It has nothing to do with forcing people to pay off their debt; in that case it would make better sense to have people pay off debt rather than interest. It is because you want to have your actual payment stay the same each month, which is easier for the vast majority of people to comprehend and put into their budget. It is called an annuity in Finance terms. In theory you could use another method - eg. pay of the same amount of debt each month - then your interest payments will decrease over time. But in that case your monthly payment (debt + interest) will not be stable - It will start of high and decrease a little bit each month. With an annuity you have a constant cashflow. In Finance you generally operate with three methods of debt repayment: Annuity: Fixed cashflow. High interest payment in the beginning with small debt payments - later it will be reversed. Serial loan: Fixed debt payments. Debt payments are equally spread out accross the period - interst is paid on the remaining debt. Cash flow will decrease over time, because interest payments become smaller for each period. Standing loan: You only pay interest on the loan, no debt payments during the period. All debt is payed back in the end of the loan. In Europe it is common practise to combine a 30 year annuity with a 10 year standing loan, so that you only pay interest on the loan for the first 10 years, thereafter you start paying back the debt and interest, the fixed amount each month (the annuity). This is especially common for first-time buyers, since they usually have smaller salaries early in life than later and therefore need the additional free cash in the beginning of their adult life.


"Extrinsic value is not a factor with respect to gold.  Intrinsic value by definition is the natural value of a commodity set by the market -- extrinsic value is externally set. The ""extrinsic"" value of gold in the United States is $50/oz. If the market value of gold fell below $50/oz, a US American Eagle coin would be worth $50 in the US. If you take away the attributes that make a commodity valuable, the value drops. Substitutes of equal or better quality for most industrial or other uses of gold exist, so if if the popularity of gold declines, or if the hoarders of gold have to liquidate, it's value will diminish. I have no idea what that value would be, but it would set by the market demand for gold jewelry and other valuable industrial uses."


You're absolutely right - comforts in and of themselves are not everything, and certainly not an excuse to withhold freedoms or any of the other points noted in the list. That said, will all the others covered, comforts can be the icing on the cake.


"It is explained on their website.  Just look for the word ""routing"" on the Features page: Choose Your Venues Liquidity Pools Group 1: Bats Europe Group 2: Liquidity Partner (LP) Add this group to access dark pool liquidity. Group 3: Exchanges and MTFs Choose to access additional Exchanges and MTFs across Europe."


Coin regardless of the metal content proportion, all have intrinsic and face value. The more the silver and gold presence in coins the more the value. Pure Nickle and copper coin have intrinsic value. The more zinc, and manganese presense in coin the less value the coin becomes.


At 19 years old you can and should be investing to see your money grow over the years. Reinvesting the dividends does get to be pretty significant because they compound over many years. Historically this dividend compounding accounts for about half of the total gains from stocks. At 70 years old I am not investing to see my money grow, although that's nice. I am investing to eat. I live on the dividends, and they tend to come in fairly reliably even as the market bounces up and down. For stocks selected with this in mind I get about 4% per year from the dividends.


"> The laws just mean you can't make your decision on the basis of religion. Make your decision because they don't interview well, they can't do the job, they have poor qualifications, etc.  Which means people are being forced to lie and make up excuses to hide the real reason they don't want to hire someone.  > Substitute, say, ""black people"" for the reference to religious expression and you see where this is a problem. Paraphrased, you've got: ""Why should I be forced to hire black people who I fundamentally oppose (and do not wish to support, however indirectly via a paycheck), why is their right to be black more valid than my right to not like black people?""  There is a MORAL problem with this insfar as I object to bigotry.  There should not, however, be a LEGAL problem with it.  If the local bigot business owner does not wish to serve blacks, they shouldn't be forced to do it - it is THEIR business. They took the risk, they pay the bills, and they should be free to hire, fire, and serve whomever they wish as long as they to not use fraud, force, or threat to do so.    if you think otherwise, then you're asking goverment to be in the morality business and this does not end well.  it is EXACTLY because of this that we see the right trying to enforce morality codes when they are in power, the left trying to enforce some version of fairness codes when they are in power.  I want one code: a code liberty that applies to everyone equally.  Yes, that means there will be bigots that do not serve blacks or gays.  But it also means that I can start a business, hire whom I wish, serve whom I wish, and thereby create community-specific value."


"I think Amazon wants to compete with Walmart the same way Target competes with Walmart.   California Walmarts are depressing. Target offers a somewhat better store with a little better products. My personal experience at Grossmont Center in La Mesa, where a target and a Walmart are anchor stores at either end of a mall, the difference is striking.   I assume (not having shopped at Whole Foods) that Whole Foods has a lot of products that people love. I also assume they are spending a ton on stocking a lot of pricey items that don't move. They might also have whole sections that loose money that may be more trouble than they are worth - the former owners may have thought they drove foot traffic, but Amazon may think otherwise.   In retail, the opportunity cost of having shelves full of crap no one buys is huge. The idea that shelf space is precious cannot be overstated. Amazon wants to use that badly-used shelf space for other stuff they know moves. Products they sell online already. Products their online stats says people who buy similar Whole Foods goods also buy. This means ""cheaper retail products"" - but I don't think it means expired yellow cake mix and a 30lb bucket of lard."


"Do you have the felling this is going to get much much worse before it gets better? I mean, Greece is going through with austerity measures and will be cutting gov't spending and raising taxes again. They will be cutting over 150,000 gov't workers, pensions cut, etc. How are they ever going to grow? If Spain and Italy follow in this practice, I see another ""loss decade"" just like Japan went through. If not a total EU collapse."


You didn't answer my questions above, but the biggest factor if the two interest rates are similar is what it will cost you for mortgage insurance if you do not include a 20% down-payment on your next house purchase. I would take the extra money from the proceeds of the other sale to get to a 15-year loan on your next house, then put all of your extra money into paying down the student loans ahead of the 7 year schedule.


Wow, I had never heard of this before but I looked into it a bit and Mikey was spot on. It seems that if you don't pay attention to the fine print when making credit card purchases (as most of us tend to skip) many companies have stipulations that allow continued charges if they are recurring fees (monthly, yearly, etc.) even after you have cancelled the card.


"Since these are specific items that you don't really want to buy, it might help to figure out what you could spend that money on that you DO really want. It sounds like right now you are thinking ""Wow, I can get this widget (that I don't really want) for so cheap with this discount code!"" Try changing your thinking to something along the lines of ""This widget is pretty cool, but I could buy this doodad that I really want instead"" or ""This widget is nice, but if I don't buy it, I could have a latte every other day this month."" I've found this to be a very effective technique-- and I often don't end up buying the doodads or lattes either. It's just a good way to put the cost of your purchase in perspective. The other thing I do when I want something is to write it down and revisit it a week or so later. If I still want it and I still have the budget for it (and especially if I've skipped other purchases to save up for it), then I buy it. That advice doesn't sound like it will work for you though, since it sounds like you've wanted to buy these things for a long time. So... are you REALLY sure you don't want them, or do you just not want to want them?"


The idea was to not make the same mistake Meredith Whitney did. You don't have to agree with me but I'm also not going to slap a specific date on it.  Calling out structural flaws is one thing, and trying to put an exact date onto it is another exercise entirely.   It's like pointing out the financial jeopardy the US government is in. At the current rate of debt increase we've been seeing we're guaranteed to face massive inflation eventually. The only way to stop this from happening is to have a fundamental mindset shift in Congress. *But* I'm not about to attach a date onto when this will happen because there are just too many variables for me to figure out when it's going to happen.  Like I said earlier, Whitney's only mistake was to slap a date onto her call.


What's your opinion of the rising student loan debt?  It keeps going up, is that realistic and sustainable?  It looks like it could be a possible bubble to me, especially considering private investors take on little risk because the loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.


Pre-Enron many companies forced the 401K match to be in company shares. That is no longer allowed becasue of changes in the law. Therefore most employees have only a small minority of their retirement savings in company shares. I know the ESOP and 401K aren't the same, but in my company every year the number of participants in the company stock purchase program decreases. The small number of participants and the small portion of their new retirement funds being in company shares would mean this spike in volume would be very small.  The ESOP plan for my employer takes money each paycheck, then purchases the shares once a quarter. This delay would allow them to manage the purchases better. I know with a previous employer most ESOP participants only held the shares for the minimum time, thus providing a steady steam of shares being sold.


I can't see how you can deduct your mother's loss. The money was not stolen from you, and you gave money to your mother of your own free will and with full intention of the money to be used by her as she wishes. Moving money from your own account to a joint account allowing the joint holder to use it - is akin to giving the money directly to the joint holder, i.e.: in your case, giving a gift to your mother.


"I am no business expert, but I know that their branding and licensing is good because it makes kids demand it ""because frozen"" but parents are reluctant to buy the same old ""one big piece with some bolt on blocks"" sets where you aren't *really* building anything. It lacks the creativity since they made it more difficult to just buy a tub of blocks. I struggled to find legos one year where it wasn't some smartly branded yet completely cold and bland set."


They are certainly only suggesting that the money you pay to recycle the bulbs is tax deductible as a donation, assuming that they are indeed a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Donations of goods are only deductible at fair market value. Light bulbs that no longer light up have no market value, so only the payment could possibly be deductible.


"There are two things going on here, neither of which favors this approach. First, as @JohnFx noted, you should be wary of the sunk-cost fallacy, or throwing good money after bad. You already lost the money you lost, and there's no point in trying to ""win it back"" as opposed to just investing the money you still have as wisely as possible, forgetting your former fortune. Furthermore, the specific strategy you suggest is not a good one. The problem is that you're assuming that, whenever the stock hits $2, it will eventually rebound to $3. While that may often happen, it's far from guaranteed. More specifically, assuming the efficient market hypothesis applies (which it almost certainly does), there are theorems that say you can't increase your expected earning with a strategy like the one you propose: the apparent stability of the steady stream of income is offset by the chance that you lose out if the stock does something you didn't anticipate."


Not sure where the confusion is coming from - software/digital/intangible goods are just like any other product, with regard to VAT. Turns out it's being made complicated by HMRC... Anyone would think they enjoy making everyone who collects tax for free on their behalf a crook! You charge customers everywhere in the EU VAT and pay it to HMRC, the only exception being customers outside the UK who can provide you with a VAT number. For these customers you are free to not charge VAT, as it's assumed they would be reclaiming it in their home country anyway. The above is true until 2015, when the rules become more relaxed - you will not need a VAT number from customers outside the UK in order to exempt yourself from collecting VAT. Turns out you need to be part of the MOSS scheme (more here) which was set up to prevent you having to register for VAT in every country you sell your software. Unless you only sell through app stores, and then it's easier because each sale is treated as you selling your software to the store for it to be sold on. You can reclaim all VAT on your eligible purchases in the UK, just as any other UK VAT registered business would (usual rules apply). And of course you don't collect VAT from anyone outside the EU, so you can either reduce the price of your software or pocket the additional 20%.


"It's pretty easy. In the Interview Setup for Ufile, check the box for ""Self-employment business income"". Then during the process of filling everything out, you'll get a Self-Employment screen. It'll ask for the name of your business, but just put your own name since you don't have one. For the 6-digit classification code, click the ? button and look through the list for the industry that best matches the one for whom you wrote the technical report. Or you can go with 711500: Independent artists, writers and performers. It doesn't really matter that much so don't worry if it's a poor match. It will also ask you for your income and expenses.   I don't know exactly what costs you might have incurred to write your report, but you can likely claim a very tiny amount of ""home office"" expenses. Costs like rent (or mortgage interest + property tax), utilities, and home insurance can be claimed, but they have to be pro-rated for the time you were actually doing the work, and are based on the amount of space you used for the work.  For example, if you paid $1000 rent and $200 utilities for the month in which the work was done, and it took you 20 of the 31 days in that month to actually do the work, and you used a room that makes up about 10% of the square footage of your home, then you can claim: $1200 * 20/31 * 0.1 = $77.42 for your home office expenses. If you also used that room for non-business purposes during that time, then you reduce it even further. Say, if the room was also used for playing video games 50% of the time, then you'd only claim $38.71"


She sold the rights to her photo. Burger King bought a stock photo. She no longer has any rights to control the photo.   She suddenly has a problem with the ad 5 years after it ran. Clearly just trying to milk money out of the company or get attention.


Just came back from the IBM Smarter Computing forum in Ryebrook, and this was one of the more interesting parts of the presentations.  The steps that have been made are already enormous, and yet there is a long way to go.  Watson is one side of the equation - the software approach to cognitive function.  I think the far more interesting side is the hardware approach.  A system that does not function in a linear manner, that uses no little or no power to maintain states, just spiking when reacting to stimuli.    They demonstrated a 256 neuron network that could change states bases on optical input that was quite interesting, not because of its sophistication, but rather the exact opposite - extremely low power compared to conventional processing (although still more than 40 times the draw of human neurons) and lots of fuzziness in terms of its reactions to change.  Watson is very cool, but I think ultimately, linear programmed systems will fall behind the parallel approach.


You are right: if the combined value of all outstanding GOOG shares was $495B, and the combined value of all GOOGL shares was $495B, then yes, Alphabet would have a market cap of at least $990B (where I say at least only because I myself don't know that there aren't other issues that should be in the count as well). The respective values of the total outstanding GOOG and GOOGL shares are significantly less than that at present though. Using numbers I just grabbed for those tickers from Google Finance (of course), they currently stand thus:


This is pretty basic question, but my head is confused :(  If you buy a $1000 bond with 5% interest rate, so it would be $1050 at maturity  what does it mean?  * you will be paid the interest in coupons (paid in coupons until it totals $50) and at maturity paid $1000 (in one large single payment) * you get paid the full value in coupons ($1050 split by multiple coupons)  Any other explanations of how a bond works are welcome, most of the stuff I could find was about what yield is, not how the bond actually works.


I had a colleague turn down a raise once because he believed that female colleagues were already being paid well below his salary and it was unfair to further increase this gap. For very public figures raises are often declined as a form of leadership: showing that management is willing to forgo bonuses and salary increases as a form of solidarity with the employee population.  Some leaders forgo a salary altogether (or take a $1/year salary).


There are a few methods you can use to estimate your taxes. On the results screen, the app will show you your estimated tax burden, your estimated withholding for the year, and your estimated overpayment/refund or shortfall/tax due.  It may also have recommendations for you on how to adjust your W-4 (although, this late in the year, I think it only tells you to come back next year to reevaluate).   Your state might also have income tax, and if you are curious about that, you can find the state tax form and estimate your state income tax as well. My guess is that you will be getting a refund this year, as you have only worked half of the year.  But that is only a guess.


Yes, there is; you are correct. Once I register my phone to the WiFi, the store has access to my phone's IP address, so that's how they ultimately identify me. I just use a spurious email address because I do not want all the spam and advertisements sent to my email. If you haven't noticed, the minute you provide your email to a company, organization, etc., all of a sudden you start getting emails for random places (third-parties).   I like you, Sarah. You're a sharp interlocutor that loves to confabulate. You keep me on my toes lol


Right, but the world needs an army of burger flippers and low skill level wage earners, how else would the upper echelons profit? Wait, I forgot let's let arbitrary randomness and luck determine who gets a job instead of the one's with a passion for it. And then we can finally let people with passions start up their business because of complete happen-stance, or you know we could make a system in which there are more chances for people to succeed based on previous people's capabilities and successes, but no, this is between you and the universe to determine survival of the fittest, no hand outs! Sarcasms, and such.


"Buying lotteries tickets makes you the fish not the fisher. Just like casinos or drugs. If you like, you can call buying tickets an ""investment"" or better yet, a donation in the lottery's owner wealth. No real investor is dumb enough to get into a business where 99.9999999% of the ""investors"" lose EVERYTHING they invested. Besides, a real investments means BIG money. You can call it so if you are ready to sell your house and buy tickets of all those money, but still, the risk is so high that it's not worth it."


"This is a great question! I've been an entrepreneur and small business owner for 20+ years and have started small businesses in 3 states that grew into nice income streams for me. I've lived off these businesses for 20+ years, so I know it can be done! First let me start by saying that the rules, regulations, requirements and laws for operating a business (small or large) legally, for the most part, are local laws and regulations. Depending on what your business does, you may have some federal rules to follow, but for the most part, it will be your locality (state, county, city) that determines what you'll have to do to comply and be ""legal"". Also, though it might be better in some cases to incorporate (and even required in some circumstances), you don't always have to. There are many small businesses (think landscapers, housekeepers, babysitters, etc.) that get income from their ""business operations"" and do so as ""individuals"". Of course, everyone has to pay taxes - so as long as you property record your income (and expenses) and properly file your tax returns every year, you are ""income tax legal"".  I won't try to answer the income tax question here, though, as that can be a big question. Also, though you certainly can start a business on your own without hiring lawyers or other professionals (more on that below), when it comes to taxes, I definitely recommend you indeed plan to hire a tax professional (even if it's something like H&R Block or Jackson Hewitt, etc). In some cities, there might even be ""free"" tax preparation services by certain organizations that want to help the community and these are often available even to small businesses. In general, income taxes can be complicated and the rules are always changing. I've found that most small business owners that try to file their own taxes generally end up paying a lot more taxes than they're required to, in essence, they are overpaying! Running a business (and making a profit) can be hard enough, so on to of that, you don't need to be paying more than you are required to!  Also, I am going to assume that since it sounds like it would be a business of one (you), that you won't have a Payroll. That is another area that can be complicated for sure. Ok, with those generics out of the way, let me tackle your questions related to starting and operating a business, since you have the ""idea for your business"" pretty figured out. Will you have to pay any substantial amount of money to attorneys or advisors or accountants or to register with the government? Not necessarily. Since the rules for operating a business legally vary by your operating location (where you will be providing the service or performing your work), you can certainly research this on your own. It might take a little time, but it's doable if you stick with it. Some resources: The state of Florida (where I live) has an excellent page at: http://www.myflorida.com/taxonomy/business/starting%20a%20business%20in%20florida/ You might not be in Florida, but almost every state will have something similar. What all do I need to do to remain on the right side of the law and the smart side of business?  All of the answers above still apply to this question, but here are a few more items to consider: You will want to keep good records of all expenses directly related to the business. If you license some content (stock images) for example, you'll want to document receipts. These are easy usually as you know ""directly"". If you subscribe to the Apple Developer program (which you'll need to if you intend to sell Apps in the Apple App Stores), the subscription is an expense against your business income, etc. You will want to keep good records of indirect costs. These are not so easy to ""figure out"" (and where a good accountant will help you when this becomes significant) but these are important and a lot of business owners hurt themselves by not considering these. What do I mean? Well, you need an ""office"" in order to produce your work, right? You might need a computer, a phone, internet, electricity, heat, etc. all of which allow you to create a ""working environment"" that allows you to ""produce your product"". The IRS (and state tax authorities) all provide ways for you to quantify these and ""count them"" as legitimate business expenses. No, you can't use 100% of your electric bill (since your office might be inside your home, and the entire bill is not ""just"" for your business) but you are certainly entitled to some part of that bill to count as a business expense. Again, I don't want to get too far down the INCOME TAX rabbit hole, but you still need to keep track of what you spend! You must keep good record of ALL your income. This is especially important when you have money coming in from various sources (a payroll, gifts from friends, business income from clients and/or the App Stores, etc.) Do not just assume that copies of your bank deposits tell the whole story. Bank statements might tell you the amount and date of a deposit, but you don't really know ""where"" that money came from unless you are tracking it! The good news is that the above record keeping can be quite easy with something like Quicken or QuickBooks (or many many other such popular programs.) You will want to ensure you have the needed licenses (not necessarily required at all for a lot of small businesses, especially home based businesses.) Depending on your business activity, you might want to consider business liability insurance. Again, this will depend on your clients and/or other business entities you'll be dealing with. Some might require you to have some insurance.  Will be efforts even be considered a business initially until some amount of money actually starts coming in?  This might be a legal / accountant question as to the very specific answer from the POV of the law and taxing authorities. However, consider that not all businesses make any money at all, for a long time, and they definitely ""are a business"". For instance, Twitter was losing money for a long time (years) and no one would argue they were not a business. Again, deferring to the attorneys/cpas here for the legal answer, the practical answer is that you're performing ""some"" business activity when you start creating a product and working hard to make it happen! I would consider ""acting as"" a business regardless! What things do I need to do up-front and what things can I defer to later, especially in light of the fact that it might be several months to a couple years before any substantial income starts coming in? This question's answer could be quite long. There are potentially many items you can defer.  However, one I can say is that you might consider deferring incorporation. An individual can perform a business activity and draw income from it legally in a lot of situations. (For tax purposes, this is sometimes referred to as ""Schedule-C"" income.) I'm not saying incorporation is a bad thing (it can shield you from a lot of issues), but I am saying that it's not necessary on day 1 for a lot of small businesses. Having said that, this too can be easy to do on your own. Many companies offer services so you can incorporate for a few hundred dollars. If you do incorporate, as a small business of one person, I would definitely consider a tax concept called an ""S-Corp"" to avoid paying double taxes.) But here too, we've gone down the tax rabbit hole again. :-)"


Wow. She really is in a pickle. Even though I can intellectualize that she ought have paid more attention to her family's finances, and assuming she wasn't complicit in her husband's obvious tax evasion, I can sympathize to some extent.  This is a great demonstration of how dangerous it is to just let your spouse handle all the finances because they understand the money stuff. Even if they pay the bills you should have at least a fundamental understanding of the taxes being paid, estate and retirement plans. So here's some practical advice based on the hole she has dug for herself:


3D modeling of jewelry from your ideas, photos or drawings Fast budget in 24 hours Realistic rendering for customer approval Support at all stages of production Quality at competitive prices Modules with pre-crimping We can modify or repair your 3D designs Exclusivity in their designs Delivery in 7 days and emergency modeling in 48 hours available


In the very unlikely event that it is not a scam, there would be a distinct probability that it is someone trying to launder money.  You don't want to get caught up with drug dealers or ISIS terrorists, so forget it. There is also the possibility that your post is a scam, looking for people who would believe such nonsense.  I wonder if people who reply are going to get phished.


Auto Insurance score is in no way related to your driving habits, instead it is based on your credit usage.  You are often punished for having more than one or two hard inquires in a year and they also frown upon having many lines of credit even though that helps your credit utilization.


"Depends what you mean by simplify. I thought I would save money when I talked the family into dropping cable TV, but it ends up coming out as a wash because we rented more and bought TV shows online from amazon.com.  (Then we bought a new computer so I could keep working on my laptop while the family watches streaming internet, we save money, but not as much as I thought) We did a great purge of ""stuff"" from the garage and closets a couple of summers ago because I wanted to simplify (some clothes, extra pots and pans, a coat rack, unused electronics) and now I am seeing their replacements coming back into the house in the form of new purchases. I guess my lesson is that you cannot make another person simplify their life.  I love my wife for trying so hard to help me with my plan, and I certainly don't blame her for wanting a coat rack again (it is just who she is, she doesn't see the irony) but I should have considered how my desire impacted those around me."


"Short answer, yes. But this is not done through the deductions on Schedule A. This can happen if the employer creates a Flexible Spending Account (FSA) for its employees. This can be created for certain approved uses like medical and transportation expenses (a separate account for each category). You can contribute amounts within certain limits to these accounts (e.g. $255 a month for transportation), with pre-tax income, deduct the contributions, and then withdraw these funds to cover your transportation or medical expenses. They work like a (deductible) IRA, except that these are ""spending"" and not ""retirement"" accounts. Basically, the employer fulfills the role of ""IRA"" (FSA, actually) trustee, and does the supporting paperwork."


"So many interesting points you raise ...   I only have a minute, so:  > the more technology that is created, the less privacy we have, the dumber we become and the more jobs we lose to automation  I agree wholeheartedly with your first two points... as far as the loss of jobs to automation, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.   Who exactly is happy spending 40 hours each week standing on a factory line or stocking shelves? I don't think that's a life anyone would choose if better options were available.   Of course, that raises the thorny issue of ""better options being available."" :)   I think that the loss of jobs to automation will raise complex issues that are not nearly as black and white - or *predictable* - as many seem to think they are.   p.s.  You're delightful to chat with!"


Yes, there's a way. I actually wrote a blog post about it. Its a new service from the IRS which allows you pulling your account online. IRS also has an instruction page just for this case here.


From Wikipedia: Investment has different meanings in finance and economics. In Finance   investment is putting money into something with the expectation of   gain, that upon thorough analysis, has a high degree of security for   the principal amount, as well as security of return, within an   expected period of time. In contrast putting money into something with   an expectation of gain without thorough analysis, without security of   principal, and without security of return is speculation or gambling. The second part of the question can be addressed by analyzing the change in gold price vs inflation year by year over the long term. As Chuck mentioned, there are periods in which it didn't exceed inflation. More important, over any sufficiently long length of time the US stock market will outperform. Those who bought at the '87 peak aren't doing too bad, yet those who bought in the last gold bubble haven't kept up with inflation. $850 put into gold at the '80 top would inflate today to $2220 per the inflation calculator. You can find with a bit of charting some periods where gold outpaced inflation, and some where it missed. Back to the definition of investment. I think gold fits speculation far better than it does investment. I've heard the word used in ways I'd disagree with, spend what you will on the shoes, but no, they aren't an investment, I tell my wife. The treadmill purchase may improve my health, and people may use the word colloquially, but it's not an investment.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://betterfuture.xyz/2017/10/07/why-the-penny-must-die/) reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The United States Mint admitted that, &quot;There are no alternative metal compositions that reduce the manufacturing unit cost of the penny below its face value.&quot; Thus, unless they were to be made out of plastic, the penny will always cost more to produce than they are worth; yet, the U.S. Mint continues to manufacture 4 billion pennies each year.  > The penny lobby &quot;America For Common Cents&quot; argue that without the penny, prices would rise and charitable contributions will fall.  > At the time when Sweden removed the 50 &ouml;re, it was worth approximately 5 cents - mayhap we should look into getting rid of more than just the penny.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/75ad2p/it_costs_18_cent_to_manufacture_each_penny_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~224964 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **penny**^#1 **cost**^#2 **removed**^#3 **worth**^#4 **even**^#5"


I fear that when most of the cost is overhead, very minimal marginal costs, efficiencies of scale make de facto monopolies. Mix this with compatibility, creating a new competitor in the smartphone market would be next to impossible unless they could run Android or iOS third party apps for example.


Like I said in my original post, you could have two part time jobs paying at $15, restoring your hours, paying more. Again, the condition for this is the overall employment level (jobs availability). I say successful people, to show this is a widespread opinion verified by those who are successful, but being widespread it's believed by many people, including those getting min wage. It's a pretty simple concept,  do you really think min wage people wouldn't get it?


The comparison was emphatically not one that went to success of the company, otherwise there are a ton of blue chip companies that could have been cited. Instead, Dixon cites emergent technology companies who are at the top of their game in terms of bringing new and innovative products to market. It's about business plan and vision as it translates to long term success. It has nothing to do with quarterly returns.


If you are going to put it into a banking system, just deposit it. Why did breaking it up even cross your mind? Like what would that even have accomplished, so you could pretend like you started moonlighting as a club bouncer if you were ever casually asked by a bank teller or federal agent? If you have to ever account for the source of your money, you will have to account for it regardless. You shouldn't worry about things that may trigger higher scrutiny on you, because it is pretty random. The financial institution may file a suspicious activity report any time they feel like it (which they routinely do without the customer's knowledge, for a wide range of reasons), and actually attempting to break it up into smaller deposits would mean the suspicious activity report would escalate into criminal charges. And regarding the IRS, if they ever audited you then you will still have to account for that $25,000 no matter what you did with it.


Is this transaction legal Yes it is. Are there any tax implications in US?  The interest is taxable in US. From what I understand, there are no tax implications in India. Yes this is right. The question you haven't asked is does this makes sense? So you are paying 3% upfront. Getting 8% at end of one year. You can making monthly repayments through the year. You have not factored in the Fx Rate and their fluctuations. For Example you would convert USD to INR and back to USD. Even if you do this the same day, you loose around 2% that is referred to as Fx Spread. Plus the rates for USD and INR get adjusted for inflation. This means that INR will loose value in a year. In long term it would be balance out [i.e. the gain in interest rate is offset by loss in Fx rate]. At times its ahead or behind due to local conditions.


>I agree that double taxation makes no sense regardless of individual or corporation. Having said that, it's my understanding that Murca offers corporations tax credits on foreign taxes paid to avoid double taxation. I'm pretty sure that a similar vehicle exists for individuals as well. My issue is entirely with corporations paying off legislators to avoid taxes that they have an obligation to pay in the country that they operate.  Context, friend.  The statement you quoted was in reference to the issue of double taxation.  Hence the statement was made in attempt to indicate that no issue with the responder's stance on double taxation, but in fact the paying for and receiving tax concessions.  The statement certainly could have been more comprehensive in identifying legislators as equally culpable in its part.    Your attempt to cherry pick a statement out of context is disingenuous.  Bro, do you work for Fox?


"Equity could mean stock options. If that's the case if the company makes it big, you'll have the option to buy stocks cheap (which can then be sold at a huge profit) How are you going to buy those without income?  5% equity is laughable. I'd be looking for 30-40% if not better without salary.  Or even better, a salary. To elaborate, 5% is fine, and even normal for an early employee taking a mild pay cut in exchange for a chance at return. That chance of any return on the equity is only about 1/20 (94% of startups fail) There is no reason for an employee to work for no pay. An argument could be made for a cofounder, with direct control and influence in the company to work for equity only, but it would be a /lot/ more (that 30-40%), or an advisory role (5% is reasonable)  I also just noticed you mentioned ""investing"" in the startup with cash. As an angel investor, I'd still expect far more than 5%, and preferred shares at that. More like 16-20%.  Read this for more info on how equity is usually split."


It is breaking the law, it's just difficult to demonstrate it. It's easy for international companies to make individual territories look unprofitable, reducing local tax bills. The law forbids this when abused, but not easy to prove. In this case Starbucks execs have been mouthing off about how profitable it is in the UK!


Why should a bank get into construction specifically? Lots of business opportunities require capital. Conceivably banks could build factories, develop consumer electronics, complete with SpaceX, etc. It's all capital in, profits out, with varying levels of risk and returns. There's nothing special about constructing apartments. The reason banks don't run businesses is because there are plenty of private firms that compete with each other for business. What's the chance that a bank, with all its bureaucracy, can deliver cheaper apartments than an apartment developer? Pretty low in fact, and that's why they would rather lend to an apartment developer rather than building the apartments themselves. Banks are in the business of competing with other banks. The main work they do is to sort out good investments from poor ones. And if they can do that just a bit more efficiently than their competitors, they make big bucks. For example, it might only take a few additional hours to better vet a deal worth millions. Whereas with an apartment building, you wouldn't be able to make that amount of money per hour even if the materials and labor cost you nothing.


Well my privileged friend, let me tell you that it's over. I live in a place where there are barely contracts anymore, let alone permanent contracts. Overtime is a fond memory. The future will be tougher for the unskilled as these jobs are automated. Once more, it's over. People smart and ambitious enough to be come employers didn't get there by overpaying.


According to my calculations, you always lose money on group B.  x = average monthly balance  Income for a year = 0.015 * (12 * x) = 0.18 * x  Cost of funds for one month = 0.04 * x  Cost of funds for one year = 12 * (0.04 * x) = 0.48 * x  Profit? at end of year   = income_for_year - cost_of_funds_for_one_year  = (0.18 * x) - (0.48 * x)  = forever loss


The cause of incomplete/inaccurate financial data's appearing on free sites is that it is both complicated and expensive to obtain and parse these data. Even within a single country, different pieces of financial data are handled by different authorities.  In the US, for example, there is one generally recognized authority for stock prices and volumes (CQS), but a completely different authority for corporate earnings data (SEC).  For futures and options data the only authority is each individual exchange.  Each of these sources might have a vastly different interface to their data; some may have websites, others may have FTPs, others may have TCP datastreams to which you must subscribe, etc. Now throw in the rest of the world and all their exchanges and regulatory agencies, and you can see how it's a difficult job to gather all this information, parse it on a daily (or more frequent) basis, and check it all for errors. There are some companies (e.g. Bloomberg) whose entire business model is to do the above.  They spend tens of millions of dollars per year to support the infrastructure and manpower required to keep such a complex system working, and they charge their consumers a pretty penny in return. Do Google/Yahoo pay for Bloomberg data access just to display information that we then consume for free?  Maybe.  Maybe they pay for some less expensive reduced data set.  Or a data set that is less rigorously checked for errors. Even if they pay for the best data available, there's no guarantee that a company's last earnings report didn't have a glitch in it, or that Bloomberg's latest download from the Canadian Agency for Corporate Dividends and Moose Census-Taking didn't get cut off in the middle, or that the folks at Yahoo built a robust system that can handle a particular file's not arriving on time.  Bloomberg has dozens or even hundreds of employees focused on just this one task; Yahoo probably has 5. Moral: If you really need the best available data you must go to the source(s), or you must pay a provider to whom you can then complain when something is wrong.  With free data you get what you pay for.


ACA has market stabilizing mechanisms like cost-sharing reduction subsidies.  Republicans have been blocking that in recently, causing many insurance companies to pull out of some states.  I imagine repeal will just be a continuation of that until there is less competition and insurance companies make higher margins to offset the risk of unprofitable quarters.  So maybe they make more money because of higher margins or maybe they don't because they lose subsidies.


"Your question does not say this explicitly, but I assume that you were once a W-2 employee.  Each paycheck a certain amount was withheld from your check to pay income, social security, and medicare taxes.  Just because you did not receive that amount of money earned does not mean it was immediately sent to the IRS.  While I am not all that savvy on payroll procedures, I recall an article that indicated some companies only send in withheld taxes every quarter, much like you are doing now.  They get a short term interest free loan.  For example taxes withheld by a w-2 employee in the later months of the year may not be provided to the IRS until 15 January of the next year.   You are correct in assuming that if you make 100K as a W-2 you will probably pay less in taxes than someone who is 100K self employed with 5K in expenses.  However there are many factors.  Provided you properly fill out a 1040ES, and pay the correct amount of quarterly payments, you will almost never owe taxes.  In fact my experience has been the forms will probably allow you to receive a refund.  Tax laws can change and one thing the form did not include last year was the .9% Medicare surcharge for high income earners catching some by surprise.    As far as what you pay into is indicative of the games the politicians play.  It all just goes into a big old bucket of money, and more is spent by congress than what is in the bucket.  The notion of a ""social security lockbox"" is pure politics/fantasy as well as the notion of medicare and social security taxes.  The latter were created to make the actual income tax rate more palatable.     I'd recommend getting your taxes done as early as possible come 1 January 2017.  While you may not have all the needed info, you could firm up an estimate by 15 Jan and modify the amount for your last estimated payment.  Complete the taxes when all stuff comes in and even if you owe an amount you have time to save for anything additional.  Keep in mind, between 1 Jan 17 and 15 Apr 17 you will earn and presumably save money to use towards taxes.  You can always ""rob"" from that money to pay any owed tax for 2016 and make it up later. All that is to say you will be golden because you are showing concern and planning.  When you hear horror stories of IRS dealings it is most often that people spent the money that should have been sent to the IRS."


The purpose of this spammy Motley Fool video ad is to sell their paid newsletter products.  Although the beginning of the video promises to tell you this secret trick for obtaining additional Social Security payments, it fails to do so.  (Luckily, I found a transcript of the video, so I didn't have to watch it.) What they are talking about is the Social Security File and Suspend strategy.  Under this strategy, one spouse files for social security benefits early (say age 66).  This allows the other spouse to claim spousal benefits.  Immediately after that is claimed, the first spouse suspends his social security benefits, allowing them to grow until age 70, but the other spouse is allowed to continue to receive spousal benefits.   Congress has ended this loophole, and it will no longer be available after May 1, 2016.


I think the Saudi stake in Twitter has something to do with this.  Edit  Downvote me all you want. It doesn't make Prince Alaweed bin Talal own any less of Twitter.  In 2015 his stake was valued at $1 billion and there's no doubt that number has only gone up over the last two years.  http://fortune.com/2015/10/07/saudi-prince-twitter-stock/  Saudi Prince Alaweed bin Talal remains one of the largest and most important Twitter shareholders.  https://www.recode.net/2016/8/11/12417064/twitter-stock-ownership-takeover-acquisition-challenges


Did you not see the top response to you about how the banks are actually AGAINST this bill and Dodd's subsequent repeal? Also many of the bank shares like JPM and GS (which don't have other unrelated issues) are well above '07 highs


"With the scenario that you laid out (ie. 5% and 10% loans), it makes no sense at all. The problem is, when you're in trouble the rates are never 5% or 10%. Getting behind on credit cards sucks and is really hard to recover from. The problem with multiple accounts is that as the banks tack on fees and raise your interest rate to the default rate (usually 30%) when you give them any excuse (late payment, over the limit, etc). The banks will also cut your credit lines as you make payments, making it more likely that you will bump over the limit and be back in ""default"" status. One payment, even at a slightly higher rate is preferable when you're deep in the hole because you can actually pay enough to hit principal. If you have assets like a house, you'll get a much better rate as well. In a scenario where you're paying 22-25% interest, your minimum payment will be $150-200 a month, and that is mostly interest and penalty. ""One big loan"" will usually result in a smaller payment, and you don't end up in a situation where the banks are jockeying for position so they get paid first. The danger of consolidation is that you'll stop triggering defaults and keep making your payments, so your credit score will improve. Then the vultures will start circling and offering you more credit cards. EDIT: Mea Culpa.  I wrote this based on experiences of close friends whom I've helped out over the years, not realizing how the law changed in 2009.  Back around 2004, a single late payment would trigger universal default on most cards, jacking all rates up to 30% and slashing credit lines, resulting in over the limit and other fees. Credit card banks generally apply payments (in order, to interest on penalties, penalties, interest on principal, principal) in a way that makes it very difficult to pay down principal for people deep in debt. They would also offer ""payment plans"" to entice you to pay Bank B vs. Bank A, which would trigger overlimit fees from Bank A. Another change is that minimum payments were generally 2% of statement balance, which often didn't cover the monthly finance charge. The new law changed that, resulting in a payment of 1% of balance + accrued interest. Under the old regime, consolidation made it less likely that various circumstances would trigger default, and gave the struggling debtor one throat to choke. With the new rules, there are definitely a smaller number of scenarios where consolidation actually makes sense."


I think the surface is a very cool machine in that it combines a lot of features from different devices: touch screen and portability of a tablet, specs and operating system of a laptop, and the on screen stylus of a Wacom cintiq. I think they messed up by dropping Wacom for the Surface 3, and that may have turned more than a few artists away from the device. I like the idea of it, even if the execution is still a little lacking.


There are 2 trades involved - keep in mind that the function of the CIO is to hedge out the banks risk from a very high level. Credit and interest rate risk should come to mind since what does a bank do (for the most part)? Loan money.   Trade #1 - The bank is long corporate debt, that's no secret, so they're always exposed to a high amount of macro economic risk. So the CIO hedged this initially by taking a bearish stance on junk bonds. This is somewhat narrow, but still reasonable.   Trade #2 - What you'd call a second order hedge in an attempt to offset the overly bearish but still embarrassingly narrow position in trade #1. All on the Markit CDX IG 9 (Investment Grade Series 9 10yr), Mr Iksil sold CDS tranches out to 2017 and bought to 2012.   So, the books were flat (with a slight optimistic edge) through 2012, and bullish on the economy out to 2017.   Unfortunately, credit markets didn't exactly take off. The economy stayed volatile, and Bruno had to keep digging deeper into the trade, selling back year tranches to buy front the front years. This eventually wonked spreads out so badly that everyone who cared caught on and, when JPM decided the time had come to take their losses, hedge funds started picking them off on the unwinds.


The two really aren't easily comparable - you have to look at cost of living.  sdg's calculations account for provincial and federal taxes in Canada, but elide state taxes in the US.  There's also sales taxes, which are usually higher in Canada, and property taxes, which tend to be higher in the US (from my experience).  You also have to include health insurance into your calculations, since that expense is included in your taxes in Canada.


Here's the reality: Facebook was forced into an IPO because of stupid federal regulations.  They would have happily continued to stay closely held and raked in money while maintaining their mystique.  If there is any problem, start at the root.


"This is basically the short-term/long-term savings question in another form: savings that you hope are long-term but which may turn short-term very suddenly. You can never completely eliminate the risk of being forced to draw on long term savings during a period when the market is doing Something Unpleasant that would force you to take a loss (or right before it does Something Pleasant that you'd like to be fully invested during). You can only pick the degree of risk that you're willing to accept, balancing that hazard of forced sales against the lower-but-more-certain returns you'd get from a money market or equivalent. I'm considered a moderately aggressive investor -- which doesn't mean I'm pushing the boundaries on what I'm buying (not by a long shot!), but which does mean I'm willing to keep more of my money in the market and I'm more likely to hold or buy into a dip than to sell off to try to minimize losses. That level of risk-tolerance also means I'm willing to maintain a ready-cash pool which is sufficient to handle expected emergencies (order of $10K), and not become overly paranoid about lost opportunity value if it turns out that I need to pull a few thou out of the investments. I've got decent health insurance, which helps reduce that risk. I'm also not particularly paranoid about the money. On my current track, I should be able to maintain my current lifestyle ""forever"" without ever touching the principal, as long as inflation and returns remain vaguely reasonable. Having to hit the account for a larger emergency at an Inconvenient Time wouldn't be likely to hurt me too much -- delaying retirement for a year or two, perhaps. It's just money. Emergencies are one of the things it's for. I try not to be stupid about it, but I also try not to stress about it more than I must."


Most likely your accounting is cash basis, not accrual, so it's pretty tough to do unless you resort to the dodgy methods discussed so often by the tax avoidance enthusiasts.  There is a difference between a CPA service and a tax lawyer, perhaps you need to know one of the latter.


A rough estimate of the money you'd need to take a position in a single stock would be: In the case of your Walmart example, the current share price is 76.39, so assuming your commission is $7, and you'd like to buy, say, 3 shares, then it would cost approximately (76.39 * 3) + 7 = $236.17. Remember that the quoted price usually refers to 100-share lots, and your broker may charge you a higher commission or other fees to purchase an odd lot (less than 100 shares, usually).  I say that the equation above gives an approximate minimum because  However, I second the comments of others that if you're looking to invest a small amount in the stock market, a low cost mutual fund or ETF, specifically an index fund, is a safer and potentially cheaper option than purchasing individual stocks.


>  it was no longer free to deliver that sort of content  It's not free.  Content providers pay for the right to access the network, just like you or I.  Their bandwidth (**not** usage) needs are greater, and they therefore pay a notably larger monthly bill than most individuals.    But it's not free.


Body painting is always popular and is a great choice for keeping the kids entertained at your next birthday party or event. Let us amaze them with sparkly fairies, scary tigers, and beautiful butterflies. We Love Face Painting is known for providing the most efficient services of body paint in Melbourne, there can be no better choice than We Love Face Painting. Call - 0400 042 612 for more information!


The jobs in the economy is (generally) fixed -- there are just so many good jobs and so many bad jobs.  If someone manages to move from a bad to a good job, they must displace someone who had that good job.  At the end of the day we will still need dishwashers and security guards.  If you better educate children, you're going to get smarter people who are dishwashers and security guards.


**Volume-weighted average price**  In finance, volume-weighted average price (VWAP) is the ratio of the value traded to total volume traded over a particular time horizon (usually one day). It is a measure of the average price at which a stock is traded over the trading horizon.  VWAP is often used as a trading benchmark by investors who aim to be as passive as possible in their execution. Many pension funds, and some mutual funds, fall into this category.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/finance/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.24


If that's the case I hope continues and is more articulate about he is proposing.   Maybe I'm just a cynic but I see CEOs and Governors and Congressmen as all cut from the same cloth.   They paint a beautiful picture that everyone loves and they build support by that.  For businessmen, this is the top job.  For politicians, that support winning the election.   How and whether they can deliver on the dream is always irrelevant.  The supporters don't wise up until years later.


It is only wise to invest in what you understand (ala Warren Buffet style). Depending on how much money you have, you might see fit to consult a good independent financial advisor instead of seeking advice from this website. A famous quote goes: “Those who say, do not know. Those who know, do not say”


**Very Misleading** redditor title: nothing in the article talks about the 'industry at risk'. Here's what it *does* state:  >But there is tremendous variation in an individual’s response [to various diet plans].    Some might gain the weight back, some might not, but nothing in the article states that the 'industry' is 'at risk'. [UPDATE: this article is like sound-bite heaven. You could probably make a dozen different redditor submissions from the sensationalist style that the article writer uses]


What drives me insane is when UPS leaves a package on my porch without even knocking. Every single time they come, the guy places it on my porch and leaves while I am right inside. Sometimes I won't notice it for 3 hours, while the other day I didn't find it until the next morning.  It would take 3 seconds to knock!


Companies in their earliest stages will likely not have profits but do have the potential for profits.  Thus, there can be those that choose to invest in companies that require capital to stay in business that have the potential to make money. Venture Capital would be the concept here that goes along with John Bensin's points that would be useful background material.  For years, Amazon.com lost money particularly for its first 6 years though it has survived and taken off at times.


I don't understand why the gaming industry has never embraced the concept of the Summer Blockbuster.   Everyone knows only shit games come out in summer. Even big name games that come out in summer are sure to be the ones that couldn't compete during the holidays.


Well, holy shit better sell everything.  Here's the same guy saying this in 2013: http://www.moneynews.com/Economy/Levy-economy-recession-debt/2013/08/07/id/519172/  Then in 2012: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QICgObHj4dg  And he was saying this in 2010: http://demandsideblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/double-dip-week-david-levy.html  Eventually he will be right, but you know it's just not that impressive.  Tired of my more doom and gloom investor friends sending me links to this guy.


"You really don't think 7 trillion dollars is huge?    BTW, There was no "" insane spending uptick"".  The budget deficit numbers for the Bush years are meaningless, because the wars were ""off budget"".  Use [Debt to the penny](http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np) to run the numbers.   Bush added 1,438,236,760,982.61 to the debt in his last 12 months.  Call it 1.43 trillion."


"It completely depends on what type of work you intend to do. Are you intending to run/setup your own business? Or stay with your current employer, but work from home instead of going to the office? If thats the case, then yes it is a good idea, since you will save on commuting costs amongst other things If you are asking about working from home under one of those ""work from home piecework"" schemes, I would be wary. Many of them require you do an insane amount of piecework, for literally peanuts, so it might not be worth the effort (since you could earn 2, 3x as much in a supermarket shift of the same duration)"


So why are large US companies privy to the language but large US consumer or civil liberties groups not?  For example, analysts at Cisco, IBM, Intel, and HP have access to the text of the TPP and can make comments to guide policy decisions that will go into the treaty[1], but I don't believe the EFF has had access except for leaks[2].  So, where's my advocate in the negotiations?  Why should I believe the negotiators have my best interests at heart?  Even if the treaty comes back as something generally positive, it's going to be tilted in such a way that those with a spot at the table come out ahead whereas Congress' only option is just 'take it or leave it'.  By extension of my representation in Congress (and even that's kind of weak given the current state of US politics), that's my only option as well.  [1] http://www.flushthetpp.org/tpp-corporate-insiders/   [2] https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp


Better for r/personalfinance . But having some exposure to the real estate industry, you are most likely over priced. Although you say that market is slow where you are, if you desperately need the money, you may have to sell at a bit of a loss.


"> Just as we are seeing the repercussion's of Obamas 8 years now.  What repercussions? Economy is doing pretty damn good.  > Some of it I agree with but I don't think Trump will make the ""american century"" obsolete.  I am pretty sure if we bad mouth our friends, piss off our Allies and emboldened our adversaries, the America Century will come to an end real quick. Plus, if Trump pushes isolationism, doesn't that mean he is trying to end the American Century? What is the point of an American Century if we don't come to the defense of our Allies and protect the world order?  > That is a vast overstatement with very little evidence to back it up.  Ask any economist what they say about getting ride of trade or going back to the days of protectionism. You won't find any economists that say stifling trade is good for the economy."


I ate a McDonald's burger about a month ago for the first time since I was a kid. I'll tell you, if that's your standard for a real meat burger, there are definitely vegetarian products that could fool you into thinking they were real meat. Quite frankly, I'm pretty positive that McDonald's could sub out the burger patty for a soy based substitute tomorrow and no one would ever notice.


I sold my house and had been in the market looking for a replacement house for over 6 months after I sold it. I found someone willing to give me a short term, 3 month lease, with a month to month after that, at an equitable rate, as renters were scarcer than buyers.By the time I found a house, there were bidding wars as surplus had declined (can be caused seasonally), and it was quite difficult to get my new house. However, appraisers help this to a degree because whatever the seller wants, is not necessarily what they get, even if you offer it. I offered $10k over asking just to get picked out of the large group bidding on the house. Once the appraisal came in at $10k below my offer, I was able to buy the house at what I expected. Of course I had to be prepared if it came in higher, but I did my homework and knew pretty much what the house was worth. The mortgage is the same as the lease I had, the house is only 10 years' old and has a 1 year warranty on large items that could go wrong. In the 3 months I've been in the house, I have gained nearly $8k in equity....and will have a tax writeoff of about $19,000 off an income off a salary of $72,000, giving me taxable income of $53,000... making by tax liability go down about $4600. If I am claiming 0 dependents I will get back about $5,000 this year versus breaking even.


**Here's a sneak peek of /r/AskEconomics using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!**  \#1: [As an economic system, why does capitalism require constant growth?](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/5e3qc5/as_an_economic_system_why_does_capitalism_require/)   \#2: [Is there even one economist in here that thinks Trump's protectionist agenda will result in welfare gains for the American people?](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/5p5lpe/is_there_even_one_economist_in_here_that_thinks/)   \#3: [/r/memenomics posts aside, is Ben Bernanke really a hero? Did the Fed save us from something much worse during the recession? How bad would it have been if the Fed acted as poorly and lamely as it did before/during the Great Depression?](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/5ijtls/rmemenomics_posts_aside_is_ben_bernanke_really_a/)  ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/6l7i0m/blacklist/)


"Read ""Stop Acting Rich"" by Dr Thomas Stanley. I'm concerned that even before you've earned your first paycheck you want a flashy car. $4800/yr on $63K/yr income is just about half what I'd recommend to someone who starts working. 10% is the minimum, if and only if, the employer matches 5, for a total 15% saved. Do it in a pretax account and when you go back to grad school convert to Roth."


">  and that is what's uncalled for.  I think folks aren't reading this right. It's not ""you voted for Trump, which I disagree with.""  Look at how a large swath of America views President Trump, and of more importance here - how a large number of folks view his supporters.   Over 2/3 of Americans polled don't trust President Trump and think poorly of people that support him.   If you follow the line of reasoning, you can get to ""anyone who supported Donald Trump is not acting rationally."" In that light, it would mean believing that someone who supports Donald Trump is doing so based on naked, unthinking politics instead of a rational evaluation of his policies and past history.   In other words, Reed Hastings looks at ""voting for Trump"" as a sanity test, and this person (who not only voted for him, but advertised his doing so, loudly and proudly) does not have the kind of judgement he wants in a board member."


"An LLC is overkill for 99% of 1 man small businesses. Side-businesses should remain as sole proprieterships until they get much larger and need the benefits of the LLC laws. You can still bill through a company name if you want to start building a brand: And set aside 25% of your gross income for Uncle Sam. He wants you to file a Schedule C with your regular 1040 at tax time. He doesn't care about your company. He just wants your social security number with a big fat check stuck to it. Be sure to maximize your tax savings by tracking your expenses like a hawk. Every mile is worth 50 cents. I recommend using a tracking system like the TaxMinimiser.com (buy the $4 version to see if you like it). Bottom line: EARN MONEY. Don't set up a ""corporation""."


"I wouldn't go quite that far.    It's dreadfully formatted, and not brilliantly written, I'll give you that.  I'd guess it's written by someone who believes they they have a flair for storytelling and the dramatic, and writes as they would talk.  Assume Amy Hoy is a slightly melodramatic awkward gal soliloquizing at you, and this all seems a little more tolerable.    But I find her points somewhat solid.    I think she's presenting from a ideological standpoint where safety and security are paramount, and the risk associated with startups is ""too much risk.""  But I think the point thats he's making about the poisonous rhetoric associated with ""glorious death"" and ""working for a startup"" being very similar is well thought out and quite an interesting perspective.  I go to a school whose idea of ""business"" is ""entrepreneurship.""  I left their business program because my career goals simply cannot be sustained by entrepreneurship until a very long while into my career, and I found the ""here's how to have a startup"" focus of the bulk of the courses essentially valueless to me where I am now.    Having seen what the author refers to as the ""hagiography"" of successful startups (great word, by-the-by), I cannot help but recount those courses and the ways we were sold on this ideology.    Much was made about how much money was made by successful startups.  Much was made of the independence, the power, the *glory*, of winning the startup lotto and making it big.  The guys that did it young were revered and lauded as the greatest of our generation.    No mention was made of the failures.  No mention was made of the failure rate.  No mention was made of the costs associated with failure.  No mention was made of the people who got fucked as these entrepreneurial saints made their fortunes.    Further, the ones that got the most attention were the ones who went back and did it a few more times.  Anyone clever, who won big and cashed out and quit while ahead was mentioned as a success, but their retirement or cashing out went unmentioned.  Some sort of shameful detail, maybe.    The guys that won big and went back and tried again were praised for their determination and vigor.  If they set themselves back to square one betting on an unsuccessful attempt, that was unmentioned.    VCs were praised as the greatest thing that happened to entrepreneurship.  We were given no real warnings about ""hey, those contracts can be kinda shady sometimes"" or ""they want a *big* cut, yo."" Instead, they were the grease to our machine.  It was a money making machine.  A machine of winners.  Of the great men and women of our generation.  Of everything that is good about western society.    And we are letting our generation down if we don't play.    Seriously.    I had a prof tear a strip off a kid for asking something along the lines of ""but what's wrong with working for a company that already exists and can pay a steady wage?""  The prof got started in on how our generation is listless coasters and just fall into things and accomplish little on our own.  He moved into how it's merely riding someone else's coattails and it's not really achieving anything for yourself.  The tl;dr of what was a fifteen minute in-class excoriation of a student who asked what I thought was a reasonable question was ""If you're not signing your own paycheques, you are a huge failure and are contributing nothing of note to society or it's progress.""    This particular rant pretty much sealed my withdrawal from the business aspect of my school.  If my very goals render me a huge failure in my profs' eyes, I'm not interested in what they have to say or in contributing to their employment at the university.    But off that somewhat-personal tangent, the culture of ""glory of the startup"" that Amy Hoy somewhat ineloquently complains about in her article certainly exists.  In the form she's complaining about.    Your rebuttal makes sense too - it's not that VC are or aren't a risk, it's not that people don't have the right and the opportunity to take that risk if they see it as a valid opportunity to make money, it's not like it's fair to expect a VC to fund you without seeing a profit in the long run.    But you're rebutting her thesis with something that doesn't actually address it.    The culture that she's complaining about exists, in my experience. The culture glosses over so much of what you rebutted her article with, that risks exist and that failures exist and that there are a lot of harsh realities associated with the startup world.  The culture does, indeed, glorify all the best parts of startup-dom and creates a toughness challenge that renders ""no, this may not be a good idea"" unfalsifiable because failure are personal while successes are cultural.   Successful startups and people who have done very well by them are held up as everything startups are supposed to be and look at how their hard work paid off - and if yours doesn't work, it is entirely that you didn't work hard enough.  Someone who has bought in wholesale holds that there are no ""bad"" startups - any startup can be successful, you just need to bust balls working harder if you fail.    Startups are akin to gambling.  They're not the roulette of ""it's all luck,"" but closer to five card stud - skill plays a lot of a role, but there's still luck involved.    Startup culture represents all this as far closer to Texas Hold 'Em, where luck in minimized, where skill and diligence play the greatest role.  It assumes that everyone going in already knows all the things you brought up in your rebuttal, without ever actually giving them that information.  It keeps pimping ""just work harder"" without really saying ""Hey, guys - check the odds you're playing with **and know when to hold and when to fold**."""


This is focused on communication rather than the decision process.  Communication is flat but decisions can follow a structure.    Many managers out there force employees to follow the structure.  Musk is right, that is self-serving.    This is an awesome memo.  I've worked in places that needed that memo printed on every door.


"We cannot know if you owe them anything. But at the least I would expect that they don't just say ""you owe us"" but ""we found out that we were supposed to pay you $X, but we paid you $Y which is more"", and then we can go from there.  There are things like ""we should have paid you $12.20 per hour for the last year, but we paid you $12.50 per hour"", where you can tell them that by paying you that rate, you assumed it was correct one, you wouldn't have worked for less, so they effectively gave you a raise. On the other hand, if they say ""you worked here for 38 hours a week, but we paid you for 40 hours a week"", and you did indeed work only 38 hours, then most likely they are correct."


Linksys Smart Wi-Fi routers can be easily setup through the setup wizard provided by the Linksys Company. This is designed for the ease of the users. If you still having issues or do not know how to setup the router using setup wizard. Get in touch for help.


"Possible but very unlikely. Money market funds invest in high grade liquid assets and the primary goal is not to lose money. I have not been able to find an example of a Vanguard money market fund ever ""breaking the buck"" and having the value of a share go below a dollar. It is possible that this could happen in the event of a large scale financial collapse, but even then I would call it possible rather than likely."


eSalesData can get sales teams and marketing departments directly in touch with the honchos that run the architecture industry. Our information banks are packed with contact information that pertains to everyone from the biggest to the tiniest of architecture establishments and will, without a doubt, help you reach your exact target market.


The product type and transaction direction are not linked.  When you short sell a stock, you are still dealing with shares of an equity security.  When you take delivery of a bond, you are buying that bond and holding a long position even though it's a debt security.


> a device with a microphone on all the time in their house  You mean like your phone? Which also has video, gps, your credit card info, personal identity, known contacts, etc? Yeah I'm sure Alexa is the tipping point.


People talking the impact of manufacturing costs on the final price are completely missing the point of how this industry works.  Nobody needs a goddamn mechanical movement to keep time. You can do a better job digitally for pennies.  These watches are status symbols. High prices are the *whole point*.


Yes traders, living or algorithmic, are the only direct factors that can cause a change in the price of a marketable item. Traders can be affected by news, broken exchanges ;), emotional cycles, lunar cycles, time the trader goes to lunch (or a power cycle if you are an algo running on that unfortunate OS), anything.


exactly...and this isn't even just theory...we have hard examples of higher tax rates NOT translating into higher tax receipts:  While we had crazy top income rates in the past per this: http://t-a-x.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/1.png  we saw that didn't translate at all into higher actual $ receive by the govt: https://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/taxrevenuepercentGDP.png


I thought it was interesting they would ignore it because it makes them look complicit. I doubt Republicans will agree to subpoena DB, so we'll never know. .   Also, could anyone explain the mirror trades a big more in depth?


Whenever an article like this pops up people love to point out the fact people may not have much in savings because savings accounts are effectively stagnant money. However, that many people with <$1,000 certainly means it's because they don't really have any money to begin with, and not that it's invested elsewhere, right?


Let's look at some of your options: In a savings account, your $40,000 might be earning maybe 0.5%, if you are lucky.  In a year, you'll have earned $200.  On the plus side, you'll have your $40,000 easily accessible to you to pay for moving, closing costs on your new house, etc. If you apply it to your mortgage, you are effectively saving the interest on the amount for the life of the loan.  Let's say that the interest rate on your mortgage is 4%.  If you were staying in the house long-term, this interest would be compounded, but since you are only going to be there for 1 year, this move will save you $1600 in interest this year, which means that when you sell the house and pay off this mortgage, you'll have $1600 extra in your pocket. You said that you don't like to dabble in stocks.  I wouldn't recommend investing in individual stocks anyway.  A stock mutual fund, however, is a great option for investing, but only as a long-term investment.  You should be able to beat your 4% mortgage, but only over the long term.  If you want to have the $40,000 available to you in a year, don't invest in a mutual fund now. I would lean toward option #2, applying the money to the mortgage.  However, there are some other considerations: Do you have any other debts, maybe a car loan, student loan, or a credit card balance?  If so, I would forget everything else and put everything toward one or more of these loans first. Do you have an emergency fund in place, or is this $40,000 all of the cash that you have available to you?  One rule of thumb is that you have 3 to 6 months of expenses set aside in a safe, easily accessible account ready to go if something comes up.   Are you saving for retirement?  If you don't already have retirement savings in place and are adding to it regularly, some of this cash would be a great start to a Roth IRA or something like that, invested in a stock mutual fund. If you are already debt free except for this mortgage, you might want to do some of each: Keep $10,000 in a savings account for an emergency fund (if you don't already have an emergency fund), put $5,000 in a Roth IRA (if you aren't already contributing a satisfactory amount to a retirement account), and apply the rest toward your mortgage.


Time value of money means it's a no brainer: if it doesn't cost you anything extra (ie. Interest) then you pay over time.  You must pay it. It is not optional. You won't be able to fight it and win. Someone paid taxes in your behalf and you are obligated to reimburse them. Not paying is a great way to trigger a foreclosure. You will be considered in default of your mortgage if you do not pay them.


"If the person has prepared (""put your affairs in order"") then they will have a will and an executor. And this executor will have a list of the life insurance policies and will contact the companies to arrange payouts to the beneficiaries. It's not really the beneficiary's job to do that. If the person hasn't made a list of their policies, but has a will and an executor, then the executor can try things like looking at recently paid bills (you're sending $100 a month to ""Friendly Life Insurance Company""? Bet it's a life insurance policy) or paperwork that is in the person's home or their safety deposit boxes. Even if you don't have the key to those boxes, a copy of the will and the death certificate will get the box drilled out for you. If you don't know what bank they might have SD boxes at, again your paperwork will get the manager to find out for you if there is a box at that particular branch, so a day spent visiting branches can be fruitful. (Something I know from personal experience with someone whose affairs were nowhere near in order.) Generally you find out you're a beneficiary of a will because the executor tells you. I suppose it's possible that a person might name you beneficiary of their life insurance without telling you or anyone else, and without writing a will, but it's pretty unlikely. If you're worried, I suggest you encourage your parents, grandparents, and other likely namers of you to write up some paperwork and keep it somewhere family is likely to find it. (Not hidden inside a book on a bookcase or in the back of the wool cupboard.)"


The real, short-term effect is that prices will go up a bit, have no effect on the amount of actual travel, and the government(s) that impose this tax will rake in more money to waste.  This is what the governments actually want, but CO2 emissions is a good way to sell it.  The long-term effect is that people will be just a bit more, on the margin, likely to avoid interacting with the European economy, which sucks for everyone.


If they bring cash, meet at your bank to verify. If they want to use cashiers check, meet them at their bank. Large amounts use wires directly to your acct and verify (not only received, but deposited) before handing over the title/keys.


As you said, the next generation will be cheaper and more efficient. Same for the generation after that. From a financial standpoint, there isn't a steadfast theory that supports when to buy the technology. It comes down to primarily personal issues.  As far as I know, Musk's claims about the cost were relating to a traditional slate roof, not a traditional asphalt shingle roof. I can't recall if he explicitly said one way or the other, but I have yet to see any math that supports a comparison to asphalt shingles. If you look at all of the demos and marketing material, it's comparisons to various styles of tile roofing, which is already more expensive than asphalt shingles.  Do you feel it's worth it to invest now, or do you think it would be more worth it to invest later when the costs are lower? A new roof will last 10-20 years (if not longer...I'm not a roof expert). Do you need a new roof yet? Are your electricity bills high enough that the cost of going solar will offset it enough? Can you sell unused power back to your power company? I could go on, but I think you get the point. It's entirely a personal decision, and not one that will have a definitive answer. If you keep waiting to make a purchase because you're worried that the next generation will be cheaper and more efficient, then you're never going to make the purchase.


I think people are tiring of the 200 TV mega chain bars and prefer something a bit smaller and locally owned. I know I do, and it seems the sales trends back that up. Locally owned non-chain restaurants (mom and pops) are doing well right now.


From your viewpoint you paying the dealer directly is better. You know that the check went to the dealer, and was used to purchase a car.  If you give the check to your friend they may say I can't find the car I want this week, so I will purchase it next week but first let me by groceries and a new suit. I will replace the funds after my next paycheck. Next thing you know they are still short of funds. This might not happen, but it could. From your friends viewpoint getting a check from you allows them to potentially keep your part of the transaction out of view of the dealer/lender. In a mortgage situation the lender will take a look at your bank account to make sure there isn't a hidden loan, but I am not sure they do when they are approving a car loan. What you want to avoid is being a co-signer for the loan. As a co-signer you will be responsible for all payments; and missed payments will hurt your credit score.


"One thing I would like to clear up here is that Black Scholes is just a model that makes some assumptions about the dynamics of the underlying + a few other things and with some rather complicated math, out pops the Black Scholes formula. Black Scholes gives you the ""real"" price under the assumptions of the model. Your definition of what a ""real"" price entails will depend on what assumptions you make. With that being said, Black Scholes is popular for pricing European options because of the simplicity and speed of using an analytic formula as opposed to having a more complex model that can only be evaluated using a numerical method, as DumbCoder mentioned (should note that, for many other types of derivative contracts, e.g. American or Bermudan style exercise, the Black Scholes analytic formula is not appropriate). The other important thing to note here is that the market does not necessarily need to agree with the assumptions made in the Black Scholes model (and they most certainly do not) to use it. If you look at implied vols for a set of options which have the same expiration but differing strike prices, you may find that the implied vols for each contract differ and this information is telling you to what degree the traders in the market for those contracts disagree with the lognormal distribution assumption made by Black Scholes. Implied vol is generally the thing to look at when determining cheapness/expensiveness of an option contract. With all that being said, what I'm assuming you are interested in is either called a ""delta-gamma approximation"" or more generally ""Greek/sensitivities based profit and loss attribution"" (in case you wanted to Google some more about it). Here is an example that is relevant to your question. Let's say we had the following European call contract: Popping this in to BS formula gives you a premium of $4.01, delta of 0.3891 and gamma of 0.0217. Let's say you bought it, and the price of the stock immediately moves to 55 and nothing else changes, re-evaluating with the BS formula gives ~6.23. Whereas using a delta-gamma approximation gives: The actual math doesn't work out exactly and that is due to the fact that there are higher order Greeks than gamma but as you can see here clearly they do not have much of an impact considering a 10% move in the underlying is almost entirely explained by delta and gamma."


> Honestly, I think this open access to the stock market whereby anyone can be a 'trader' is a terrible thing.  Really? Could you please elaborate? Do you think it's a flaw in the stock market system itself or in peoples' financial education?


The results are generated by our one-of-a-kind system within seconds of submitting the completed online questionnaire. These results are then delivered to the company representative’s inbox so that they can be distributed freely for the company’s decision makers to peruse and act upon.


No, remittances are a current account.   Capital/financial accounts are “investments”. Current account is transactional. So if I take out a loan from a Spanish bank in Latin America, the principal of the loan is recorded as a capital flow but the interest income is a current account flow.   If I make a dollar here and send it to a family member in Mexico, that’s considered a current account flow.   The BPM6 manual from the IMF has the updated information on BOP accounting. It was updated in like 2013, I believe. It’s quite technical and dull but if you’re really curious it’s a 300+ page guide on the intricate details.


I understand you are trying to remain neutral here, as any cautious person should be. However, facts are facts, and to falsely blame both sides when it is quantifiably provable that one side is primarily to blame only punishes the less guilty party and rewards the party creating the worst situation.  Yes, there is a bit of momentum that carries over from one president to the next. For instance, Clinton left a booming economy and a budgetary surplus to W Bush, who left the Great Recession, 2 unfunded wars, and massive tax cuts (mostly for the rich) to Obama.   Overall however, the article (and [the study it cites](http://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/Presidents_Blinder_Watson_July2014.pdf)) actually address this point. It is important to recognize that.


Dwolla looks to be a great option. But it requires users to have an account there (Free to sign up). And there rates are absolutely amazing.  Free for transactions under $10 $0.25 to receive money on transactions over $10


You need receipts only if you claim deductions in the itemized deductions section based on them. You itemize deductions only if your claims exceed the standard deduction (which for a single person was $5,800 last year). Even then, you need receipts for everything only if you claim sales tax as the deduction (you have to buy really a lot to pass $5K with sales tax...). I would expect people to pay more in state income taxes than sales taxes (you can claim either this or that, not both). For food - there are no taxes (at least here in California), so nothing to deduct anyway. In any case, you can always scan your receipts and keep them in the computer, for just in case, but IMHO it's waste of time, pixels and gigabytes. Here's a question which deals with the same issue, read the answers there as well.


No, it makes no sense.   The US national debt is different from other debt on TWO KEY WAYS : 1.) The national debt is not money we owe to our government IT IS MONEY WE OWE TO OURSELVES. 2.) If the GNP of our country can grow at a rate equal to or greater than the national debt interest, then the figure of national debt has no bearing on anything. So a more philanthropic endeavor would be to help grow the economy.


solidcopy, my point was that during the 4 transitions listed above, people had the same fears as you do today. What would all the horse workers do? What would the whaling industry do? That would the secretarial industry do? What would the switch board operating industry do? Society as a whole has benefitted.    1. With cars, you can now travel faster and longer than a horse and its much cleaner.   2. With incandescent light bulbs, you now have better lighting and you don't have to kill whales for it.   3. With computers, you have the ability to communicate with people from all over the world and our productivity, entertainment, and lives are better than ever.   4. With automatic telephone switch boxes, long distance calls now cost nothing when we used to be charged upwards of 10 dollars a minute.    All those people eventually found other jobs. There isn't a society of unemployed horse people, whaling people, secretaries, or switch box operators. They were all able to transition.


So there's no extra money from your employer if you contribute extra to your 403(b)? My answer will be a bit different than most others, but I'd recommend not paying another dime into your 403(b).  Pay your taxes now, and be done with them. Retirement saving does not need to be in a tax-deferred or tax-free account. Rent vs. buy is another question.  Buy from a distressed seller at a heavy discount.  You have time.  Don't panic or rush in.


This looks pretty good. Do you use their payroll software at all? Currently I am using Gusto and it is pretty automatic with some nice integrations (time tracking software, etc.).  It sounds like if you can accomplish everything with Wave's platform it is a really good option.


Look at Price/book value and there are more than a few stocks that may have a P/B under 1 so this does happen. There are at least a couple of other factors you aren't considering here: Current liabilities - How much money is the company losing each quarter that may cause it to sell repeatedly. If the company is burning through $100 million/quarter that asset is only going to keep the lights on for another 2.5 years so consider what assumptions you make about the company's cash flow here. The asset itself - Is the price really fixed or could it be flexible? Could the asset seen as being worth $1 billion today be worth much less in another year or two? As an example, suppose the asset was a building and then real estate values drop by 40% in that area. Now, what was worth $1 billion may now be worth only $600 million. As something of a final note, you don't state where the $100 million went that the company received as if that was burned for operations, now the company's position on the asset is $900 million as it only holds a 90% stake though I'd argue my 2 previous points are really worth noting. The Following 6 Stocks Are Trading At or Below 0.5 x Book Value–Sep 2013 has a half dozen examples of how this is possible. If the $100 million was used to pay off debt, then the company doesn't have that cash and thus its assets are reduced by the cash that is gone. Depending on what the plant is producing the value may or may not stay where it is. If you want an example to consider, how would you price automobile plants these days? If the company experiences a reduction in demand, the plant may have to be sold off at a reduced price for a cynic's view here.


"What do you think Keynes recommended?  He's got a bad rap in the US, I think unfairly.  Also, you seem to be implying that Keynes was part of the Chicago School, which given the fact that the Chicago School has a history of rejecting Keynesianism and that it postdates Keynes' death seems a little unfair.  Here's a quote from Keynes that often surprises Keynes-haters:  > By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some.... > >Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ""profiteers,"" who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery. > > *The Economic Consequences of the Peace*"


A parking lot is someone else's property. They get to decide whether you can park a mobile home or equivalent, and can demand you remove it at any time. Similarly, permission to charge an electric car us not permission to use power for anything else.  And health codes will be applied to your housing, as will zoning laws, as will... Without permission you are just begging for trouble. With permission (which may involve paying rent for the space and paying for utilities) you're still likely to find this much more complicated, difficult, and expensive than it appears.