the details of your employer's plan: Does your employer offer a match? If so, you should definitely take advantage of it.  Are there good investments available inside the 401(k)? Some plans offer very limited options. If you can't find anything good to invest in, you don't want to contribute anything beyond the match; instead, contribute to an IRA, where you can invest in a fund that you like.  The other reason to use a 401(k) is that the contribution limits can be higher. If you want to invest more than you are allowed to in an IRA, the 401(k) might allow that.  In your case, since there is no match, it is up to you whether you want to participate or not. An IRA will allow more flexibility in investing options. If you need to invest more than your IRA limit, the 401(k) might allow that. When you leave your employer, you should probably roll any 401(k) money into an IRA.


Besides that, that about my comment was actually 'wrong' no matter what you do have about 60 hours of Gen eds to take. Everything beyond that was advice and recommendations which are never 'wrong' because they don't claim to be empirically 'right' in the first place.


Having trouble understanding currency arbitrage for one example. Conditions: US 3% interest per 6 months Germany 3.6% interest per 6 months Spot rate is $1.09/euro 6-month Forward is $1.04/euro  How do I make this into an arbitrage opportunity?  There is supposed to be a profit but I keep getting negatives. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


"Get a will completed ASAP.  It sounds like you are not doing a standard inheritance, so you will want to have it down in writing.   If money is an issue, I would research were you can get a will done for cheap, but I would avoid doing a ""fill out the form yourself"" kind of a thing given that this is non-standard."


"> having to wait around for the delivery  If it is advantageous for you to stay at the house (e.g. you have small children), online groceries will be your friend.  If you have a certain brand that you like, I am certain you will only need to find it once when buying online. Just like I use the ""reorder"" button to place the same online order over and over again on Chipotle.com.  It sounds like you might not be in the target demographic for the service, but that doesn't mean there is no market for it."


Its easier than that: employer matching contributions are  always pre-tax. While your contribution is split between the pre-tax and the Roth post-tax parts, matching contributions are always pre-tax. Quote from the regulations I linked to: For example, matching contributions are not permitted to be allocated to a designated Roth account. So the tax you pay is only on the Roth portion of your contribution. One of the reasons for that is the complexity you're talking about, but not only. Matching is not always vested, and it would be hard to determine what portion to tax and at what rate if matching would be allowed to go to Roth.


The Winning Investor http://winninginvestor.quickanddirtytips.com/ This is a blog and a podcast. Load a bunch of these onto your iPod and start listening. Stikky Stock Charts http://www.amazon.com/Stikky-Stock-Charts-professionals-smart/dp/1932974008 This is a beginner's guide on how to read charts. Lots of charts, not too many words.


Track your expenses. Find out where your money is going, and target areas where you can reduce expenses. Some examples: I was spending a lot on food, buying too much packaged food, and eating out too much. So I started cooking from scratch more and eating out less. Now, even though I buy expensive organic produce, imported cheese, and grass-fed beef, I'm spending half of what I used to spend on food. It could be better. I could cut back on meat and eat out even less. I'm working on it. I was buying a ton of books and random impulsive crap off of Amazon. So I no longer let myself buy things right away. I put stuff on my wish list if I want it, and every couple of months I go on there and buy myself a couple of things off my wishlist. I usually end up realizing that some of the stuff on there isn't something I want that badly after all, so I just delete it from my wishlist. I replaced my 11-year-old Jeep SUV with an 11-year-old Saturn sedan that gets twice the gas mileage. That saves me almost $200/month in gasoline costs alone. I had cable internet through Comcast, even though I don't have a TV. So I went from a $70/month cable bill to a $35/month DSL bill, which cut my internet costs in half. I have an iPhone and my bill for that is $85/month. That's insane, with how little I talk on the phone and send text messages. Once it goes out of contract, I plan to replace it with a cheap phone, possibly a pre-paid. That should cut my phone expenses in half, or even less. I'll keep my iPhone, and just use it when wifi is available (which is almost everywhere these days).


Came here to say this. Sure Northrop Grumman et al make a shit ton of money for their shareholders and CEOs, but they also employ hundreds of thousands of people whose income and spending account for millions of dollars of tax revenue (not to mention they're... you know... humans with lives that would be damaged if we just eliminated their jobs).  This is the forgotten factor of defense spending. Real Americans depend on it to live. The American economy may depend on it to live.


"The answer to each of your questions is no. It is important to appreciate that the ""quoted"" ticker price may be delayed by say 15 minutes, and thus is not ""real-time."""


"It is actually an option - last 3 places I worked during the negotiation I said ""how about you pay me 20% less than your offer but I work four days a week"".  They were happy and I was happy."


Note that if 1)  The stock prices are continuously differentiable (they aren't) 2)  You rebalance continuously in the absence of trading fees and taxes then the return fraction (future price / original price) will be the geometric mean of the return fractions for each investment. If you don't rebalance then the return fraction will be the arithmetic mean. But the arithmetic mean is ALWAYS greater than or equal to the geometric mean, so continuous rebalancing in the case of continuously differentiable prices will always hurt you, even abscent trading costs/taxes. Any argument in favor of blind rebalancing which does not somehow fail in the continuously differentiable case is simply wrong. See https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/38536036/to%20karim.pdf -JT


There are many aspects to consider in deciding what sort of company you want to form. Instead of an S-corporation, you should determine whether it would be better to form a Limited Liability Company (LLC), Limited Partnership (LP) or even a professional company (PC). Littleadv is correct: There is minimal benefit in forming an S-corp with you and your wife as the shareholders, if you will be the only contributor-worker. There are costs associated with an S-corporation, or any corporation, that might outweigh benefits from more favorable tax treatment, or personal protection from liability: Filing fees and disclosure rules vary from state to state. For example, my father was a cardiologist who had no employees, other than my grandmother (she worked for free), in a state with income taxes (NM). He was advised that a PC was best in New Mexico, while an S-Corp was better in Florida (there are no personal income taxes in Florida).  The only way to know what to do requires that you consult an accountant, a good one, for guidance.


"I get the sense that this is a ""the world is unfair; there's no way I can succeed"" question, so let's back up a few steps. Income is the starting point to all of this.  That could be a job (or jobs), or running your own business. From there, you can do four things with your income: Obviously Spend and Give do not provide a monetary return - they give a return in other ways, such as quality of life, helping others, etc. Save gives you reserves for future expenses, but it does not provide growth. So that just leaves Invest.  You seem to be focused on stock market investments, which you are right, take a very long time to grow, although you can get returns of up to 12% depending on how much volatility you're willing to absorb. But there are other ways to invest.  You can invest in yourself by getting a degree or other training to improve your income.  You can invest by starting a business, which can dramatically increase your income (in fact, this is the most common path to ""millionaire"" in the US, and probably in other free markets). You can invest by growing your own existing business.  You can invest in someone else's business. You can invest in real estate, that can provide both value appreciation and rental income.  So yes, ""investment"" is a key aspect of wealth building, but it is not limited to just stock market investment. You can also look at reducing expenses in order to have more money to invest. Also keep in mind that investment with higher returns come with higher risk (both in terms of volatility and risk of complete loss), and that borrowing money to invest is almost always unwise, since the interest paid directly reduces the return without reducing the risk."