I would like to see what they propose as far as taxing dividends, capital gains, inheritance and other sources of financial gain that the wealthy seem to rely on far more than this 'income' thing. Income is for us hoi polloi.


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/talkbusiness] [How much of an equity gap should Co-founders starting at same time have? (If any gap at all).](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/7897ih/how_much_of_an_equity_gap_should_cofounders/)  [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*  [](#bot)


That is certainly true, but I think those innocent people have to take that risk if they are going to work for immoral employers.  Your objection holds for just about every single boycott that has ever happened, every single trade embargo, every single sanction against a nation, and so on.


From my 2003 Colorado experience here:  Earnest money shows that your offer is legit and is held until escrow as you recall correctly.  I assumed you meant escrow money, because I cannot think of any other non-refundable deposit you'd put on a home.  Perhaps for a new home or a manufactured home?


"The problems of the government ""watching your money"" only apply to paper cash money which has pictures of presidents on it, and it's for anti-laundering/anti-crime/drug reasons. Nobody cares who you write a $100,000 check to.  The paper trail is there, but nobody ever looks at it. No reputable money management firm would even want cash. The apocryphal ""briefcase of money"" would be a nightmare for them. They'd need to count it in front of you, guard it, call in a security firm to transport it, and then make the same exact justifications to the government that you have to make, which means, chain of custody, they'd have to give you the same grilling your bank just gave you!  They would strongly discourage cash for those reasons.   So the crook wants the paper bag o' cash because he plans to do none of those things; he plans to take it from you and doesn't want a paper trail.  Often when the financial industry uses the term ""cash"", it's a slang for checks, money orders, cashiers checks, savings bonds, and other things that instantly map to denominated US dollars or a foreign currency routinely traded like yen, pound, franc, or Euro.  The opposite of ""cash"" would be stocks, bonds, real estate holdings, patents, heirlooms, debt, vehicles, etc. where they must be sold to make them into USD.   Just as a warning: most ""financial management firms"" rip you off; they pretend to be cheap or free, but actually earn their pay through deception: they talk you into fairly mediocre investments which pay them a huge sales commission. Sure, your money goes up, but not half as much as it should've, and they pocketed the difference.  They also recommend products which are unnecessarily complex, as a snow job.  Investment is simpler than that."


Oh, come on, man! The president was a Constitutional ~~Scholar~~ tutor.  Good thing he proved himself with the health care law he allowed Pelosi and Reid to craft so it could get tossed by the Supreme Court and he could avoid blame once again.


Hah, good luck getting those kind of terms. There's always another fresh-faced new grad with dollar signs in his eyes who doesn't know enough to ask about outstanding shares, dilution, or preferences. Very few startups are looking for penny-ante 'investor' employees who can only put <$100k. That's what co-founders are for. Actual employees are lucky if they can properly value their options, let alone control how much it ends up being worth in the end.


Automatic exercisions can be extremely risky, and the closer to the money the options are, the riskier their exercisions are. It is unlikely that the entire account has negative equity since a responsible broker would forcibly close all positions and pursue the holder for the balance of the debt to reduce solvency risk.  Since the broker has automatically exercised a near the money option, it's solvency policy is already risky. Regardless of whether there is negative equity or simply a liability, the least risky course of action is to sell enough of the underlying to satisfy the loan by closing all other positions if necessary as soon as possible. If there is a negative equity after trying to satisfy the loan, the account will need to be funded for the balance of the loan to pay for purchases of the underlying to fully satisfy the loan. Since the underlying can move in such a way to cause this loan to increase, the account should also be funded as soon as possible if necessary. Accounts after exercise For deep in the money exercised options, a call turns into a long underlying on margin while a put turns into a short underlying. The next decision should be based upon risk and position selection.  First, if the position is no longer attractive, it should be closed.  Since it's deep in the money, simply closing out the exposure to the underlying should extinguish the liability as cash is not marginable, so the cash received from the closing out of the position will repay any margin debt. If the position in the underlying is still attractive then the liability should be managed according to one's liability policy and of course to margin limits. In a margin account, closing the underlying positions on the same day as the exercise will only be considered a day trade.  If the positions are closed on any business day after the exercision, there will be no penalty or restriction. Cash option accounts While this is possible, many brokers force an upgrade to a margin account, and the ShareBuilder Options Account Agreement seems ambiguous, but their options trading page implies the upgrade. In a cash account, equities are not marginable, so any margin will trigger a margin call.  If the margin debt did not trigger a margin call then it is unlikely that it is a cash account as margin for any security in a cash account except for certain options trades is 100%. Equities are convertible to cash presumably at the bid, so during a call exercise, the exercisor or exercisor's broker pays cash for the underlying at the exercise price, and any deficit is financed with debt, thus underlying can be sold to satisfy that debt or be sold for cash as one normally would. To preempt a forced exercise as a call holder, one could short the underlying, but this will be more expensive, and since probably no broker allows shorting against the box because of its intended use to circumvent capital gains taxes by fraud.  The least expensive way to trade out of options positions is to close them themselves rather than take delivery.


If you have multiple accounts, you have to empty them all before you can deduct any losses. Your loss is not a capital loss, its a deduction. It is calculated based on the total amount you have withdrawn from all your Roth IRA's, minus the total basis. It will be subject to the 2% AGI treshhold (i.e.: if your AGI is > 100K, none of it is deductible, and you have to itemize to get it). Bottom line - think twice. Summarizing the discussion in comments: If you have a very low AGI, I would guess that your tax liability is pretty low as well. Even if you deduct the whole $2K, and all of it is above the other deductions you have (which in turn is above the standard deduction of almost $6K), you save say $300 if you're in 15% tax bracket. That's the most savings you have. However I'm assuming something here: I'm assuming that you're itemizing your deductions already and they're above the standard deduction. This is very unlikely, with such a low income. You don't have state taxes to deduct, you probably don't spend a lot to deduct sales taxes, and I would argue that with the low AGI you probably don't own property, and if you do - you don't have a mortgage with a significant interest on it. You can be in 15% bracket with AGI between (roughly) $8K and $35K, i.e.: you cannot deduct between $160 and $750 of the $2K, so it's already less than the maximum $300. If your AGI is $8K, the deduction doesn't matter, EIC might cover all of your taxes anyway. If your AGI is $30K, you can deduct only $1400, so if you're in the 15% bracket - you saved $210. That, again, assuming it's above your other deductions, which in turn are already above the standard deduction. Highly unlikely. As I said in the comments - I do not think you can realistically save on taxes because of this loss in such a manner.


Think about it this way. If the strike price is $200, and cost of the option is $0.05. $200 + $0.05 is $200.05. That does not mean that the price of buying the option is more. Neither is the option writer going to pay you $70 to buy the contract.  When you are buying options, you can only have a limited downside and that is the premium that you pay for it.  In case of the $115 contract, your total loss could be a maximum of $19.3.  In case of the $130 contract, your total loss could be a maximum of $9.3. This is due to the fact that the chances of AAPL going to hit $130 is less than the chance of AAPL hitting $115. Therefore, option writers offer the lower probability contracts at a lower price.  Long story short, you do not pay for the Strike price. You only pay the premium and that premium keeps getting lower with and increase in Strike price(Or decrease if it is a put option). Strike price is just a number that you expect the stock or index to break. I would suggest you to read up a little more on pricing from here


Yes, the Fed has made a point of buying up longer-term bonds to push down rates on that part of the curve.  That's not an indication that they're having problems selling Treasuries, in fact far from it.  But apparently there's no demand for Treasuries and Bloomberg is just making up lies to help get Obama reelected?  >Investors are plowing into Treasuries (USB2YBC) at a record pace as the supply of the world’s safest securities dwindles, ensuring yields will stay low regardless of whether the Federal Reserve  undertakes more stimulus to fight unemployment. Buyers bid $3.19 for each dollar of the $538 billion in notes and bonds sold this year, the most since the government began releasing the data in 1992 and on pace to beat the high of $3.04 in 2011. The net amount of Treasuries available will decline by 30 percent once proceeds from maturing securities are reinvested, according to data from CRT Capital Group LLC.  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-09/record-treasury-demand-keeps-yields-low-as-supply-shrinks.html


Having freelanced myself in South America I could give you a sound advice BUT you would first need to answer some questions.  1) How long do you plan on being in South America? At the end of 2017 will you be back in Ireland or still being in South America? In other words was is your country of residence for tax purposes on Dec. 31 2017 ? That is the key element to consider. Link 2) In latin America you can freelance with a legal working permit BUT in all these countries more than 50% of the economy is under the table. In all these countries expatriate work under the table. The question you need to answer is then: Who will be your employer, a company or the owner of this company? Working undeclared in Latin America is very common, what are the risks? The legal risks depend on the country and their laws. In which country will you travel? How long will you stay there? You will have a tourist visa or a working visa? 3) An important detail, your health. Check how long you can be out of Ireland without loosing your social health benefits in Ireland? In my country, if I am abroad for more than 180 days, I loose my national health coverage. Evaluate the amount of days you will be out of Ireland and where you want to be on Dec. 31th. That could change a lot of things in your life.


You need a find a financial planner that will create a plan for you for a fixed fee. They will help you determine the best course of action taking into account the pension, the 403B, and any other sources of income you have, or will have. They will know how to address the risk that you have that that particular pension.  They will help you determine how to invest your money to produce the type of retirement you want, while making sure you are likely to not outlive your portfolio.


I noticed that as well. It's practically a direct copy paste from the post, even the intro making it sound as if the content was written specifically for medium.    Are both articles written by the same authors? If not this seems somewhat unethical.


"The answer comes down to what you expect the future tax rate to be. If that tax rate is the same (25℅ marginal here), then it is a wash. Yes you will pay more taxes when you pull the money out with a traditional, but it is the same fraction of the original contribution as when you pay the tax now to convert to Roth (all you did was invest uncle Sam's money well). So if you expect to pay higher tax rate on retirement then a ROTH could be beneficial. Also a ROTH does not have a required minimum distribution (but Congress can change that and it has been proposed). The argument for leaving the money in the traditional is that you expect a lower tax rate on retirement. Or you don't trust that a future Congress won't decide to add a ""nominal"" tax to ROTH distributions.  Now if there is a year where your tax rate is very low, then a partial conversion may well be worth it. Also if you your balance is insufficient for a good portfolio and future contributions will be to a ROTH due to income limits, then that would also be a very good reason to convert."


"This is a pretty shit article I didn't know people got business advice from Slate.com's business blog. Jesus.  Everyone in the industry knows that AMC is sour about this because they are trying to do their own thing. They tried it before with Moveipass and probably weren't happy with the split, and now they're not happy because this is undercutting what they were planing. They don't actually have a real reason to be upset about this and are going to have a tough time getting out of it.  The article also doesn't mention Regal and Cinemark which are both excited about Moviepass and (I have heard) have expressed willingness to potentially share incremental concession revenue. These guys make 90 cents on the dollar on concessions, so I don't think they give a shit who is lining their customers up as long as they're there.  Also if you don't see the obvious acquisition strategy here then you should probably stick to whatever it is that Slate.com regularly covers.....looks like today's headline is ""Who Won the Eclipse on the Internet""."


There is no way in 5 years or even 10 years a computer can make a made-to-order burger in any way that is more cost-effective than paying a person 12 bucks an hour.   No way no how.  Now, there may be some gimmick restaurant that figures it out, but in a world with an oversupply of unskilled labor, it will never make economic sense.


">""Frequently you’ll see that there’s really no future for the business beyond the selling season,” Albergotti said. “Lenders want to liquidate inventory and get as much cash as they can to sell the company and move on.”  The last paragraph of the article really echoes your sentiment. With the exception of a few brands that could be ""saved"" - whether it is due to their strong customer base or a maneuverable capital structure / balance sheet - there is a lot to be concerned about  when it comes to these traditional retailers."


Royal white Marmo Pvt Ltd is topmost Marble Manufacturer, Exporters and and supplier of several types and quality of Indian Marbles. We have high quality and most demanding Indian marbles like Agaria white, Dharmata white, Vanni marble, Talai marble etc. Quality is the main thing of our management. We have succeeded to win the trust and confidence of our clients by providing best quality products.http://royalwhitemarmostone.in/index.php#Indian-Marble-Quality


"You're not focusing in the right place and neither is anyone else on this thread because this isn't about the guy owning you money... This is about you not having enough money to pay your rent.  If rent wasn't due and the utility bills weren't piling up, you wouldn't be trying to justify taking money out of someone else's account. So let's triage this. Your #1 problem isn't hunting down Dr. Deadbeat's wallet. So put a pin in that for now and get to the real deal.  Getting rent paid. Right? OK, you said he called ""regarding a business I have"".  It's great that you have your own business.  Are you also employed elsewhere?  If you are, then you really should simply go to your employer and tell them you are in financial distress.  Tell them that right now you can't cover your rent or bills and you want to know if they can help, i.e. give you an advance from your paycheck, do a withdrawal/loan from a retirement savings that's in your employee benefits package, etc...  They will HELP YOU because it's in their best interest as much as it is in yours. Foregoing that, consider these thoughts... If you were to go your grandparents telling them what you told all of us here, and ask them the same ""do you think it's ok to..."", they would say something close to ""Absolutely DO NOT touch someone else bank account EVER! It doesn't matter what information you have, how you got it, or what you think they owe you. Do NOT touch it.  There's a legal system that will help you get it from them if they truly do owe it to you.""   I guarantee you this, withdrawing funds from an account on which you are NOT an authorized signatory is both financial theft as well as identity theft. Bonus if you do it on a computer, because you'd then be facing criminal charges that go beyond your specific legal district, i.e. you'd face criminal charges on a national level. If convicted, odds are you'd be sentenced within the penal guidelines of the Netherlands 1983 Financial Penalties Act (FPA). Ergo, you would have much much much less money in the very near future, which would feel like an eternal walk through the Hell of the court system.  Ultimately, over your lifetime you would be exponentially poorer than you may think you are now.  I strongly urge you to rebrand this ""financial loss"" as ""Tuition at the School of Hard Knocks"". There's one last thing... the train jumps the tracks for me during your story... This guy called you? Right?...  (raised eyebrow) What kind of business do you ""have""?  The sense of desperation and naiveté in your urgent need for money to pay rent. The fact that you are accepting payment for services by conducting a  bank transfer specifically from your clients account directly toward your own utility bills is a big red flag. Bypassing business accounting and using revenue for personal finances isn't legitimate business practices. Plus you are doing it by using the bank information of brand new client who is a TOTAL stranger.  Now consider fact that this total stranger was so exceedingly generous to someone from whom he wanted personal services to be rendered. Those all tell me that he's doing something he wants the other person to do for him and he doesn't want anyone else to know.  The fact that he's being so benevolent like a 'sugar daddy' tells me that he feels guilty for having someone do what he's asking them to do.  Perceived financial superiority is the smoothest of smooth power tools that predators and abusers have in their bag.  For instance, an outlandish financial promise is probably the easiest way to target someone who is vulnerable; and then seduce them into being their victim.  Redirecting your focus on how much better life will be once your problem is solved by this cash rather than focusing on the fact that they're taking advantage of you.  Offering to pay rates that are dramatically excessive is a way of buying a clean conscious, because he's doing something that will ""rescue you"" from a crisis. The final nail in the coffin for me was that he left so abruptly and your implied instinct suggesting his reason was a lie.  It sounds like he got scared or ashamed of his actions and ran out.  It paints a picture that this was sex-for-money Good luck to you."


Basically, yes. That doesn't mean that it's easy to do. The government provides a dividend tax credit since an individual takes on more risk to invest in dividend-paying corporations rather than trading their human capital for an income. Thus, for the most part, $1 earned from dividends is taxed much less than $1 earned from income or interest. Finally, note that foreign dividends are not eligible for the dividend tax credit, and are not preferentially taxed.


One of my friend is sending 100000 pounds to India, Although you haven't asked, this is a large amount of funds and depending on why it is, there could be taxes to you or lot of paperwork. He is asking for RIB and IBAN and I am not aware of it. India does not have IBAN. IBAN is mostly in Europe, Australia and New Zealand. You would need to give Bank Account Number and SWIFT BIC. The details can be found here. Best talk to your Branch to understand.


The details of credit score calculation tend to change periodically, but the fundamentals are mostly consistent.  Pay your bills, keep your average account age high, overpay your credit card minimums, and keep your overall debt low.  And do soft pulls on your credit report to see what's happening. First, the simplest route: pay all your bills early or on time.  Automatic deduction may be useful in this regard, especially for bills with predictable amounts.  A corollary to this tip is to never leave an unpaid bill.  What often happens to young people is in the course of moving around they leave the final bill unpaid and it gets reported to collections.  Make sure you follow up online with all bills, even after canceling the service. Second, average account age and oldest account age matter.  Open an account like a credit card and never close it, so you'll have an older account (hopefully a zero-fee card).  Try to keep other accounts open rather than closing them (no need to cancel a zero-fee credit card) so your average account age stays higher.  A card that works on internal systems (like a gift card) is not going to show up on a credit report; a card that works like any VISA/MC is likely going to show up.  The rule of thumb is if they need your SSN to run a credit check for the application, then the card will appear on a credit report.  You can pull your credit report to find out if the card is listed (you may have to allow time for lag before the card appears, but I'm not sure how long that might be).   Third, a tip for extra credit score is to pay more than the minimum required on credit card bills.  You can achieve this by either using your credit card at least once a month or by leaving a small hanging balance each month so there's always something to overpay next month.  Credit card reporting will be either: unpaid, underpaid, minimum paid, or overpaid.  Minimum payment helps your score and overpayment helps more.  If you can use your credit card every month, that will give you something to overpay every month.  Otherwise, you can leave a small debt left on the card but still pay over the monthly minimum.  However, your total debt load, especially debt carried on your cards, counts against your score; aim for less than 10% of your limit. Finally, of course, is to pull your credit report periodically.  You need to know what others are seeing.  Since debt load utilization matters, make sure the reported card maximum is correct on your credit report.  Talk to your bank or account issuer if the limit is wrong.  If a collection appears, then you need to handle it.  Often you can negotiate with the collector, but be careful to negotiate how they will report the resolution.  You want them to agree to remove any negative information (either in exchange for payment or because of a mistake).  Failing that, you want them to mark it paid in full or satisfied in full; letting them notate your score that you only partially paid is what you want to avoid, since it most signals someone with cash flow problems and credit issues.  They control their reporting to credit bureaus, so if the person on the phone demurs, ask to speak to their supervisor or someone with negotiating authority.  Try to get any agreements in writing. Remember that your total debt load is a factor in your credit score.  Home loans and student loans do affect credit score.  If you take on a smaller home loan, then it will affect your credit less harshly (and leave you with smaller monthly payments).


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/08/19/542436391/how-to-buy-a-goat-when-you-re-ultra-poor-join-a-merry-go-round) reduced by 94%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Basic Income Experiment In Kenya Prompts A Boom In Savings Clubs : Goats and Soda Skeptics say if you hand cash to the impoverished, they&#039;ll mismanage it.  > For poor people in Kenya who don&#039;t have access to banks and who worry about stowing their cash under a mattress, this type of rotating savings club is often the main way to accumulate money.  > So even people who don&#039;t have enough to eat properly are constantly setting aside teeny amounts through their savings clubs so as to build them into a larger chunk.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6uvgx6/basic_income_experiment_in_kenya_prompts_a_boom/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~194986 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*: **people**^#1 **save**^#2 **Merry-go-round**^#3 **poor**^#4 **village**^#5"


At the time of writing, the Canadian dollar is worth roughly $0.75 U.S. Now, it's not possible for you to accurately predict what it'll be worth in, say, ten years. Maybe it'll be worth $0.50 U.S. Maybe $0.67. Maybe $1.00. Additionally, you can't know in advance if the Canadian economy will grow faster than the U.S., or slower, or by how much. Let's say you don't want to make a prediction. You just want to invest 50% of your money in Canadian stocks, 50% in U.S. Great. Do that, and don't worry about the current interest rates. Let's say that you do want to make a prediction. You are firmly of the belief that the Canadian dollar will be worth $1.00 U.S. dollar in approximately ten years. And furthermore, the Canadian economy and the U.S. economy will grow at roughly equal rates, in their local currencies. Great. You should put more of your money in Canadian stocks. Let's say that you want to make a prediction. The Canadian economy is tanking. It's going to be worth $0.67 or less in ten years. And on top of that, the U.S. economy is primed for growth. It's going to grow far faster than the Canadian economy. In that case, you want to invest mostly in U.S. stocks. Let's get more complicated. You think the Canadian dollar is going to recover, but boy, maple syrup futures are in trouble. The next decade is all about Micky Mouse. Now what should you do? Well, it depends on how fast the U.S. economy expands, compared to the currency difference. What should you do? I can't tell you that because I can't predict the future. What did I do? I bought 25% Canadian stocks, 25% U.S. stocks, 25% world stocks, and 25% Canadian bonds (roughly), back when the Canadian dollar was stronger. What am I doing now? Same thing. I don't know enough about the respective economies to judge. If I had a firm opinion, though, I'd certainly be happy to change my percentages a little. Not a lot, but a little.


It's illegal and you can go to jail because it exploits the small companies and their investors who believe in the company.


"> That is in large part do to insane healthcare costs passed on to the consumers by the aca. Healthcare spending has increased on average 1.5% annually since 2009 where as the highest growth in spending from 1991 until 2006 was 1.3%  Health Care costs have actually been on the rise for decades now. It was only ""noticed"" by the majority party (i.e. the GOP who had held the majority for 16 of the years prior to 2009) when the ACA was enacted. Suddenly, health care costs ""started"" to ""explode"". The truth is that health care costs have been on a steady rise. In the time period from 1972 to 1982, costs rose on [average 14% per year](https://www.thebalance.com/causes-of-rising-healthcare-costs-4064878). Keep in mind, this was prior to the expansion of Medicare. From 1983-1992 costs grew at a rate of 9% per year - 3 times faster than inflation. From 1993 to 2010, cost rose at a rate of 6.4% per year. The ACA of course was passed in 2009, but didn't start to take effect until 2011. Since 2010, health care costs has risen about 4% per year. That is a 2% drop in a short amount of time, compared to the previous years. However, the numbers are already so big, just like the national debt, that the GOP (who had as much part to play in the health care costs as they did in the debt) had tons of numbers they could use to make it seem like ""health care costs have exploded"".   In reality, what happened is that people who never had health insurance before were forced to get it, and started to realize how expensive it is when it actually covers what it was intended to cover - preventative care as well as emergent care. The GOP has been on a steady march to undermine the new law as much as possible since it passed, because it made some of their biggest donors (HMOs, and Health Care Insurance providers) uncomfortable the fact that they HAD to share their cost information, and that the health care exchange required them to do a line item by line item comparison with other companies out there.   So, here we are. The ACA is going to be cut, and millions of people are going back to be uninsured or underinsured. What you are going to see is the rate of costs growth start to increase again after decades of slowly decreasing rates. Why? Because of the renewed ability of insurance providers to hide the costs, to hide costs increases. It will also cause hospitals to greatly overcharge the uninsured, as they were doing before, but there will be many more of them. The goal being, that the uninsured are unlikely to pay for the (very large) medical bills. So, knowing this, hospitals artificially inflate the bill in the hopes of getting a larger portion of that unpaid bill liquidated through Medicare.   Uninsured populations also lead to more unhealthy people. You would think that not having health insurance would make people want to remain more healthy. However, studies show [the opposite to be true](http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2011/07/does_health_coverage_make_people_healthier.html). In actuality, people stress more about their health, and avoid periodic checkups. Both of which lead to bad health results.   Trying to blame the cost increases in health care on government ""meddling"", or say it is a problem brought on by the ACA is weird since there are [so many examples of government provided](https://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthcare-ranked-dead-last-compared-to-10-other-countries/#175cf39e576f) health care programs out there which are so much more efficient, less costly, and have resulted in much healthier populations.   > I dont have health insurance and an ER visit with xrays costs me less out of pocket than 90% of the country why is that?   I am going to call BS. Number one, that is a huge claim to make without supporting evidence. Number two, you would have to demonstrate how much that same visit would cost to those *with* health insurance.   > Do you think it has to do with the fact that with the aca hospitals know they are getting paid with 0 questioning on pricing so charge whatever they want and with me they think ""shit this guy might not ever pay us lets just give him a decent price and get some money from him because all we can do is send his bill to collections""   Actually, no. The [exact *opposite* happens](http://www.alternet.org/story/16466/why_hospitals_overcharge_the_uninsured). They now, because you are uninsured, that you are unlikely to pay. So they *overcharge* you for the same services because they know that they will only be reimbursed a percentage of the costs if it goes to Medicare for non-payment.   > The swiss do everything better,  You keep referring back to Switzerland. Don't get me wrong, they are a very good country, and have the number 2 ranked health care system in the world. However, I don't think they are the low tax haven that you think they are. They have an [average corporate tax rate of 17.2%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates), whereas the US has it at 32%. Their highest income tax bracket is 13.2, whereas the US is at 39%. Their sales tax goes at high as 8%, where ours go as high as 11%. Their [average effective tax](http://www.economist.com/node/14340551) rate is around 11%, while ours is around 18%. Including Social Security puts Switzerland at 17%, and the US at 24%.   So, they are definitely a lower tax rate country, but in no way are they a no tax rate country. Then again, Switzerland has no military to speak of, while the US spends more on military then the next 7 countries put together.   > This is the dumbest statement youve made this entire time.   I have been very patient. I have stuck with this conversation, in spite of the put downs and snide remarks. I have jabbed a little too, but you can go back to most of my remarks and see that I have been more congenial. I have given you some leeway because of your age, and I am almost twice as old as you.   So, you gave me your background. I will give you mine. I am closer to 50 then I would prefer. I left the house at 17, enlisted in the Navy, and spent the next 15 years serving in the military. I ended my career in a select community. I have been out for ten years this July. I am now owner of a company that does R&D and works with the government. A lot of my knowledge about inventions, and how commercial works with government comes from my own personal experiences. I have seen the best, and worst, of government - as well as seen the same on the commercial side of the house. Anyone comes to this game with the presupposition that government can't get anything done as well as commercial quickly learns that is not true. Likeways, anyone comes thinking that commercial equals efficient learns *that* is not always true too.   > Take apple for instance where is all the government funding they recieved to be one of the most innovative companies in human history or microsoft?  As I said previously, that you thought was a ""dumb"" comment - commercial is very good at taking existing systems and finding ways to make them efficient and better. Apple and Microsoft is the same. They both made their mark in history by expanding on and creating innovation with existing technologies that had their foundation in government R&D projects - including the [digital computer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vincent_Atanasoff), as well as computers like the [ENIAC and the UNIVAC](https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000984.htm), and the advancements into [microsecond multitasking](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/06/did-ibm-invent-the-personal-computer-answer-no/) which lead to the first efficient and cost effective personal computers. The touchscreen was actually first invented in by [engineers at CERN](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History). And of course, we know that the [internet started as a government funded project called ARPANET](http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/who-invented-the-internet).   I think you would be surprised how much many if not most of the things we take for granted today have a foundation in government funded R&D. My company is a commercial company, and we do a great job creating our own products and innovation. And yet still, our best selling product is a design of a national laboratory that we license from them. Commercial industry is great at manufacturing and producing, something the government is not as good at, and so often they will license out designs for production to companies like ours. Some of the biggest commercial companies out there do the same."


You definitely used to be able to (see this BBC article from 2006), and I would imagine that you still can, although I also imagine that it would be more difficult than it used to be, as with all mortgages. EDIT: And here's an article from last year about Chinese banks targeting the UK mortgage market.


A fully automated website that literally does the selling for you.  Receive money daily paid directly to you PayPal account!  100% commissions from one incredible package... for just $6.99!  No Web Hosting Or Domain Fees!!   For all the details, visit website at:  http://victor699.beep.com/


"If you think about it, it's really all one big pot of money.  The idea behind an ""emergency fund"" is that you want to make sure your financial life has stability: it's not going to be suddenly driven into the red, below $0.  As long as that doesn't happen, you can figure out how to live your life as you want. The reason we separate out an ""emergency fund"" is to simplify decision making.  In theory, every single purchase you make should include a consideration of how it destabilizes you.  Every $100 you spend on groceries is $100 you won't be able to bring to bear if you get fired or have a major accident.  In practice, this would be a crippling way of thinking about things.  You don't know what emergencies can hit you, nor when they will hit.  That's why they're ""emergencies.""  If you had to think about them all the time, it'd be horrible!  You would end up simply not thinking about it (like most people), and then the emergency hits when you don't have enough cash to stay solvent. The purpose of an ""emergency fund"" is to help make these decisions easier.  If you have money set aside for ""emergencies"" that you only have to think about every now and then, you can make the decisions in the rest of your financial life without too much concern for them.  You don't have to worry about that $100 in groceries because you are confident that if an emergency hits, that $100 won't be the straw that broke the camel's back because you have reserves to draw on. So you should define an ""emergency fund"" in a way which is most helpful for you to remain stable and solvent without having to fret about it too much.  For most people, the criteria for tapping that fund is very high, because the goal is to not have to think about it all that much.  If you wanted to, you could feel free to lump those ""medium predictability"" items into the emergency fund, but it just means you have to spend more time and effort thinking about the state of the fund.  Every medium predictability purchase has to come with the thought process ""what is the state of the emergency fund? Could this purchase meaningfully destabilize my ability to handle emergencies?""  Your emergency fund might yo-yo under these extra purchases, which could force you to think about the state of your emergency fund for normal purchases.  That'd be bad. Different people might want to think about things different ways.  I'm a big-picture guy, so I prefer to think about all of my assets as one big account when I make a lot of my decisions.  My wife, on the other hand, prefers not to have to think that way when she makes her purchases.  For her, having a very discrete ""emergency fund"" has great value.  For me, it has less.  So when I look at the finances, I choose to lump the emergency funds in with, say, the funds to re-do our backyard (something we are looking at doing over the next 2-5 years).  For me, that is the most natural way to deal with analyzing the risks -- I just have to be aware of how backyard purchases interact with our safety net.  My wife prefers to keep those funds separate in her head, so that she can look at how to spend money on the backyard without thinking about how it affects our emergency readiness.  While complicated, it shows that even within a household, it's possible to think about emergency funding two different ways.  (it causes minimal headaches, though a fair bit of book-keeping) So define ""emergency fund"" however suits you and your life best.  However, practically speaking, most people find it desirable to not put those medium predictability purchases into the same bucket as emergencies.  Those that do find it desirable to put them in the same bucket typically have a personal reason for why that suits their needs better."


I currently use Moneydance on my Mac.  Before that I had used Quicken on a PC until version 2007. It is pretty good, does most simple investment stuff just fine. It can automatically download prices for regular stocks.  Mutual funds I have to input by hand.


"Personally I would have a hard time ""locking up"" the money for that very little return.  I would probably rather earn no interest in favor of the liquidity. However, you should find out what the early removal penalties are.  If those are minimal and you are very confident that you will not need the money over the term period then its definitely better to earn something rather than nothing. If inflation is negative you aren't out as much not getting any interest as you would be normally. Consider that in 2014 US inflation was 0.8%.  Online liquid savings accounts pay about 1%.  so that's only .2% positive.  In comparison at -.4% you are better off with no interest than a US person putting their money in a paying savings account.  Keep in mind though that inflation can change month to month so just because June was negative doesn't mean the year will be that way. Not sure your ability to invest in the US market or what stable dividend payers may exist in Sweden.... You said you are risk averse, but it may be worth it to find a stable dividend paying fund.  I like one called PFF, it pays a monthly dividend of 6% and over 5 years stock price is very stable.  Of course this is quite a significant jump in risk because you can lose money if markets tank (PFF is down over 10 years quite a bit).  Maybe splitting up the money and diversifying?"


I once had worked for Koch Industries. I attended a meeting in which Charles Koch said 'do well so that you can do good'. I like that philosophy. It means make money (even if it is from 'bad' companies) so that you have the means (money) to do good things for others. Bill Gates has made money and is now trying to do good with it.  You have better control of how your money is used if you manage it yourself. If you let some faceless company manage it you are never quite sure that they are really helping others.


I get where you're coming from, but wouldn't it make your life easier to post the salary range you're looking for so that you don't have to waste your time interviewing those who believe they're worth more?  Having a stack of resumes means nothing if 60-70% of that stack would never consider working for the salary you have in mind for the job you're looking for.


"Let's say you bank with Ally bank - one of the largest online banks in the US. First, find out what your daily purchase limit is on your debit card, for Ally bank it is $5000, but you can call them and request a one-time extension. Then:  You walk into a bank, any bank or credit union; you don’t need an   account there. You tell the teller: “I’d like to take a cash advance against my Visa card.” (or   MasterCard, if your debit card is a MasterCard)"" Don’t mention it’s a debit card. You will only confuse them. As long   as the card carries a Visa or MasterCard logo, they will do it the   same way whether it’s credit or debit. They will ask for your ID. Then   they will run your card on a terminal. It’s very similar to how you   swipe your card when you buy something at a store. You sign the slip   before they give you the cash. You can think of a cash advance as buying cash."


You’re using logic, reason, optimism, and wishful thinking. I’m using cynicism.   In New Orleans, we were not allowed to sue the clearly-at-fault, criminal, negligent, lying, guilty-A-F, corps of engineers nor even their fraudulent or incompetent sub contractors that built shoddy levees because “immunity.”  “Grouping together” is greatly discouraged by the status quo.  I hope I’m wrong. I do.


Generally speaking.  1. Take the position size / average daily volume.  2. Multiply that number by 10 or whatever 1/whatever % of volume you think you can execute, ( you can at best acct for 10 percent of traded volume on a day).  3. You now have days until liquidation (x)  4. Take the days until liquidation sample the return over  time x. I.e. if days until liquidation is 10, you would sample 10 day returns.  5. Calculate the distribution characteristics of this window (mean, var, skew, kurt) and calculate VaR based on some confidence.  You can now have a liquidity risk expected loss and a VaR.  If position is on margin don't forget to add the interest cost.  Note: Instead of taking 10 day return, you can take the 10 day VWAP and calculate return between Open and 10 day vwap.


A 529 plan! The savings can only be used for education purposes, but you can use them for ANYONE and even change the beneficiary.  Distributions are tax free, and contributions are usually state tax free.


Good tax people are expensive. If you are comfortable with numbers and computers, you can do it better yourself.


"I also feel it's important to NOT get a credit card. I'm in my mid 30's and have had credit cards since I was 20, as has everyone I know. Every single one of those people, with the exception of my dad, is currently carrying some amount of credit card debt - almost always in the thousands of dollars.  Here is the essential problem with credit cards. Everyone sets out with good intentions, to use the credit card like a debit card, and pay charges off before interest accrues. However, almost no-one has the discipline to remember to do this, and a balance quickly builds up on the card. Also, it's extremely easy to prioritize other bill payments before credit card payments, resulting in a balance building up on the card.  It's almost magical how quickly a balance will build up on a credit card. Ultimately, they are simply too convenient, too tempting for most human beings. The world, and especially the North American world, is in a massive debt crisis. It is very easy to borrow money these days, and our culture is at the point where ""buy now pay later"" is an accepted practice.  Now that I have young children, I will be teaching them the golden rule of ""don't buy something until you have cash to pay for it in full!"" It sounds like an over simplification but this one rule will save you an incredible amount of financial grief over time."


This situation is exactly why we have the concept of legal tender. Legal tender is a form of payment that must be accepted to settle a debt. Your friend is entitled to insist on paying the rent in cash — accepting any other form of payment is at the landlord’s discretion.


In general, things to look for are: Things to look out for: I'd recommend two places: I'd recommend reading up on HSA's in this related question here.


If the company is non-public, your hands are tied. Most startups have a Stock Option Plan with specific rules on the shares. In almost all cases, they have a Transferability clause preventing transfers of options and shares unless approved by the company (who would almost always say no). Additionally, they usually have a Right of First Refusal (ROFR), which states that if shares are going to be transferred, the company gets the chance to buy it first. In your case, the company may argue your friend would sell you the shares for free and the company would exercise their ROFR and buy back the shares for free. There is not much you can do in this case. You may be able to write up a contract between your friend and you, but it would be costly and possibly not worth the effort. You may be better off asking for a lump sum or some other sort of compensation. Additionally, your friend might want to be careful with this idea. You could potentially gain access to sensitive company tools/documents which could get them in a lot of trouble.


"If I were you I would pay off these loans today. Here are the reasons why I would do this: Car Loan For car loans in particular, it's much better to not pay interest on a loan since cars lose value over time. So the longer you hold the debt, the more you end up paying in interest as the car continues to lose value. This is really the opposite of what you want to do in order to build wealth, which is to acquire assets that gain value over time.  I would also recommend that once you pay the loan, that you set aside the payment you used to make on the loan as savings for your next car. That way, you will be able to pay cash for your next car, avoiding thousands of dollars of interest. You will also be able to negotiate a better price by paying cash. Just by doing this you will be able to either afford to buy a nicer car with the same amount of money, or to put the extra money toward something else. Student Loan For the student loan, 3% is a very low rate historically. However, the reason I would still pay these off is that the ""return"" you are getting by doing so is completely risk free. You can't often get this type of return from a risk-free investment instrument, and putting money in the stock market carries risk. So to me, this is an ""easy"" way to get a guaranteed return on your money. The only reason I might not pay this down immediately is if you have any other debt at a rate higher than 3%. General Reasons to Get out of Debt Overall, one of the basic functions of lifetime financial planning is to convert income into assets that produce cash flow. This is the reason that you save for retirement and a house, so that when your income ends when you're older these assets will produce cash, or in the case of the house, that you will no longer have to make rent payments. Similarly, paying off these debts creates cash flow, as you no longer have to make these payments. It also reduces your overall financial risk, as you'd need less money to live on if you lost your job or had a similar emergency (you can probably reduce your emergency fund a bit too). Discharging these loans will also improve your debt-to-income ratio if you are thinking of buying a house soon. I wonder whether as someone who's responsible with money, the prospect of cutting two large checks feels like ""big spending"" to you, even though it's really a prudent thing to do and will save you money. However, if you do pay these off, I don't think you'll regret it."


"Inflation and stock returns are completely different things The CPI tracks the changes in the prices of a basket of goods a consumer might buy, the S&P 500 tracks the returns earned by investors in the equity of large companies.  The two are very different things, and not closely linked. Example: A world without inflation Consider a world in which there was no inflation.  Prices are fixed.  Should stocks return zero?  Certainly not.  Companies take raw materials and produce goods and services that have value greater than that of the raw materials.  They create new wealth.  This wealth becomes profit for the company, which then is passed on to the owners of the company (equityholders) either in the form of dividends or, more commonly, price increases. Example: A world with no inflation and no economic growth Note that I have not implied above that companies have to grow in order for returns to outperform inflation.  Total stock returns depend on the current and expected profit of the firm.  Firms can remain the same size and continually kick out profits.  Total returns will be positive in this environment even if there is no growth and no inflation.  If the firms pay the money out as dividends, investors get a cash flow.  If they retain these earnings, the value of the firm's equity increases.  Total returns take both types of income into account.  Technically the S&P 500 is not a total return index, but in our current legal and corporate culture environment, there is a preference for retaining profits rather than paying them out.  This causes price increases. Risk bearing In principle, if profit was assured, then investors would bid up stock prices so high that profit would have to compete with the risk-free rate, which often is close to inflation (like, right now).  However, profit is not assured.  Firm profit swings around over time and constitutes a significant source of risk.  We can think of the owners of the firm as being the bondholders and equityholders.  These assets are structured such that almost all the profit risk is born by equityholders.  We can therefore think of equityholders as being compensated for bearing the risk that would otherwise  be born by bondholders.  Because equityholders are bearing risk, stock prices must be low enough that stocks have a positive expected return (above the risk-free rate, which is presumably not significantly below inflation).  This is true for the same reason that insurance premiums are positive--people have to be compensated for bearing risk. See my answer to this question for a discussion of why risk means we should expect stock prices to increase indefinitely (even if inflation halts). The S&P is not a measure of firm size or value The S&P measures the return earned by investors, not the size of US companies.  True, if constituent companies grow and nothing else changes, the index goes up, but if a company shrinks a lot, it gets dropped out, rather than dragging the index down. By the way, please note that dollars ""put into"" equities are not stuck somewhere.  They are passed on to the seller, who then uses it to buy something (even if this is a new equity issuance and the seller is the firm itself).  The logic that growth of firms somehow sucks money out of usage is incorrect."


Vehicle Recovery Service in Galway  on the open road, nobody knows when something bad may happen. So, it is best to be prepared for any possible emergency to avoid being stranded in the middle of nowhere.  Keywords:  Vehicle Recovery Service in Galway, Vehicle Recovery Service, Vehicle Recovery, Car Recovery Service, Van Recovery Service, Road Recovery Service, Break down Recovery Service, Vehicle break down service, Wheel changes, Local car recovery service, Galway Vehicle recovery.  http://www.localbind.ie/galway-services/vehicle-recovery-service-in-galway/


"Inherent or intrinsic value. (Aside from the term's use with regards to options markets)  Every time I tell someone I've invested in Bitcoin they tell me that it is silly because there is no inherent or intrinsic value in Bitcoin.  But what is the intrinsic value of paper with a federal seal on it? What is the intrinsic value of a component that could be, but doesn't have to be used in computer parts (gold)?   My favorite question of all to show the silliness of ""intrinsic value"" is to ask what is the intrinsic value of water?   To someone parched and dying of thirst in a desert I'm quite certain that, faced with death, they'd be willing to part with an appendage for the water, if anything to simply survive.  On the other hand, what is the value of water to someone drowning? I would think it actually has a quite negative value and they'd be more than happy to see the water gone, even going so far as to part with an appendage.  To make an argument that water has an intrinsic value is to say that the word ""value"" isn't subjective when it very clearly is, in both cases where water is needed and not wanted, one would feasibly be willing to pay a very extreme cost (the removal of an appendage) in order to both have or be rid of water.  All this said, it would appear that ""intrinsic value"" means ""I'm trying to make an objective point about a subjective value."" Even if you were to try to make the case that water had some sort of baseline or average value with regards to supporting mankind and that *this* was ""intrinsic"", it would additionally be irrelevant, because the definition of supporting mankind is subjective. Do we just use just enough water to keep men and women alive across the world, without regards to health? Do we count children as half men? Do we count a non-active 50 year old female's water needs as highly as an active 16 year old male's? What about with regards to evaporation and condensation? We don't know the weather or climate changes in store, so in case of famine should we consider enough water to last 3 days, 3 weeks, or 3 years?  No, I'm afraid the only way to really consider what is the value of water is to drop this silly notion of intrinsic value and realize that water is worth merely what someone is willing to pay for it. And so, my argument would go, is Bitcoin."


If the funds are deposited into a noninterest-bearing account, they will be covered by FDIC insurance regardless of the amount (However, this extended coverage may not be valid after Dec. 31, 2012): On November 9, 2010, the FDIC issued a Final Rule implementing section 343 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that provides for unlimited insurance coverage of noninterest-bearing transaction accounts. Beginning December 31, 2010, through December 31, 2012, all noninterest-bearing transaction accounts are fully insured, regardless of the balance of the account, at all FDIC-insured institutions.   (Source: http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/changes.html)


I'm currently a senior finance student in Pittsburgh graduating in May. I get pretty good grades (3.2) and have had a few internships. I've recently decided I want to go to grad school as soon as possible, but am unsure of the next steps in my process. Could someone point me in the right direction?


Laurel is pretty nice, and centrally located to both D.C. And Baltimore, you can be downtown in either in 30 minutes, and the MART train runs through it. This would be my choice. If you're working in Laurel you could easily live in downtown Baltimore if you prefer the more cosmopolitan life.  Germantown is western Maryland. More rural, cheap, conservative. Not bad though. It's a hike to get from there to anywhere though, it's pretty remote.   Temple Hills is a D.C. suburb, and may be on the expensive side, but is pretty nice.


https://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc171009m.png  >The following charts will provide a sense of where the U.S. equity market currently stands. The first chart shows our margin-adjusted CAPE, which as noted above has a correlation of about -0.89 with actual subsequent market returns across U.S. market cycles since the 1920’s.  https://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc171009.htm  It will turn, downside potential is historic.


Local 'SEO near me’ searches are becoming more important for every business. Google defines these ‘near me’ or ‘nearby’ searches as micro moments. It is the moment when a consumer is ready to buy immediately. Optimizing for SEO near me searches will increase your website’s chances of appearing on location based search results and will strengthen your SEO strategy as a whole. Visit http://sitesbysara.com for any help.


Shorts are difficult because you have to find someone to lend the stock to you. In contrast, put options don't require that. They also have some nice properties like you're only out the contract price. The options chain for BSFT will give you an idea of where the market is.  Keep in mind that BSFT only IPO'd last year and announced blowout earnings recently. Make sure the P:E you're looking at is using recent earnings reports!


"Capitalism doesn't have an overall goal for society or the economy. It's simply a description of the behaviour of an economy given certain legal constraints, some market conditions, and the assumption that participants behave in their own interest. It's a descriptive system, as opposed to a proscriptive system such as communism - which, btw, might well agree with your ""should"" statement."


"You don't think rent, gas, and utilities would go up? Seems like you're trying to suggest that this person is ignoring factors while completely ignoring the interconnectedness of our society.   If minimum wage jumps to $15/hr, suddenly minimum wage workers can afford to live in places that only people who could make $15/hr could live in. Now those areas are overflowing with potential tennants and the people that own the buildings realize that they can charge more. Suddenly, rent goes up. People living at those places go, ""hey, if a burger flipper makes $15/hr, there's no reason for me to keep busting my ass at this rate! I'm gonna ask for a raise too!"", so now anyone working for the gas company also wants a proportional raise, driving up the price of gas, etc. etc. etc.  ""Oh, well, we'll just do it incrementally over time and that will fix it""  Sure..."


That's a place you can't just buy one house you must buy a few blocks and develop it to change the way things are there! Heck they have 5 dollar houses  in those parts with homeless and all scrap metal taken out of them heck of a place.


"While that's possible, there is no guarantee.  The ultimate thing causing the ""scare"" was a loss of jobs due to outsourcing.  I know we associate it with the housing bubble.  But really we moved to housing from dot-com, and we moved to dot-com from real manufacturing and production.  These more recent bubbles were ways of ""making up"" for the lost of manufacturing jobs.  Manufacturing jobs left (I'm going to focus on the US) the US because it was cheaper in other countries.  Now, once debt is largely payed off, people will likely be willing to accept lower pay, making production in the US cheaper.  However, we still have environmental regulations and basic labor laws. Further, initial education to enter the job market brings about massive debt as well.  This is pure speculation, but what I think will happen is collapse of the ""education bubble"".  People will lose faith in college degrees and start working as contractors, plumbers, mechanics, etc.  This will generate a direct wealth, but it will also severely hurt our ability to innovate due to the resulting ""brain drain"".  Multiple educational facilities will close down or contract, and some private schools will convert to public to stay afloat.  Many jobs will also be lost.    The resulting outflow of academicians will stimulate the development of new start-ups in online education and smaller institutes.  This will lead to cheaper education with more ""certifications"" over ""degrees"".  This will also lead to more start-ups in direct production of goods.    I'm thinking this process will take another 5-7 years or so.  Again, this is just wild-ass guessing on my side based on observed trends."


It's ok if you haven't fleshed out the ideas yet. It's partially why I'm asking questions.  Something you said seemed incorrect and it's better to verify than assume.  I'll check out Friedman's video when I have time, though I've read up on him a bit and find some of his theories hold up and some don't. Can't be specific ATM though.


I think it's very interesting to see these concepts play out (albeit simply) in an economy with a complete data set (as opposed to the never-perfect data we have about real systems). I'm also impressed that Valve hired an economist to help manage their economies, although I guess I shouldn't be surprised.


A self-directed IRA could be a good solution for you and all IRAs are qualified IRAs the administrator must allow for alternative assets. However, if you're looking to do the ROBS (Roll Over Business Start-up) system, there are not very many administrators that can facilitate that. There is also a checkbook IRA (aka single member LLC) that more administrators are able to work with, but the rules are different from a ROBS plan. Check with your financial adviser, CPA, tax guru and ask which method would work best for what you're looking to accomplish.


There are many different types of 1099 forms. Since you are comparing it to a W-2, I'm assuming you are talking about a 1099-MISC form.  Independent contractor income If you are a worker earning a salary or wage, your employer reports   your annual earnings at year-end on Form W-2. However, if you are an   independent contractor or self-employed you will receive a Form   1099-MISC from each client that pays you at least $600 during the tax   year. For example, if you are a freelance writer, consultant or   artist, you hire yourself out to individuals or companies on a   contract basis. The income you receive from each job you take should   be reported to you on Form 1099-MISC. When you prepare your tax   return, the IRS requires you to report all of this income and pay   income tax on it. So even if you receive a 1099-MISC form, you are required to pay taxes on it.


You have a few options and sometimes challenges help us improve our situation. First, you can not borrow to buy a car.  Reducing the massive depreciation that cars undergo will help you be wealthier.  It is hard to find a good use car that you can buy for cash, but it will play out best for your finances in the long run. If your heart is set on borrowing, I would encourage you to go to the bank/credit union where you have your checking account.  They will see your history of deposits and may grant you a loan based on that.  Also you are likely to get a better deal from the bank than from the car dealer. Thirdly, you can simply go to your employer's HR department and ask them.  Surely someone has applied for a loan during the company's history.  What did they do for them?


What city are you in?            >  I got a call for contract work and it only lasted two weeks.       This can happen.  Sometimes contracts don't work out.        >  With that contract I was finally getting paid what I was getting paid at my last permanent position, but again I did not receive the same benefits as a full time employee. That contract let me go after 18 months due to policy that they couldn't string contractors along.      This is very common.  Unfortunately due to a court case involving Microsoft contractors 25-30 years ago, many firms limit contracts to a hard stop at 18 months - 2 years.   Not all firms have this policy.        I am interested what city you are in.  My career has taken me throughout flyover country, and finding 6 figure contracts has always been reasonably achievable.  Most cities appeared to have a shortage of workers with 5+ years experience in most specializations.       Fellow IT contractors have felt that IT unemployment insurance is $45 per hour jobs where you compete with H1B body shops, since those almost never get filled.  It sounds like you are in an economically depressed area.


This is largely dependent on your overall investment goals. GIC's provide protection of the invested capital and a guaranteed return at the end of the term. However, in real terms, 1.4% over 18 months results in a loss of capital in real terms. This is because inflation in Canada is just about at or higher than 1.4% per year. In other words, at best, you are equalling inflation and gaining nothing in those 18 months. If their typical rate is 1.2% over 12 months, you are only gaining an additional 0.2% for the additional 6 months. You know as well as I do, 0.2% for 6 months is abysmal. If you have no use for the money in the medium to long term, you should look in to an index fund that is balanced, and diversified and more likely to get you a higher real return over the time period of a few years. Look in to: If you want to preserve the capital over the short term because you might need it after the 18 months period, the GIC is the safer and recommended option.


Because once those enhancements take off, I think it will rather quickly (in historical time) reach a point where it's simply not worth it, for the same reason we no longer bother dominating horses except as a hobby.


The main point of college is alumni network, with all the useful future career-related connections. Dating/marriage is a big thing, too. Think of college as a big career fair / singles party.   Learning is only important when you go into non-bullshit fields like  science/engineering, but then you probably need labs... you have to be there in person.


What type of credit card should I be looking in to to build credit from scratch? I have a stable job and will be able to pay back debts right away I just don't want to get into something and then regret it in the future.


"USPS doesn't receive any taxpayer money.  Not entirely true:  http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout.htm  ""The USPS does get some taxpayer support. Around $96 million is budgeted annually by Congress for the ""Postal Service Fund.""""  Even so, they obviously don't know how to manage money efficiently.  A few years ago, the usps web apis went down for 3+ weeks.  If this happened to a non-government organization, they probably would have gone out of business.  Here is an interesting article about medicare:  http://www.smartmoney.com/retirement/planning/how-to-treat-medicares-problems--and-yours-1306871486889/  an excerpt: ""Medicare will start running out of money in 2024""  My point still stands.  I don't trust any government to run a service that my life will ultimately depend on when they can't even manage simple services without running out of money.  Have you ever been a part of a government-run organization?  They get an allotted amount of money to use per year.  If it's not used, guess what happens?  They get less money the next year.  So the logical conclusion for most of these organizations is to spend all of the money they get, even if it's wasteful.   Everyone on the left seems to want to increase taxes, but there's absolutely no thought put into accountability.  This is why to me, it feels like stealing."


"**diversificering er om tilføjelse af indtjening og værdi til din eksisterende virksomhed - få mest muligt ud af dine aktiver, skriver Stephen Rudd. Hvad skal du overveje, når du opretter et nyt projekt?**  **Projektvurdering**  • [markedsundersøgelser](http://www.fwi.co.uk/articles/17/08/2014/146099/practical-and-tax-tips-for-farm-diversifications.htm) er væsentlige for at forstå projektet, konkurrence, rentabilitet og likviditet.  • Pas på ikke at undervurdere den tid og ressource, der er nødvendig for at få tingene - det kan være et dræn på core business.  **Indkomst betragtninger**  • føjes til en eksisterende virksomhed med succes kan føre dig direkte til højere indkomstskat, så overvej om det nye joint venture skal være en del af den eksisterende virksomhed eller separat.  • Selskaber betaler skat til lavere priser end enkeltpersoner og potentielt giver mere fleksibilitet, når overskuddet er der. De kan også beskytte den eksisterende forretning mod risikoen fra business fiasko, hvis det går galt.  • Er alle familiemedlemmer med deres grundlæggende sats banderolerne - hvis ikke, kan de inddrages i det nye selskab?  • Nogle former for virksomheder vil være tabsgivende tidligt i år - dette kan være en ulempe for den nye forretning er ikke en del af den eksisterende forretning, som tab kan det være nødvendigt at finde frem til nye venture forvandler en fortjeneste. Hvis det er en del af en eksisterende virksomhed, er det sandsynligt, at tabene i et område kan modregnes i indkomst fra et andet.  **Moms**  • er en indtægtskilde momsfritagelse? Hvis ja, kan det have en indvirkning på moms opsving og hvad er kendt som den delvise fritagelse beregningen for den primære virksomhed. Kort sagt, det kan betyde mindre moms er regenereret end ellers.  • Hvis den nye virksomhed er en afgiftspligtig levering - for eksempel afgifter moms på det forsyner - det gør den konkurrencedygtig? F. eks. B&B indkomst er levering af indkvartering og forplejning og hvis aggregerede med en main (momsregistreret) virksomhed, vil det være nødt til at opkræve 20% moms. Forskellige virksomhedsejere til virksomheden kan hjælpe, men pas på HMRC ""opdeling"" regler, der skal forhindre kunstige opdeling af virksomheder.  **Kapital og finansiering**  • Helt nye ventures kræver driftskapital. Hvordan vil det være forudsat - enten interne familie lån, eller ekstern finansiering via bank eller anden kilde - og hvad kan det gøre for resten af virksomheden?  • En separat bankkonto m ay blive behov for nye forretninger, hvis med en anden ejer. Det er under alle omstændigheder altid god husholdning til at holde transaktioner separat og transparent, ikke kun fordi det kan være et krav, men også for at det nye joint venture og dets bidrag kan en omkostningsvurdering og overvåges.  **Aktivering af næste generation**  • er dette et projekt for at få næste generation driver? Det kan give stor erfaring og selvstændighed, igen at gøre brug af basissatsen bands.  • Adskillelse mellem virksomheder kan også være nyttig for generationsskifteplanlægning, især hvor den næste generation har forskellige interesser eller karriere retninger."


2 billion is a drop in the bucket compared to other government costs. We spent 400 billion on  a fighter jet that cant fly at night or in clouds. I would gladly take 200 years of postal service over military waste.


Image Wizards is your source for dye sublimation printing. Choose the high quality Aluminum Metal Prints can last for a long time. Company Name: Image Wizards Address:  Image Wizards, LLC                   105 Rogers Road Lexington,                   NC 27292                   US  Phone: 336.283.8679 Email: info@imagewizards.com  Webiste: https://www.imagewizards.com/


First of all, it's pretty rare that would cash out your entire Traditional IRA at once when you retire. That would incur major taxes and negate much of the tax deductibility benefit. Instead, you'd want to take distributions of just what you want to live on, which are taxed at income rates, and let the rest continue to grow tax free until you need/want it. As to your main question, if you don't expect to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement, then yes, Roth makes sense. But this is a pretty major assumption. When you're working, your salary pushes you into higher tax brackets. Once you're retired, you don't have as many sources of income. It could be mostly distributions from retirement accounts, and even coming from a Traditional IRA a lot of that will be tax free or taxed at a low rate (e.g. 15%). If when it was earned it would have been taxed at a higher marginal rate (e.g. 25%), then the Traditional IRA was a better choice than the Roth. Traditional versus Roth, if both are options to you (with deductibility for the Traditional), all comes down to tax rate now versus what you expect your tax rate to be in retirement. There is no universal answer.


Why is that social irresponsibility? If the kids are being educated and take care of, then he SHOULD have that many kids. Society benefits from having such people around. If you're going to make some boilerplate overpopulation argument, you should read some books.  Edit: typo


"I just bought supplies on Home Depot's website. About half of the items were not available in store, and could be shipped to my address for free. Yay! The other half I must pick up in store, or have ""rush delivered"" from the store for $60. Boo!"


Here's what you wanted to write:  The root cause is a corrupt federal government that's too far gone to even reform, which keeps the people who care about this issue the most from wasting their time using ineffectual methods to try to change things.


Finally someone who I agree with! Think just how dexterous humans would be if we had hand feet. I'm incredibly confused as to how we got stuck with retarded looking mounds for feet in evolution! It seems like the clear loser to me


It is recommended that you put a new coat of paint on your home every few years. Are you worried that you won’t be able to get that done properly, or do you lack the tools and training to do so? Our house painting services in Vancouver can help you to get the job done right, no matter how big or small your home may be. http://barwickpainting.com/residential/


So what, if anything, might this mean for those of us who still have those Countrywide mortgages?  BTW, my subprime mortgage is awesome. We rode out a bad year where the price shot up to $4,000/month. Today it's way down and we're paying only 2.5%.


The basic theory is that if the price goes up, demand for the product will go down. The ancillary benefit is a public health one: less diabetes and health related issues from over consumption of sugars which leads to lower costs of health care for people who end up consuming less sugar and the overall population - this reduces insurance rates and so on and so forth. That is the theory.


Like email and spam, fighting creditcard fraud is a cat and mouse game, with technology and processes constantly being developed to reduce fraud. The CVV on the back of the card is just one more layer of security.  Requiring the CVV generally requires you to physically have access to the card. CVV should not be stored by any merchant. This frustrates card skimming fraud as the CVV is not present in the track data and fraud caused by database compromises.  You should never use your PIN online. MC/VISA both have implementations of 3D-Secure (SecureCode for MC and Verified by VISA) which require a password / code to confirm card ownership. Depends on both Issuer and Merchant implementing the standard.  Regarding not needing a PIN at the airport, some low value transactions no longer need PINs, depending on the Issuer and Scheme (VISA/MC). MasterCard PayPass or VISA PayWave enable low value contactless transactions without PIN. In Australia, the maximum value for a contactless transactions is $100 AUD. At some merchants (McDonalds for example) a PIN is not required for for meals purchased with VISA (at least, for the cheeseburger I bought there as a test). This makes sense - if you don't need a PIN for a contactless purchase, why do you need it for a chip based purchase?  So - why allow PIN free transactions? On average customers report stolen credit cards / wallet very quickly and the losses are correspondingly small. As card issuers are always online, cards can be cancelled very quickly after being reported lost / stolen. Finally, by performing transactions for just a few cents or pennies, the merchant (Spotify) can likely validate you are the owner of the card as you'd need access to your online bank to confirm the transactions.  PayPal do this with bank account to confirm ownership. (Unless I've misunderstood your statement).


"The downside of the store card is that the ""deal"" for using the card is typically 6-12 months of ""no payments"" or ""no interest"". In reality, the ""deal"" is deferred payments/interest. The problem is, if you miss any payment, or fail to pay the computer off in full, you'll have to pay for the accrued interest -- at a rate typically 25% or higher. That means if you buy your computer for $1,000, and pay $999 at the end of 12 months, you may have to pay $250 in accrued interest. These cards can be great deals, just be really careful!"


Someone who spends thousands of dollars and years of work getting a sustainable business degree doesn't do so because they are a corporate apologist. I absolutely did not say that the wrongs committed should be dismissed and made no attempts to absolve them for those sins.   All I'm saying is that for a subreddit dedicated to the discipline, you would think users would have a more nuanced approach to the topics and not see things in black and white. But that's clearly not the case with the majority of users here. Many people seem to be mistaking this subreddit with /r/greed.   As you said, there's no discourse here. And that's my only complaint, not that there's no forgiveness.


"Its more ""there could be a big market correction without vix going up"", though I suppose it might spike briefly if there's a sudden reversal. VIX is one of those things that doesn't feel like it is ever due for a change."


"I mean...we can all agree how weird the credit system is in general.    ""You pay your bills off early?  Don't worry, your credit score will go down""  ""You hold onto debt as long as possible?  Great news, we will give you more credit""    I can't even anymore"


"First, I'm really sorry to hear about your mother. My wife was recently diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer, so I know that there is a possibility that your mind is in ""survival"" mode, trying to preserve as much as you can in the way of things that you can effect (that's how I've been feeling recently). Having a loved one with cancer is really tough because there is absolutely, positively nothing tangible that you can do to change the fact that they have cancer. You will have to ask yourself some questions: How important is it that your mom can stay in her house? Moving could add some unneeded stress. How may years have you been contributing to your 401k? If you have 30 years left, you could have enough time to recover some of your losses from reducing the amount of money you have given up for your mom. Will your mom be able to pay you back for paying the taxes over time, or would this be a 'gift'? Have her doctors told her that she ""... has N months left...""? What is the next step after you are able to pay her taxes and save the house?  Someone close to me recently told me that ""There is no point in trying to save for someone for the future, if you can't sustain them until they get to that future. What will happen to your mom if she loses her house? Will it make it easier or harder for her to recover if she can stay? To paraphrase someone famous, ""you can't take a loan out for your retirement, but you could take a loan out for this event."" At any rate, good luck. My thoughts are with you and your mother."


Why would you reference Batman as pro-war propaganda? I feel like you haven't actually seen the movies.   As far as Hollywood being a cancer, again I feel like your connection to the process and the product are so far removed that you can't really accurately comment. Everyone should hate DRM. Because at its core it aknowledges that the consumer and the producer can't have an honest relationship when it comes to digital content. It's a flawed outlook and every **major** supplier that's gone against it has been successful. That doesn't mean the current system of getting stuff made is completely ass-backwards and a cancer on art. It's fun and easy to hate on the industry, but I know that if they didn't have such a strong filter what would be showing up on the Silverscreen would feel like you shoulda just stayed home, saved your $10, and watched Youtube clips of idiots. Their business practices are slow to change, but that's the nature of any billion dollar industry.   This is not meant to be an endorsement of SOPA or Protect IP, but I think we should all admit that while Hollywood is often full of shit shows, and recycled garbage it is a far better situation than if [this whiny bitch](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9MA0eW8yyw) and his Youtube kin were given time on the Silverscreen.   I honestly don't care all that much about the legislation. I don't think the regulations it puts up will last more than 6 months before every professional internet privateer figures out a way around cobbled together idiotic legislation. Honestly, how many tech savy people exist in Washington?


"I strongly suggest you look at CreditKarma and see how each aspect of what you are doing impacts your score. Here's my take - There's an anti-credit approach that many have which, to me, is over the top. ""Zero cards, zero credit"" feels to me like one step shy of ""off the grid."" It's so far to the right that it actually is more of an effort than just playing the game a bit. You are depositing to the card frequently to do what you are doing. That takes time and effort. Why not just pay the bill in full each month, and just track purchases so you move the cash to the account in advance, whether that's physical or on paper?  In your case, it's the same as charging one item every few months to keep the card active. If that's what you'd like to do, that's fine. I'd just avoid having the card take up too much of your time and thought.  (Disclaimer - I've used and written about Credit Karma. I have no business relationship with them, my articles are to help readers, and not paid placement.) mhoran's response is in line with my thinking. His advice to use the card to build your score is what the zero-credit folk criticize as ""a great debt score."" Nonsense. If you use debt wisely, you'll never pay interest (except for a mortgage, perhaps) and you may gain rewards with no cost to you."


The 401K match has limits, but it is not taxable until you withdraw the money from the account. You can think of it as an initial lump of interest or gain.  When you leave the company you are allowed to keep it, if you are vested. You can then roll it over into a IRA, or another 401K. When you withdraw money in retirement you will pay taxes on the match and all the gains from the match. Taxes on what you contribute will depend on if it was pre-tax or post-tax, or if it was deposited into a Roth IRA. The amount you deposit pretax is noted on the W-2, which you attach to the 1040 form. The company match does not appear anywhere on the w-2 or 1040. It should show on your 401-K statements. Those statements should also tell you how much of the match has been vested.


According to the IRS:  Aliens who are not eligible to apply for a U.S. social security   number, or who do not meet the Social Security Administration's   evidence requirements for an SSN, may apply for an Individual Taxpayer   Identification Numbers (ITIN) from the Internal Revenue Service if   they have a valid tax reason for needing an ITIN, as explained in the   Form W-7 instructions. Seeing as you don't have a valid tax reason for an ITIN, your request will probably be denied by the IRS.


That seems to indicate that you can in fact depreciate a vehicle given   to you? Section 1015 discusses the calculation of basis for gifted property, it says nothing about depreciation. Personal property cannot be depreciated for tax purposes unless it is used for business purposes. So unless you drive your car as part of your sole-proprietor business, you cannot depreciate it, be it a gift or a car you purchased yourself. If you can depreciate the car, then sec. 1015 is used to calculate the basis for the depreciation.


I had a car loan through GMAC and extra money was applied to future payments.   At one point, I received a statement telling me I had 15 months until my next payment was due because I had not marked extra payments as going to principal.


Yes we do still get paid. When someone get's a burnout, they pay six weeks. There's a lot of pseudo-sickness anyway, and people living unhealthy lives and getting sick through that, so i wouldn't actually find the australian system a problem..although you only have to get really sick once to feel it hard..


"I found the answer after some searching online. It turns out that when talking options, rarely is the current P/L line considered when talking about making adjustments/taking trades off. From Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/breakevenpoint.asp ""... For options trading, the breakeven point is the market price that a stock must reach for an option buyer to avoid a loss if they exercise the option. For a call buyer, the breakeven point is the strike price plus the premium paid, while breakeven for a put position is the strike price minus the premium paid."" The first sentence sounds more like the current P/L line, but the bold section clearly states the rule I was looking for. In the example posted in my question above, the breakpoints labeled with ""1"" would be the break points I should consider."


I travel from NZ to the UK at least once a year and since the TSA became a thing I've gone the other way round the world. It's a shame as I'd like to travel round the US, but don't want to be treated as a criminal just because I choose to set foot on US territory.  Included in this are the horror stories of the poor bastards that are treated atrociously by border control, just it seems, because they can.


Reading this made me think of [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s1s5K52zEQ). I wish you luck if you consider yourself an authority on a subject you have practically no exposure to, but hey, what does a hiring manager know? I mean, you're about to start an internship, so obviously everyone should want to know your opinion on the future of the market.


Your biggest concern will be what happens during the transition period. In the past when my employer made a switch there has been a lockout period where you couldn't move money between funds. Then over a weekend the money moved from investment company A to investment Company B. All the moves were mapped so that you knew which funds your money would be invested in, then staring Monday morning you could switch them if you didn't like the mapping. No money is lost because the transfer is actually done in $'s. Imagine both investment companies had the same S&P 500 fund, and that the transfer takes a week. If when the first accounts are closed the S&P500 fund has a share value of $100 your 10 hares account has a value of $1000. If the dividend/capital gains are distributed during that week; the price per share when the money arrives in the second investment company will now be $99. So that instead of 10 shares @ $100 you now will buy 10.101 shares @ $99. No money was lost. You want that lookout period to be small, and you want the number of days you are not invested in the market to be zero. The lockout limits your ability to make investment changes, if for instance the central bank raises rates. The number of days out of the market is important if during that period of time there is a big price increase, you wouldn't want to miss it. Of course the market could also go lower during that time.


Ah . .you know sirry Amelicans feering jerous when brromberg start to plint petty news stoly.  It not China faurt you erect fucking moron as plesident, even secletly of state is sad  In China we have saying by gleat phlrosophel  Confucius say:  Secretary not permanent till screwed on desk


"Several, actually: Maintenance costs. As landlord, you are liable for maintaining the basic systems of the dwelling - structure, electrical, plumbing, HVAC. On top of that, you typically also have to maintain anything that comes with the space, so if you're including appliances like a W/D or fridge, if they crap out you could spend a months' rent or more replacing them. You are also required to keep the property up to city codes as far as groundskeeping unless you specifically assign those responsibilities to your tenant (and in some states you are not allowed to do so, and in many cases renters expect groundskeeping to come out of their rent one way or the other). Failure to do these things can put you in danger of giving your tenant a free out on the lease contract, and even expose you to civil and criminal penalties if you're running a real slum. Escrow payments. The combination of property tax and homeowner's insurance usually doubles the monthly housing payment over principal and interest, and that's if you got a mortgage for 20% down. Also, because this is not your primary residence, it's ineligible for Homestead Act exemptions (where available; states like Texas are considering extending Homestead exemptions to landlords, with the expectation it will trickle down to renters), however mortgage interest and state taxes do count as ""rental expenses"" and can be deducted on Schedule C as ordinary business expenses offsetting revenues. Income tax. The money you make in rent on this property is taxable as self-employment income tax; you're effectively running a sole proprietorship real-estate management company, so not only does any profit (you are allowed to deduct maintenance and administrative costs from the rent revenues) get added to whatever you make in salary at your day job, you're also liable for the full employee and employer portions of Medicare/Medicaid/SS taxes. You are, however, also allowed to depreciate the property over its expected life and deduct depreciation; the life of a house is pretty long, and if you depreciate more than the house's actual loss of value, you take a huge hit if/when you sell because any amount of the sale price above the depreciated price of the house is a capital gain (though, it can work to your advantage by depreciating the maximum allowable to reduce ordinary income, then paying lower capital gains rates on the sale).  Legal costs. The rental agreement typically has to be drafted by a lawyer in order to avoid things that can cause the entire contract to be thrown out (though there are boilerplate contracts available from state landlords' associations). This will cost you a few hundred dollars up front and to update it every few years. It is deductible as an ordinary expense. Advertising. Putting up a ""For Rent"" sign out front is typically just the tip of the iceberg. Online and print ads, an ad agency, these things cost money. It's deductible as an ordinary expense. Add this all up and you may end up losing money in the first year you rent the property, when legal, advertising, initial maintenance/purchases to get the place tenant-ready, etc are first spent; deduct it properly and it'll save you some taxes, but you better have the nest egg to cover these things on top of everything your lender will expect you to bring to closing (assuming you don't have $100k+ lying around to buy the house in cash)."


"Just like I've been banging on about around here: once the market realised his tax plan isn't coming, his great deregulation is either not coming or going to be smaller and not quite as stiff as it should be, the hot air will come out of this ""Trump bump"".   I'm not saying it's gonna be a big crash. But it's going to come back to reality and the market will realise that, just like most new presidents, he has limited ability to fuel a sustained stock market rally."


Well, this is the relevant portion of the 14th amendment:  > The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.


The Euro is a common currency between various countries in Europe.  This means that individual countries give up their traditional sovereign control of their own currency, and cede that control to the EU. Such a system has many advantages, but it also means that individual countries cannot deal with their unique situations as easily.  For instance, if the US were a part of the EU, then the Fed couldn't issue $600B the way they are to bolster the economy. The danger to the Euro is that countries will withdraw their participation in order to micromanage their economies more effectively.  If a major country withdraws its participation, it could start a domino effect where many countries withdraw so that they too can manage their economies more effectively.  As more countries withdraw, a shared currency becomes less and less appealing.


Diversity of risk is always a good idea.  The cheapest equity-based investment (in terms of management costs) is some form of tracker or indexed fund.  They're relatively low risk and worth putting in a fixed amount for long-term investment. I agree with Ngu Soon Hui, you're going to need a lot of cash if you decide to start your own business.  You may have to cover a significant amount of time without an income and you don't want all your cash tied up. However, putting all your money into one business is not good risk management.  Keep some savings where they can be a lifeline, should you need it.


First of all, it's not the 1% that run things. It is more like the 0.1%. They run things because they run the government, not because they cannot be challenged in the market.   We should expect the courts to be less corruptible because their proceedings take place in public, whereas the Executive bureaucracy and most of the Congressional machinations occur behind closed doors. Deals are made that we have no knowledge of. That is where the 0.1% operates. They are as afraid of the light of day as vampires.   There is usually a cycle of wealth that lasts three or four generations unless that cycle is interrupted by collusion with the government. Europe's rich stayed rich because they became the government. Their thefts were sanctified by making them nobility and protecting them with the state.   Look at the makeup of Obama's inner circle. It is the banking nobility. Those banks and banksters would all be broke now if they had not harnessed the government to steal from thee and me to give to them.   Small government that debates everything in the open will not protect the very rich. Without government protection their wealth will return to the general pool in three generations.


That doesn't really matter. It's already figured out in the percentage. Japan makes more money but also has more debt.  What does matter is that Japan has a high probability of being damaged by natural disasters and losing hundreds of billions of infrastructure and goods. Not only that but as long as global temps rise the chance of major disaster rises with it. Greece is comparatively well insulated compared to Japan. If you were to say which nation looks better at a 100+ year projection you have to consider these things. The Tsunami that hit Japan was not large by geological standards and that means Japan has a reasonable probability of near total destructing in the coming centuries. Certainly not a good place to make a long term bet on.


As most people said, family loans are dangerous to the relationship.  The lender should not lend more than they are willing to forgive, and the borrower should not borrow more than they are very certain they can repay. I would suggest a few things to consider: Anecdote: I borrowed some money from my grandfather when I graduated from college to help with cash flow for an apartment, vehicle, etc.  It was about 5% of my starting annual salary and I paid it back quickly and with interest.