I think a lot of research is about to get cited very soon.  I'll dump it here.  I have a full time job so I don't have a lot of time to dig it up; I'll let the researchers do the researching for now.  I'll get back at you when a compilation of research comes out.  My goal will be to provide the most up-to-date, global studies on gender interest levels for different career fields under the hypothesis that we will see that far fewer women are interested in tech, despite the development level or cultural background.    But, c'mon, let's be honest: All over the world men are the majority of those in tech.  That didn't happen in every single society in the history of humanity because there was not a gender bias for career fields.  If I need to cite a paper to admit there is validity to this guy's claim, then no amount of research will convince you that the bias is there.  It's like convincing Trump that climate change exists, he doesn't want to believe it, so he will ignore all of the evidence to the contrary and focus on the tiny exceptions.  Here is a little bit of research for thought, though:  http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153857  >Most importantly and contra predictions, we showed that economically developed and more gender equal countries have a lower overall level of mathematics anxiety, and yet a larger national sex difference in mathematics anxiety relative to less developed countries. Further, although relatively more mothers work in STEM fields in more developed countries, these parents valued, on average, mathematical competence more in their sons than their daughters.   As people get more economic choice, they tend to **separate** their profession based on their gender.  It's a bit paradoxical, but only if you assume that males and females have equal interest in all fields.  If you open your mind to the possibility that women and men have separate interests that are biological ingrained, then it makes a lot of sense.  If men and women are biologically predisposed to a certain career fields, giving them more choice will separate them into those fields.   More food for thought:  https://www.economist.com/news/business/21632512-worlds-most-female-friendly-workplaces-executive-suites-are-still-male-dominated


I'm a pretty tall person and I find taller vehicles much more comfortable, as well as practical, at least for the things I do.  That being said, I just traded in my Ford truck for a (small-ish) Toyota suv. It seems like all trucks and SUVs in this market get bigger every year. Couple that with really kind of legendary longevity and reliability on some models, it's no wonder why Toyota is doing well.


This is kind of true, but really if a company needs someone they will find a way to hire. Most time they just let open positions float.  My boss has been interviewing people every day for a month but hasn't found the 'right person' yet.   Now i see why companies 'outsource' their recruiting to head hunters. I prefer to just post my info and let recruiters call me.


"First, note that a share represents a % of ownership of a company. In addition to the right to vote in the management of the company [by voting on the board of directors, who hires the CEO, who hires the VPs, etc...], this gives you the right to all future value of the company after paying off expenses and debts. You will receive this money in two forms: dividends approved by the board of directors, and the final liquidation value if the company closes shop. There are many ways to attempt to determine the value of a company, but the basic theory is that the company is worth a cashflow stream equal to all future dividends + the liquidation value. So, the market's ""goal"" is to attempt to determine what that future cash flow stream is, and what the risk related to it is. Depending on who you talk to, a typical stock market has some degree of 'market efficiency'. Market efficiency is basically a comment about how quickly the market reacts to news. In a regulated marketplace with a high degree of information available, market efficiency should be quite high. This basically means that stock markets in developed countries have enough traders and enough news reporting that as soon as something public is known about a company, there are many, many people who take that information and attempt to predict the impact on future earnings of the company. For example, if Starbucks announces earnings that were 10% less than estimated previously, the market will quickly respond with people buying Starbucks shares lowering their price on the assumption that the total value of the Starbucks company has decreased. Most of this trading analysis is done by institutional investors. It isn't simply office workers selling shares on their break in the coffee room, it's mostly people in the finance industry who specialize in various areas for their firms, and work to quickly react to news like this. Is the market perfectly efficient? No. The psychology of trading [ie: people panicking, or reacting based on emotion instead of logic], as well as any inadequacy of information, means that not all news is perfectly acted upon immediately. However, my personal opinion is that for large markets, the market is roughly efficient enough that you can assume that you won't be able to read the newspaper and analyze stock news in a way better than the institutional investors. If a market is generally efficient, then it would be very difficult for a group of people to manipulate it, because someone else would quickly take advantage of that. For example, you suggest that some people might collectively 'short AMZN' [a company worth half a trillion dollars, so your nefarious group would need to have $5 Billion of capital just to trade 1% of the company]. If someone did that, the rest of the market would happily buy up AMZN at reduced prices, and the people who shorted it would be left holding the bag. However, when you deal with smaller items, some more likely market manipulation can occur. For example, when trading penny stocks, there are people who attempt to manipulate the stock price and then make a profitable trade afterwards. This takes advantage of the low amount of information available for tiny companies, as well as the limited number of institutional investors who pay attention to them. Effectively it attempts to manipulate people who are not very sophisticated. So, some manipulation can occur in markets with limited information, but for the most part prices are determined by the 'market consensus' on what the future profits of a company will be.  Additional example of what a share really is: Imagine your neighbor has a treasure chest on his driveway: He gathers the neighborhood together, and asks if anyone wants to buy a % of the value he will get from opening the treasure chest. Perhaps it's a glass treasure chest, and you can mostly see inside it. You see that it is mostly gold and silver, and you weigh the chest and can see that it's about 100 lbs all together. So in your head, you take the price of gold and silver, and estimate how much gold is in the chest, and how much silver is there. You estimate that the chest has roughly $1,000,000 of value inside. So, you offer to buy 10% of the chest, for $90k [you don't want to pay exactly 10% of the value of the company, because you aren't completely sure of the value; you are taking on some risk, so you want to be compensated for that risk].  Now assume all your neighbors value the chest themselves, and they come up with the same approximate value as you. So your neighbor hands out little certificates to 10 of you, and they each say ""this person has a right to 10% of the value of the treasure chest"". He then calls for a vote from all the new 'shareholders', and asks if you want to get the money back as soon as he sells the chest, or if you want him to buy a ship and try and find more chests. It seems you're all impatient, because you all vote to fully pay out the money as soon as he has it. So your neighbor collects his $900k [$90k for each 10% share, * 10], and heads to the goldsmith to sell the chest. But before he gets there, a news report comes out that the price of gold has gone up. Because you own a share of something based on the price of gold, you know that your 10% treasure chest investment has increased in value. You now believe that your 10% is worth $105k. You put a flyer up around the neighborhood, saying you will sell your share for $105k. Because other flyers are going up to sell for about $103-$106k, it seems your valuation was mostly consistent with the market.  Eventually someone driving by sees your flyer, and offers you $104k for your shares. You agree, because you want the cash now and don't want to wait for the treasure chest to be sold. Now, when the treasure chest gets sold to the goldsmith, assume it sells for $1,060,000 [turns out you underestimated the value of the company]. The person who bought your 10% share will get $106k [he gained $2k]. Your neighbor who found the chest got $900k [because he sold the shares earlier, when the value of the chest was less clear], and you got $104k, which for you was a gain of $14k above what you paid for it. This is basically what happens with shares. Buy owning a portion of the company, you have a right to get a dividend of future earnings. But, it could take a long time for you to get those earnings, and they might not be exactly what you expect. So some people do buy and sell shares to try and earn money, but the reason they are able to do that is because the shares are inherently worth something - they are worth a small % of the company and its earnings."


"An attempt at a simple answer for the normal investor: A normal investor buys stock then later sells that stock. (This is known as ""going long"", as opposed to ""going short"").  For the normal investor, a stop order (of either kind) is only used when selling. A stop-loss sell order (or stop sell) is used to sell your stock when it has fallen too much in price, and you don't want to suffer more losses.  If the stock is at $50, you could enter a stop sell at $40, which means if the stock ever falls to $40 or lower, your stock will be sold at whatever price is available (e.g. $35). A stop-loss limit sell order (or stop limit sell) is the same, except you are also saying ""but don't sell for less than my limit price"".  So you can enter a stop limit sell at $40 with a limit of $39, meaning that if the stock falls to $40, you will then have a limit order in effect to sell the stock at $39 or higher.  Thus your stock will never be sold at $35 or any value below $39, but of course, if the stock falls fast from $40 to $35, your limit sell at $39 will not be done and you will be left still owning the stock (worth at that moment $35, say)."


I know they were doing bad even back then but it still irks me that he took people's jobs for his own gain instead of trying to revive the company or help them find other work.


I traded futures for a brief period in school using the BrokersXpress platform (now part of OptionsXpress, which is in turn now part of Charles Schwab). They had a virtual trading platform, and apparently still do, and it was excellent. Since my main account was enabled for futures, this carried over to the virtual account, so I could trade a whole range of futures, options, stocks, etc. I spoke with OptionsXpress, and you don't need to fund your acount to use the virtual trading platform. However, they will cancel your account after an arbitrary period of time if you don't log in every few days. According to their customer service, there is no inactivity fee on your main account if you don't fund it and make no trades. I also used Stock-Trak for a class and despite finding the occasional bug or website performance issue, it provided a good experience. I received a discount because I used it through an educational institution, and customer service was quite good (probably for the same reason), but I don't know if those same benefits would apply to an individual signing up for it.  I signed up for top10traders about seven years ago when I was in secondary school, and it's completely free. Unfortunately, you get what you pay for, and the interface was poorly designed and slow. Furthermore, at that time, there were no restrictions that limited the number of shares you could buy to the number of outstanding shares, so you could buy as many as you could afford, even if you exceeded the number that physically existed. While this isn't an issue for large companies, it meant you could earn a killing trading highly illiquid pink sheet stocks because you could purchase billions of shares of companies with only a few thousand shares actually outstanding. I don't know if these issues have been corrected or not, but at the time, I and several other users took advantage of these oversights to rack up hundreds of trillions of dollars in a matter of days, so if you want a realistic simulation, this isn't it.  Investopedia also has a stock simulator that I've heard positive things about, although I haven't used it personally.


Summary: should Christians take each other to court over church matters? Absolutely not! Should Christians take each other to court over civil matters? If it can in any way be avoided, no. Should Christians take non-Christians to court over civil matters? Again, if it can be avoided, no. However, in some instances, such as the protection of our own rights (as in the example of the apostle Paul), it may be appropriate to pursue a legal solution.


Did I make the right choice? Only you can determine that. Financial security and stability are not worthless, but they do not have infinite value either. Any time you go out for a walk you're trading a small amount of financial independence for personal satisfaction, since you could be struck by a car and become disabled. That's a silly example, and you're risking much more financial security by changing jobs than by going for a walk, but it illustrates that sometimes risk is worth it. Would changing jobs be worth the risk that you could end up unemployed? Only you can determine that.


Making a payment of any amount is usually legal, although of course the specific circumstances matter, and I'm not qualified to give legal advice. Just had to throw in that disclaimer not because I think there's a problem here, but because it is impossible to give a definite answer to a legal question in a specific situation on Stack Exchange. But the government will be involved. There are two parts to that. First, as part of anti-money-laundering laws, banks have to report all transactions above a certain limit; I believe $10k. When you use a check or similar to pay, that happens pretty much automatically. When making a cash payment, you may have to fill out some forms. An secondly, Edward Snowden revealed that the government also tapped into banking networks, so pretty much every transaction is recorded, even if it is not reportable.


It sounds like your father got a loan and you are making the payments.  If your name and SSN are not on the loan then you are not getting credit for making the payments your father is.  So it will not affect your credit.  If you are on the loan as a secondary borrower it will affect your credit but not substantially on the positive but could affect it substantially on the negative side. Since your father is named as the primary borrower you will probably need to talk with him about it first.  If this is a mistake the 2 of you will need to work together with the bank to get it corrected.  Since your father is currently listed first the bank is probably going to be unable(even if they are willing) to make a change to the loan now with out his explicit permission. In addition if the loan is in your fathers name, if it is a vehicle loan, then the car is most likely in your fathers name as well.  Most states require that the primary signatory on a vehicle loan also be the primary owner on the title to the vehicle.  If your fathers name is the primary name on the title then you would have to retitle the car to refinance in your name.


"Holy shit, man. I'm applying to graduate school for Organizational Psychology right now and that's the kind of thing I want to prevent. I like where your head's at, going with the hourly wages. The past four months I've had more work piled on me because my boss quit and I won't be seeing anything close to a raise for another 8 months because I was temporary for the first six months then was technically only ""hired"" in April, meaning I'm not eligible for a raise until my ""one-year"" which was *actually* this month.   Fucked up things like that are happening all over the country. At Microsoft, staffing agencies get paid $30/hr for their employees' work (who are working AT Microsoft but are staffing agency employees) and the employees see about 30% of that. The agency doesn't have to do anything but rake in the cash, it's absolute bullshit.   I'm very happy that you were straight forward with your boss, because people need to hear that. UNFORTUNATELY, it's going to reflect poorly on you, and that's also fucked up. I have a coworker who spends half the day screwing around on various websites, but since he stays late, he's seen as more dedicated. It's ridiculous. God, I'm so proud of you. Sorry boss, *fuck you,* if you want 50 hours pay me for 50 hours. It's a business contract. You wouldn't sit there and watch a plumber unclog your toilet for 30 minutes then ask him to go unclog your shower too but not pay for that service, would you? Apparently some people would."


You need to get yourself a credit card, and use it regularly and also repay on time. This will help increase your credit score.  Hope you have a regular job which is bringing in money every month, but having just this isnt enough, get a credit card.


"Allowances are calculated as your total deductions divided by the tax year's personal exemptions. As mentioned above it is a multiplier. For 2015 the standard deduction for a married couple filing jointly is $12,600 and each of you gets 1 personal exemption ($4,000 in 2015). That's a total of $12,600 + 2*($4,000) or $20,600. Divide this by the personal exemption and you get roughly 5 allowances. Now say your employer offers health insurance and a 401(k) plan. Your total health insurance (or ""cafeteria"" contributions) are $2,000 for the year, and your total 401(k) plan contributions are $6,000 for the year. This would give an additional $2,000 + $6,000 = $8,000 divided by $4,000 = 2 allowances. Thus you would file with 7 allowances. Note that tax credits are not included in the allowance calculation. That is because they do not affect your taxable income but rather directly reduce your taxes due."


"Accrued interest generally means ""interest that is earned but not received"" (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/accrued-interest.html).  This is the interest that is added on top of the amount that was originally agreed upon. Because your friend missed some months, she will have gained 3% interest on top of the original loan amount for every month that she didn't pay.  The interest even applies to the increased loan amount, so it will increase exponentially for every month that she does not make a payment.  For example, if the loan amount was for $1,000 and she missed the payment the first month, the 3% accrued interest will raise that loan amount to $1030.  If she misses the second month, then the loan amount will become $1060.90 and so on. This means that it will take her more months to pay the loan in its entirety. ""Arrears"" are the overdue payments that she had not made (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arrears.asp). So the sentence ""with susbsequent payments paying the arrears before being applied to the current month's payment"" means that she must pay the overdue debt from the previous months first before she can even make the payment for the current month."


The Vegtrug Wall Hugger is flat on one side so it fits easily against walls, fences, and other vertical surfaces. Like the original, Vegtrug Planter provides a range of soil extent to suit the desire of both deep- and shallow-rooted edible. Vegetable Trug Planter design minimizes displeasure of bending over and helps keep pets and pests out. Flat on one side to fit even against walls and fences & Blower Vac is in the crosshairs of many homeowners lately, and who can blame them? Garden Blower can be dangerously noisy as they endlessly stir up dust and leaves throughout neighborhoods everywhere.More Visit: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Blower-Vacuum-Mini-ROK-600-Watt-/112174866451


"> It starts off being the sole province of a handful of fairly-well-off nerds who don't mind wasting their time on something that may end up being a technological dead end, then becomes a high-end rich person's thing once it's proven useful or enjoyable, then as the market expands, it gets cheap enough to benefit everyone.  If allowed to be an early adopter of mind-enhancement technologies I hereby pledge to allocate at least 5% of my time thereafter to finding ways to making the technology more available to all classes of people.  I will totally Borg it up in this shit. (Hrm. Nanovirus that infects and replicates itself into uplifting humans to transhuman... while also producing a ""pill"" in a person's palm that they can swallow to cure themselves of said infection? I like it.)"


Shop consciously, mindfully and deliberately every single time you venture into a store. Don't allow yourself to zone out while shopping, and be sure to keep yourself on a very short leash.


From PayPal's Q&A The PayPal Debit MasterCard is the fastest way to withdraw money from   your PayPal account. As a MasterCard, Amazon is beside the point. You can use it at any store that takes MasterCard Debit cards. And there would be no fees at all. It's your money.


"Working for a lot of startups, I have seen this cycle. Really it has little to do with making the IPO look good because of number of employees, and is more about making the IPO look good because of planning for the future. Many times an IPO is released, it will be valued at $1.00 (made up) and the market will soar and spike. Now stock shares are valued at $3.00. Great. Till after the dust settles a bit, and stocks are valued at $0.85.  This is ""normal"" and good.  It would be better if the stocks ended a little higher than their initial value, but... such is life.  Now the initial value of the stock is made up of basically the value of the company's assets, and employees are part of those assets and its earning power. They are also a liability, but that has less impact on initial value than assets. Sales right after IPO are based on how well a company will do. Part of that is growth. So it looks nicer to say: ""We have 500 employees and have been growing by 20% per month."" than to say ""We have 100 employees"". In other words, before IPO, employees may be hired to make the company look like it is growing. They may be hired because the budget is projected based on expected growth and expected valuation.  After IPO, you get a concrete number. You have your budget. It may be more than you thought, or it may be less. In our example, the real budget (from capital), is only 28% of the entire projected budget, and 85% of the initial value. It's time to make some budget cuts.  Also, normally, there is a period of adjustment, company wide, as a company goes from VC funding, ""here, have as much money as you want"", to ""real world"" funding, with stricter limits and less wiggle room."


Many good points have been brought up, and I'll just link to them here, for ease. Source: I work at a credit/debit card transaction processing company on the Database and Processing Software teams. See mhoran_psprep's answer. See Chris' answer. Believe it or not, banks don't expose their primary (or secondary) database to end users. They don't expose their fastest / most robust database to end users. By only storing x days of data in that customer-facing database and limiting the range of any one query, any query run against it is much less likely to cause system-wide slowness. They most definitely have database archives which are kept offline, and most definitely have an employee-facing database which allows employees to query larger ranges of data. What would a bank have to gain by allowing you to query a full year of transactions?


"I've alway thought that it was strange, but the ""price"" that gets quoted on a stock exchange is just the price of the last transaction. The irony of this definition of price is that there may not actually be any more shares available on the market at that price. It's also strange to me that the price isn't adjusted at all for the size of the transaction. A transaction of just 1 share will post a new price even if just seconds earlier 100,000 shares traded for a different price. (Ok, unrealistic example, but you get my point.) I've always believed this is an odd way to describe the price. Anyway, my diatribe here is supposed to illustrate the point that the fluctuations you see in price don't really reflect changing valuations by the stock-owning public. Each post in the exchange maintains a book of orders, with unmatched buy orders on one side and unmatched sell orders on the other side. If you go to your broker and tell him, ""fill my order for 50,000 shares at market price"", then the broker won't fill you 50,000 shares at .20. Instead, he'll buy the 50 @ .22, then 80 @ .23, then 100 @ .30, etc. Because your order is so large compared to the unmatched orders, your market order will get matched a bunch of the unmatched orders on the sell side, and each match will notch the posted price up a bit. If instead you asked the broker, ""open a limit order to buy 50000 shares at .20"", then the exchange will add your order to the book: In this case, your order likely won't get filled at all, since nobody at the moment wants to sell at .20 and historically speaking it's unlikely that such a seller will suddenly appear. Filling large orders is actually a common problem for institutional investors: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_16/b3929113_mz020.htm http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~mkearns/papers/vwap.pdf (Written by a professor I had in school!)"


"The portfolio described in that post has a blend of small slices of Vanguard sector funds, such as Vanguard Pacific Stock Index (VPACX).  And the theory is that rebalancing across them will give you a good risk-return tradeoff.  (Caveat: I haven't read the book, only the post you link to.) Similar ETFs are available from Vanguard, iShares, and State Street.  If you want to replicate the GFP exactly, pick from them.  (If you have questions about how to match specific funds in Australia, just ask another question.)  So I think you could match it fairly exactly if you wanted to. However, I think trying to exactly replicate the Gone Fishin Portfolio in Australia would not be a good move for most people, for a few reasons: Brokerage and management fees are generally higher in Australia (smaller market), so dividing your investment across ten different securities, and rebalancing, is going to be somewhat more expensive. If you have a ""middle-class-sized"" portfolio of somewhere in the tens of thousands to low millions of dollars, you're cutting it into fairly small slices to manually allocate 5% to various sectors.  To keep brokerage costs low you probably want to buy each ETF only once every one-two years or so.  You also need to keep track of the tax consequences of each of them. If you are earning and spending Australian dollars, and looking at the portfolio in Australian dollars, a lot of those assets are going to move together as the Australian dollar moves, regardless of changes in the underlying assets.  So there is effectively less diversification than you would have in the US. The post doesn't mention the GFP's approach to tax.  I expect they do consider it, but it's not going to be directly applicable to Australia. If you are more interested in implementing the general approach of GFP rather than the specific details, what I would recommend is: The Vanguard and superannuation diversified funds have a very similar internal split to the GFP with a mix of local, first-world and emerging market shares, bonds, and property trusts.  This is pretty much fire-and-forget: contribute every month and they will take care of rebalancing, spreading across asset classes, and tax calculations.  By my calculations the cost is very similar, the diversification is very similar, and it's much easier. The only thing they don't generally cover is a precious metals allocation, and if you want that, just put 5% of your money into the ASX:GOLD ETF, or something similar."


Indeed.  You don't need to know much to know that there is nothing, and I do mean nothing, which will prevent the collapse and abandonment of FB by the majority of its users *as soon as TNBT comes along*.  The same cannot be said of Google. Of which I *do* hold shares.


intelligent economists ARE worried about japan because they've nearly exhausted their savings, and will not be able to attract interest from foreigners in buying their bonds when they need to. then they'll have to either impose austerity or just keep printing money; either course will result in a depression.


Don't know how it is in the US, but here in Montreal, something like 95% of customers pay by cards where the tip amount is extremely traceable. So you end up declaring everything you make.   Waiters want to keep working for tips because that's how they make good money. And it's a direct correlation of effort and reward. You make your money on volume, more than individual tip amounts (you're better off taking 2 tables and receiving a regular tip, than taking a single one, providing amazing service and get a great tip).   So when it's quiet, you don't make much, but you didn't work too hard.   If you're getting destroyed from 5pm to 1am, short-staffed ; you work like a fucking slave, but you know you're making bank.   Tips is nothing else than a sales commission that is disclosed to the customer and which they can choose to adjust based on their experience.


I would ask your HR or benefits department to be certain, but here's how I read that without any specific knowledge of the situation: What is right to receive the RSU consideration? Company A was bought by Company B.  You had unvested Restricted Stock Units in A, which is now gone.  B is saying that you now have the right to receive consideration equivalent to the value of those RSUs in A. Since B is private, there's no publicly traded stock, so it will likely be in cash, but read the rest of the paperwork or talk to HR to be certain.   For example, if you had 100 RSUs vesting next year and the price of stock in A was $50 when the company was bought, those RSUs would be worth $5,000.  B is give you the right to consideration for those RSUs, hopefully for somewhere around $5,000.  That consideration is unvested, meaning you must stay employed until the vesting period in order to claim that right. If you are fired without cause (i.e. laid off), you will receive those unvested claims as compensation.   I assume the same will be applicable if employee leaves the company  Probably not.  In any situation, if you voluntarily leave a company, any unvested stock, RSUs, options, etc. are forfeited.


"It's not a bad strategy. I'd rather owe money at 4% interest than at 6-7%. However, there is something to consider.  Consolidating debt into a new loan can backfire. When you have money borrowed at 7%, you want to get that paid off as quickly as possible. Once you have that converted to 4%, if you think, ""Now I can take my time paying off this debt,"" then you aren't really better off. In fact, if you take too long paying off the new loan, you might end up paying more interest than if you had kept the high interest loan and paid it as soon as possible. Don't lose your drive to get out of debt after you refinance.  As far as how the student loans affect your debt-to-income ratio, I'm not sure; however, if they do count (I think they do), your ratio will not really be going up by taking out the new loan, since you are using the money to pay other debt. Make sure the new lender knows this, so they take that into consideration when making their decision.  Overall, I like your strategy: pay off what you can right away (the car loan and the highest interest student loans) and reduce the interest on the rest. Just make sure that you continue to pay down that debt as quick as you can."


"I don't really get why this is in r/business either, except that it seems it  did not accumulate sufficient karma in more fitting subreddits the OP also submitted it to.   That being said, if you search GoogleNews with ""china organ harvesting"", you'll get dozens of recent results on Chinese organ harvesting articles/investigations. While this author appears to have done an in depth investigation on his own in this particular case, there is no shortage of similar stories. Set the search time frame back a year or two, and you'll find loads of articles [about other groups in China being robbed of their organs, and/or killed, or ""lost""](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilgour-Matas_report) by state-sanctioned entities. Unethical organ harvesting in China is by no means a new story, nor is it a big secret that life is fairly cheap in China. Outside of the more obvious examples, there were also a lot of [investigations into things like the circumstances under which bodies from China were acquired that were later used in educational anatomical exhibits that traveled North America for several years](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodies:_The_Exhibition#Uncertainty_about_provenance_of_the_bodies). There are also, of course, [many, many other cases of the Chinese government abusing human rights](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China), but that's not new news either, nor is it business-related."


It's mostly VAT (value added tax or sales tax). For example an US IPad is $499 without tax, and a German IPad is EUR 499 including 17% VAT. The base price is actually only EUR 417.  In addition to that, cost of business is a little higher in Europe because of tax structures and because smaller countries cause higher overheads.


There are several problems with trying to get this data:


Good! The article says it was some kind of collateral protection insurance that customers were signed up for despite it being unrequired for the loan. The accusations is that WF racketeered about 800,000 loans by bundling in this bunk insurance cost as part of the loan structure. I'm glad you're not caught up in it.


"> Ultimately though learning how to stand up for your self  What you said is very contradictory.  If you learn new ways to behave, and you accept what you are taught, then you do not stand up for yourself.  If you learn new ways to behave, and you don't accept them, then you stand up for yourself.  If you learn new ways to behave, different than what you accepted in the past, then you may stand up for yourself.  Standing up for yourself is done mostly in a non ""respectful way"". Actually, if you find yourself to have to stand up for yourself, it's done always in a non respectful way, whether mildly or not mildly at all.  The bottom line: schools need to teach knowledge and professional behavior and not go to the business of social and political  engineering as it's always done in a non respectful way by professors who stand up, not for themselves, but for their political and social agenda."


Isn't there some way to bar Rupert Murdoch from owning any more US media outlets? This guy is a catastrophe for dissemination of the kind of accurate information necessary to a well functioning democracy. And he's only 81, he could be around, wreaking havoc for another decade or more.


It'd be a stimulus so yes.  It would create demand for labor, research, materials and what not that will result in more jobs/productivity.  Even if climate change isn't real, harnessing alternative sources of energy has alot of benefits.  It diversifies the energy sector so that we're not reliant on just one source.   See how countries like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela put all their eggs in one basket by just focusing on oil as their main driver.   When oil crashes, so do oil based economies.  Renewable energy like wind, solar and even nuclear can be clean which means less pollution to clean up and easing the burden of healthcare and improving quality of life.  When places are clean, you'll see more uptick in tourism, healthier people going out more, which ultimately leads to more economic activity.  If a war can be considered an economic stimulus, building renewable energy resources and the accomodating infrastructure should be too.


Have you tried social networking? (apart from asking questions) but actually connecting with individuals/firms? Try LinkedIn, there are groups that are very focus-orientated. You might be able to have an influence there. Prove to them that your advisory has more to offer than your competition - this might be putting out free information for everyone to see what you have to offer. Perhaps even free consultations to gain credibility?


An experienced individual wouldn't ask such questions.  I don't say this to take a jab at you, but to provide context.  The matter is much more complicated than a simple answer to your question could accomplish. The short answer is no, not necessarily; but it depends on the details. Generally, if the employer matches, it's suggested that you take advantage of the match.  It's free money.  That said, it comes with some strings attached, like a vesting schedule.  It's not yours right away, necessarily.  Choices are limited in a 401k, but we should still come out ahead with that free money. The investment choices available in a 401k are also a part of the details.  If they meet your needs you should certainly consider the 401k even if the employer doesn't match. There is also the matter of one's particular tax situation, which is certainly an involved matter.  A 401k can certainly be a part of judicious tax planning.  It's a matter of working out the details. Continuing this theme of details and coming back to the employer match: if the employer doesn't mach, I would make sure that I'm maxing out an IRA before considering the 401k.  If the employer matched, I would probably contribute to take advantage of that match.  However, it quickly becomes complicated here.  I'm accustomed to employer matching up to some percentage of pay, which typically works out to be less then the anual contribution limits for a 401k.  So, I my plan for such a situation is to contribute up to the employer match in the 401k, then max out an IRA, and then return to the 401k to finish contributing up to its yearly maximum. There is plenty for you to consider in order to come up with a plan of action.  While it's certainly complicated, it's accessible to most people.  You don't have to be a genius.  In fact, eggheads are regularly trounced by the markets.


401(k) withdrawals - early or otherwise - are not subject to FICA or Medicare taxes.  That's because they already were taxed when they were contributed.  (And of course, the earnings from the 401(k) contributions are not earned income and thus are not subject to payroll taxes for that reason.) While 401(k) contributions are exempt from federal (and generally state) income taxes, they aren't exempt from payroll taxes - and as such, you'll see two separate amounts on your W2 and paystub if you contributed: the amount that is subject to those taxes, and the amount that is subject to income tax. So, no, you don't have to pay payroll (FICA, Social Security) taxes on your early withdrawal.  As for the penalty, that is basically an extra tax - so if you withdraw $1000, you pay income tax at your marginal rate plus 10% penalty; if your marginal rate is 25% [and you're not moving across a rate step boundary], you will pay 25%*(1000) + 10%*(1000).


"There's no such thing as ""leniency"" when enforcing the law. Not knowing the law, as you have probably heard, is not a valid legal defence. Tax law is a law like any other. That said, some penalties and fines can be abated if the error was done in good faith and due to a reasonable cause. First time penalties can be abated in many cases assuming you're compliant otherwise (for example - first time late filing penalty can be abated if you're compliant in the last 5 years. Not many people know about that.). Examples for a reasonable cause (from the IRS IRM 20.1.1): Reliance on the advice of a tax advisor generally relates to the   reasonable cause exception in IRC 6664(c) for the accuracy-related   penalty under IRC 6662. See IRM 20.1.5, Return Related Penalties, and If the taxpayer does not meet the criteria for penalty relief under   IRC 6404(f), the taxpayer may qualify for other penalty relief. For   instance, taxpayers who fail to meet all of the IRC 6404(f) criteria   may still qualify for relief under reasonable cause if the IRS   determines that the taxpayer exercised ordinary business care and   prudence in relying on the IRS’s written advice. IRM 20.1.1.3.2.2.5 -   Erroneous Advice or Reliance.   Treas. Reg. 1.6664–4(c). There are more. IRM is the ""Internal Revenue Manual"" - the book of policies for the IRS agents.  Of course, you should seek a professional advice when you're non-compliant and want to ask for abatement and become compliant again. Talk to a CPA/EA licensed in your state."


You didn't identify the fund but here is the most obvious way: Some of the stocks they owned could had dividends. Therefore they would have had to pass them on to the investors. If the fund sold shares of stocks, they could have capital gains. They would have sold stocks to pay investors who sold shares. They also could have sold shares of stock to lock in gains, or to get out of positions they no longer wanted.  Therefore a fund could have dividends, and capital gains, but not have an increase in value for the year. Some investors look at how tax efficient a fund is, before investing.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/facebook-instagram-posts-will-soon-help-sniff-out-tax-evaders-in-india-1730202) reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Built over seven years at a cost of about 10 billion rupees, &#039;Project Insight&#039; will complement the world&#039;s largest biometric identity database and GST, the country&#039;s most ambitious tax overhaul as policy makers try to get more people to pay up.  > &quot;Data analytics is the way forward for tax administrations across the world,&quot; said Amit Maheshwari, managing partner at accountancy firm Ashok Maheshwary and Associates near New Delhi.  > &quot;Safeguards are must,&quot; said Rahul Garg, head of direct tax at PwC India.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6q4zch/india_to_launch_project_insight_an_algorithm_that/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~177893 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*: **tax**^#1 **Data**^#2 **Project**^#3 **government**^#4 **revenue**^#5"


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41320568) reduced by 78%. (I'm a bot) ***** > China is moving forward with plans to shut down Bitcoin exchanges in the country, starting with trading platforms in key cities.  > All Bitcoin exchanges in Beijing and Shanghai have been ordered to submit plans for winding down their operations by 20 September.  > According to a document leaked online by users on the social network Weibo that was seen by Coindesk, Chinese regulators ordered all cryptocurrency exchanges in Beijing to stop registering new user registration by midnight local time on 15 September, and to notify users publicly when they formally close.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/71bicx/china_shutting_down_bitcoin_exchanges/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~213605 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*: **exchange**^#1 **Bitcoin**^#2 **Chinese**^#3 **China**^#4 **currency**^#5"


Liam & Co. is today strong in its resolve to provide durable, versatile and above all, high-quality fashion for not only moms, but women all across the United States. We want to provide women with clothing that could simultaneously be versatile enough to play chef and professional enough to go in public and feel good about themselves.


In today's dollars, cost including room and board can total $20K - $60K/yr depending on the school. With college 15 years away, these numbers can double by then. And the annual savings required, adjusted accordingly. If we look at the low end, we're still at $40k/yr or $160k total, and it would be prudent to start saving $10k/yr if possible. It's easy enough to drop the number if 5 years in, you see college costs dropping or rising less quickly.


They return capital to investors every year to keep the fund size smaller, since there are a set number of money-making opportunities in the space.  In other words, if they will make $1 billion per year regardless of invested capital, why not lever up a few times so you don't have to put as much in?


"1.Why is there no ""United States Treasury"" endorsement? Why should there be, and what do you think it would look like? Some person at Treasury sitting at a desk all day signing ""Uncle Sam""? At most you would expect to see some stamp, because it's clear that no person is going to sign all of these checks. 2.Can I have the check returned for proper endorsement? No, this is none of your business unless you have some serious reason to believe that someone other than the treasury cashed your check. (If that were really your concern, then you'd have a bigger issue than the endorsement.) 3.If I am required to endorse checks made out to me, why isn't the US Treasury? As others have noted, an endorsement is often not required as long as the name on the check matches a name on the account to which it is deposited.  Individual banks may have stricter rules, but that's between you and your bank."


"To answer #3 specifically, there are a number of exemptions from The Individual Shared Responsibility Payment (the ""fine"" or ""penalty"" for being uninsured). One of those is: You lived in a state that didn’t expand its Medicaid program but you   would have qualified if it had. That exemption (others may well apply based on income to many people in this category) applies for the entire year if: You live in a state that hasn’t expanded its Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act [and] Your income and household size would have qualified you or your family for Medicaid if the state had expanded coverage As such, people who are stuck in the Medicaid gap in those states will not be fined. People in this category also have a special option to enroll in a non-Medicaid plan if their estimated annual income increases later in the year, even outside the normal enrollment period."


Transfer of Money from you to Your Mother is Tax Free. i.e. This will not be considered as income for your mother as there is NO work done. This would be considered as Gift and would fall under Gift Tax. As per Gift Tax you can give unlimited amounts to close relative. Mother is considered as close relative. The tax rule is same whichever option you follow. You would need to maintain proper paperwork, should there be any query from Income Tax department. Any interest / income your mother generates on this will be her taxable income. You have also mentioned that you are repaying some loan for your relative, again the paper work should be very clear when your mother is transfering the money to your relative. The interest you pay back maybe taxable to your relative depending on paperwork. Edit: Elobrate OP's edit to question From your point of view, once you have given the funds to your Mother and call it gift; it ends. What your mother does with the money invests, spends, etc is not your liability. However if your mother is tranferring money to person's who are not defined as relatives under Gift Law or the interest your relatives get are all taxable events to them.


I can't provide a list, but when I took out my Stocks and Shares, I extensively researched for a good, cheap, flexible option and I went with FoolShareDealing.  I've found them to be good, and their online trading system works well.  I hope that's still the case.


They tried, but as government workers their laziness took over.  I went to the post office to get my passport shit sorted. I waited 10 minutes for someone to waddle out from back. I didn't even wait for them to show up, I left because the sign told me I didn't have the right stuff anyway.


Fake stock market trading may teach you about trading, which isn't necessarily the same thing as investing. I think you need to understand how things work and how to read financial news and statistics before you start trading. Otherwise, you're just going to get frustrated when you mysteriously win and lose funny money. I'd suggest a few things: Also, don't get into individual stocks until you have at least $5k to invest -- focus on saving and use ETFs or mutual funds. You should always invest in around a half dozen diversified stocks at a time, and doing that with less than $1,000 a stock will make it impossible to trade and make money -- If a $100 stock position goes up 20%, you haven't cleared enough to pay your brokerage fees.


Yes there is an inverse relationship but that's how it's meant to work.  Debt creates money. Banks do lend out customers savings for return interest as the bank can make a profit rather than the cash just sitting there. The process of Lending pumps money into the economy that wouldn't be there otherwise so it creates money. The banks will either have a cash deficit or surplus at end of each day and either need to borrow from other banks to balance their books or if in surplus lend to other banks to make interest because that's more profitable than holding the cash surplus. The overnight cash rate then determines interest rates we pay.    High private debt occurs when lots of people are investing & buying things so there is stimulation and growth in the economy. A lot more tax is being paid in these periods so government debt is lower because they are getting lots of tax money. Also To stimulate the economy into this growth period the government usually sells off large cash bonds (lowering their debt) to release cash into the economy, the more cash available the less banks have to borrow to cover deficits on overnight cash market and the lower interest rates will be. Lower interest rates = more borrowing and higher Private debt.   The government can't let growth get out of control as they don't want high inflation so they do the opposite to slow down growth, I.e buy up cash bonds and take money out of economy causing higher interest rates and less borrowing = More debt for government less for private.


"Yes, it is possible for you to refinance your existing auto loan, and so long as you can get the loan on more favorable terms (e.g.: lower interest rate), it is absolutely a smart thing to do. In fact, you would be well advised to do so as soon as possible if the car was a new car, if you refinance a NEW car soon enough you will likely still be able to get new car interest rates. Even if it is a pre-owned vehicle you shouldn't wait too long, since your car will only depreciate in value.  You will almost certainly get more favorable terms from any bank or credit union directly then you would when you go through the dealership, because the dealership is allowed to mark-up your interest rate several percentage points as profit for themselves. Your best bet would be to go to a local credit union, their rates tend to be most competitive since they are ""owned"" by their members."


"> reasonable conversation where everybody treats everybody with respect is out of the question  You can't have a reasonable conversation with N.Korea.  Bill Clinton tried it... and we ended up with nuclear weapons from his ""Nuclear agreemen"" with N.Korea.  P/S: Reasonable conversation did not work with Nazi Germany. Even giving them Czechoslovakia did not appease them. Ask Chemberline from the UK."


The first two times I took my practice exams munis and options were around 60% (but overall I was still at 73%). I focused on just those and this last time they were both at 80%, but everything else dropped (still wound up at 73%).  I take it at 8am, so I think I'm just going to try and skim the vocab then see how it turns out tomorrow.


Overpriced shares: Cheaper to raise new capital through secondary share offerings or debt using shares as a security. Fends off hostile take overs, since the company is too dear. When a company is taken over it needs only one set of management. Top management of the company that is taken over loses their jobs - no one wants to lose their job. Shareholders love to see share price grow - sale brings them profit, secures jobs for company management. Shares are used as a currency during acquisitions, if company shares are overpriced that means they can buy another company on the cheap - paying with the overpriced shares. Undervalued shares: More expensive to raise additional capital through secondary share offerings - for the same amount of capital the management has to offer a bigger chunk of the company; have to offer bigger chunk of a company as a security as well. Makes company vulnerable to hostile take overs, company is undervalues - makes it an attractive bargain. Once the company is taken over top management will almost certainly lose jobs. Falling price makes shareholders unhappy - they will vote management out. Makes difficult to acquire other companies.


>On May 16, 2017, a process began to roll back Open Internet rules, in place since 2015.  How is undoing a two year old law going to change the internet as we know it? It was always like that up until 2015.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality


"Yeah, but really - Amazon and a brick and mortar like Walmart do about 3/4's of the same amount of ""shipping"" between manufacturer and eventual consumer.  The consumer does the last part in Walmart's shipping model, in going to a physical store, whereas Amazon just takes that upon themselves in delivering the goods from a warehouse that's probably not more than few hundred miles from the nearest walmart."


I can't say if there is anything specific that makes lending illegal, but if your company goes bankrupt, you might end up in trouble.  First, it's a loan. It must be repaid. It must be in the books as a loan, and if your company couldn't pay its bills, you would have to ask for the money back. If the company goes bankrupt, your creditors will ask for the loan to be repaid.  Now if things are worse, your company goes bankrupt, and the person cannot pay back the money, then you could get into real trouble. Creditors won't like that situation at all. They will claim that you moved that money aside to protect it from creditors. They might be able to force you personally to pay, or even start criminal charges against you if you can't pay either.  In the UK (and probably elsewhere) it's criminal for the company to pay dividends if that means it cannot fulfil its financial obligations. If there is no money left because of that loan, then you can't get dividend payments from your company.  So as long as your company's finances are fine, and that person's finances are fine, you will be Ok (except I don't know if you would need a license), but if there are financial problems then being an LLC might not protect you.


"There is no risk-free way to turn $500 into ""much more"" in less than 2 years. If there were, everyone would be doing it all the time.  Your best bet is to work for additional pay. In the meantime, you can invest the money in tools for your work, in education, or in savings that pay a bit of interest -- but you won't earn much interest in such a short time.  You could potentially earn much more, or nothing, or lose a lot, by investing it in the stock market instead."


This image is an advertisement from this week's Barron's. The broker would want to put himself in the best light, correct?  This shows you that of their current accounts, 53.5% are not profitable. And these guys have the best track record of the list. Also keep in mind that their client base isn't random. The winners tend to stay, so even if it were 50/50, the 50% of losers might represent many times that number of people who came to the table, lost their money and left.


"Summarized article: Pop star Justin Bieber, 18, is currently featured on the cover of the latest Forbes Celebrity 100 list as one one the highest paid entertainers, as well as a venture capitalist.   Bieber earned over $108 million over the past 2 years through album sales, tours, fragrance sales and his film ""Never Say Never"".   The singer is also one of a recent wave of tech-savvy celebrities that use their own money to back private technology startups.   Bieber's manager Scott Braun encouraged the singer to invest in startups back in 2009. According to Braun, Bieber's venture capital investments are now between 2% and 5% of his net worth or about $80 million.  Bieber currently holds stakes in a dozen companies including Tinychat, Stamped, Sojo Studios and Spotify.  *For more summarized news, subscribe to the [/r/SkimThat](http://www.reddit.com/r/SkimThat) subreddit*"


Amazon already competes with wal mart for almost everything else, and they have been slowly killing it off. This isnt going to be the last nail in the coffin, but its going to continue sucking market share from wal mart.


The ATM is connected to a basic PC in a cheap tower that sits inside with a CD drive and flash drive slots available to have anything installed to compromise it that runs on plug n play. It's pretty scary but at least the cash is protected in a tamper proof container in the atm, right?


You cannot really help someone who doesn't want to help themselves.   Show me an addict who is suffering and asking for help; trying to hard to stop, and I'll help.   But to the addict that is sitting on the bench drooling  with needle mark on the arm, they are a lost cause until they decide they are ready for help.   You do you, if you want to take your hard earned money and help those that I deem 'unworthy' by all means do it. If it makes you feel good who am I too stop you. However, don't turn your optional charity into forced taxation.


Could it conceivably be that these executives had standing orders to systematically sell a certain amount of shares each month or quarter? Could we also extrapolate that this was part of their normal compensation package? Optics are still very bad, but the amount of shares sold and the monetary gain were so small as to be negligible in the grand scheme of things. Worth a thought.


I have a father who is worth a few million I could eventually borrow from for my own trading but IB from the way my friend described it seemed like an easy way to make 500 k with brainless excel sheets etc.   After hearing yours and multiple peoples opinions I agree with you.


Keep up with market news. Macroeconomics, policies, interest rates, major movements, etc. If there's anything you don't know you'll learn on the job, they wouldn't hire you if they expected you to know stuff you didn't. Not sure what you're worried about. If you're an analyst you'll have several months of training anyway.


Yeah, the owner and inventor Ted does final editing of all of the pages and he puts it out pretty much the way he speaks. It's not sketchy in any way. He's been working on it for about 8 years, has FDA approval in the works for each product and is filing 14 new patents within the next year. As for the title, I was just highlighting one of the products that I personally think will do well. The website will be getting a redesign once it's in full production. For the moment he has just the nuts and bolts until he has financial backing to make sure he can produce for the expected demand.


"My number one piece of advice is to see a tax professional who can guide you through the process, especially if you're new to the process. Second, keep detailed records. That being said, I found two articles, [1] and [2] that give some relevant details that you might find helpful. The articles state that: Many artists end up with a combination of income types: income from   regular wages and income from self-employment. Income from wages   involves a regular paycheck with all appropriate taxes, social   security, and Medicare withheld. Income from self-employment may be in   the form of cash, check, or goods, with no withholding of any   kind. They provide a breakdown for expenses and deductions based on the type of income you receive.  If you get a regular paycheck: If you've got a gig lasting more than   a few weeks, chances are you will get paid regular wages with all   taxes withheld. At the end of the year, your employer will issue you a   form W-2. If this regular paycheck is for entertainment-related work   (and not just for waiting tables to keep the rent paid), you will   deduct related expenses on a Schedule A, under ""Unreimbursed Employee   business expenses,"" or on Form 2106, which will give you a total to   carry to the schedule A. The type of expenses that go here are: If you are considered an independent contractor (I presume this includes the value of goods, based on the first quoted paragraph above): Independent contractors get paid by cash or check with no withholding   of any kind. This means that you are responsible for all of the Social   Security and Medicare normally paid or withheld by your employer; this   is called Self-Employment Tax. In order to take your deductions, you   will need to complete a Schedule C, which breaks down expenses into   even more detail. In addition to the items listed above, you will   probably have items in the following categories: Ideally, you should receive a 1099 MISC from whatever employer(s) paid you as an independent contractor. Keep in mind that some states have a non-resident entertainers' tax, which is  A state tax levied against performers whose legal residence is outside   of the state where the performance is given. The tax requires that a   certain percentage of any gross earnings from the performance be   withheld for the state. Seriously, keep all of your receipts, pay stubs, W2's, 1099 forms, contracts written on the backs of napkins, etc. and go see a tax professional."


This is basically the same as any other loan out there that defers payments.  The bank doesn't care because your balance with them keeps going up along with their future profits when you pay that balance back.  The only point where this becomes a problem for them is when you get to a point where your monthly income no longer supports the minimum payment required. (BTW, this is basically a study of what the US Treasury is doing with the national debt and the annual budget deficit, but I will go over to politics.stackexchange.com before commenting on the wisdom of this.)


Its a good question but the answer is not at all obvious if one considers and understands the media.  The fact that the electronic media of which the 'internet' makes up less than than a single percentage has thus far allowed morons like the RIAA play with it is nothing more than a tolerance.    Governmental overview as a side note is amusing in that it illustrates the degree of ignorance displayed by our policy makers.  They dont seem to understand that communication is a philosophy and the port 80 web sphere is one path upon thousands.   They can't control what even they think they understand... and they understand nothing.  We control the routers. We control the tables. We control the traffic. We control all the black magic that these morons don't understand and that's all of it.  We can't be stopped.


Of course nobody would have believed me, that was the height of the bubble. Everybody was leveraged to hell thinking that housing prices would continue to rise, especially the people who bought houses they couldn't afford. Then when the bubble popped, there is this massive credit crunch and all of a sudden spending and investment dry up. Now there is near 0 interest rates and that still isn't enough to stimulate the economy, so inflation is very low and people are sitting on liquid assets because there is no sense in investing.


There are a lot of issues:  1.  Healthcare is dominated by monopolies and oligopolies.  Giving decision making power to individual consumers isn't going to change that.  Breaking them up is necessary.  2.  Most pharmaceutical research is carried out with tax dollars.  Then it is handed over to individual corporations to charge whatever they want.  My wife was on a cancer drug.  It was developed by a professor at a University with a government grant.  The government paid for the testing, and when it was found to be effective, further testing was waved.  Unfortunately, a pharmaceutical company had already patented the compound, without having any idea what it could do, so they got it.  With no cost other than running a program that spit out compounds.  They then charged $14,000 per month for the drug.  3.  The consumer is at a serious disadvantage when it comes to knowledge in bargaining.  Indeed in many cases the patient is unconscious when the decisions are being made.


Turning your fitness passion and experience into a business can open up a number of opportunities. Starting your own gym may seem to be overwhelming, so here is an upportunity about personal training franchise. A partnership like personal training franchise enables even low investments to open home based fitness business, be an entrepreneur and still enjoy the continuous support of a big brand. Like just you fitness franchise helps in designing, building the location, doing some heavy duty marketing and assisting in every step of the way: http://hfbatman.informe.com/profile2769.html


It's all about the land value. The structure is only ever worth as much as it would cost to build a new one (minus demolition costs)


Ive said my plea, and my experience in the domain makes me very comfortable trashing that article; if you want to trust him no questions asks, by all means, just makes you as arrogantly ignorant as he is portrayed by this article. Really sounds like this article was written based on the markets of 2010.   I am not crying, just pointing out how your arrogance and your insults are not backed by much, and its not the first time I've seen an academic thinking he understands the markets so well, while not understanding shit about it.


"Two things to consider: When it comes to advice, don't be ""Penny wise and Pound foolish"". It is an ongoing debate whether active management vs passive indexes are a better choice, and I am sure others can give good arguments for both sides. I look at it as you are paying for advice. If your adviser will teach you about investing and serve your interests, having his advise will probably prevent you from making some dumb mistakes. A few mistakes (such as jumping in/out of markets based on fear/speculation) can eliminate any savings in fees. However, if you feel confident that you have the resources and can make good decisions, why pay for advise you don't need? EDIT In this case, my opinion is that you don't need a complex plan at this time. The money you would spend on financial advise would not be the best use of the funds.  That said, to your main question, I would delay making any long-term decisions with these funds until you know you are done with your education and on an established career path. This period of your life can be very volatile, and you may find yourself halfway through college and wanting to change majors or start a different path. Give yourself the option to do that by deferring long-term investment decisions until you have more stability. For that reason, I would avoid focusing on retirement savings. As others point out, you are limited in how much you can contribute per year. If you want to start, ROTH is your best bet, but if you put it in don't pull it out. That is a bad habit to get into. Personal finance is as much about developing habits as it is doing math... A low-turnover index fund may be appropriate, but you don't want to end up where you want to buy a house or start a business and your investment has just lost 10%...  I would keep at least half in a liquid, safe account until after graduation. Any debt you incur because you tied up this money will eliminate any investment gains (if any). Good Luck! EDITED to clarify retirement savings"


It should have been buried with a stake through the coffin. However, it is very much still a standard for us. The point being that if you have access to Excel, you normally can find your way to VBA. We don't have the ability to drop into something sensible like Python or Java without a full Dev environment which they don't like in production.


neat thanks for the answer, so you are saying that we will adapt and get now jobs that are not yet in existence, you mention the service related jobs but lets say that even that field becomes obsolete will we get to a point of no jobsand riot?(well this is maybe going too far in the future so its all speculation) And the trend that the richer get richer and the poorer get pooere has to  stop too, so maybe violent stop?


Here's my thoughts on the subject:


"All things being equal, a defined benefit pension is far better than an IRA or a 401(k).  Think about it this way - let's say you can have a guaranteed $100 a month*, or the chance at $100 a month.  Which is better?   Now, obviously, your tolerance for risk is the difference - but this is the beauty of a defined benefit plan. Your employer is picking up the risk.  Assuming that the pool of investments is about the same (which unless if their funds are tremendously under performing they are), the question is, who takes the risk - you or them? Especially if you are moving into a new position, having a defined benefit plan is like having a risk-free asset in your portfolio.  It increases your safety.  The only reason to roll this over into a 401(k) or IRA is if your expected value (risk * payout) is better.  A worked example. If half the time you would earn more than $100 and half the time less, then you could imagine the two as being equally good. Only if you really love risk would you take that chance.  In reality, only half the investments out there will ""beat"" the average, and as such, you actually have less than a 50/50 shot of beating a DB - unless if there are really low returns to it.  More likely, I suspect you are over-estimating your ability to get a higher return."


>  To some extent, this success is easily explained: as Hillary Clinton acknowledged several years ago, America’s “insatiable demand for illegal drugs” is what drives the clandestine industry.          Not really much else needs to be said.  As long as people want drugs, there will be a supply.  A shame there isn't a more effective program than DARE out there to try to fix that problem.


Your website is the face of your business and only a good web design can portray your image correctly to the website visitors. If you try to find a designer online, you will find the web full of designer profiles. This list will include huge companies as well as novice design enthusiast. Although sometimes, the difference is obvious, at other times it can be hard to tell.


I was thinking something similar but that he is trying to fish for 'the best deal' by 'walking away'....or he wants show his base he was very conflicted and not totally roll over on them.  It did seem odd that only every news outlet reported inside sources say he was pulling out and he would announce his decision in a couple days.


This is why single-payer was the only way.  The net result now is:  * Workers get less hours * Workers make less money * Employer STILL gets to escape without paying healthcare costs * Workers now penalized for not paying same costs giving them even LESS money * Insurance companies still get millions of new customers.  This whole idea was really retarded.


">I fucking hate it when I see another rich kid acting like they came from slums  Where did David Knopf claim he was from the slums? You got a source for that?  >and worked their way up the ladder  How do you know he didn't? Life is a bell curve. Some people climb the ladder much faster than others. Some people may climb because of nepotism. Some people genuinely are better than most other people. You think everyone should rise up at the same pace? Move to Japan.  >delusional twats much like yourself believe that you can earn anything with just some ""hard work bruh.""  Not just hard work, but also talent. If everyone works the same amount, those who are more talented will *generally* have more success. Of course, some is subject to chance, some people have a head start, etc., but in general, that's the way that the world has proven to work.  >About every successful silicon valley startup such as Microsoft, Facebook, and Snapchat were founded by kids with very prominent parents.  Yeah, Microsoft. K. So Bill Gates grew up with upper middle class parents. Know what? So did a fucking *huge* amount of people. Know how many are as rich as Bill Gates? Fucking none of them. He had a head start, absolutely, but that doesn't take away his success. He's done more with what he was given than any of his peers, and likely more than anyone regardless of beginning income level could do.   Zuckerberg's dad was a dentist. Upper middle class, but if you're *really* being honest with yourself, you'd realize that there are almost 200k dentists in the US alone, and yet there aren't 200k multi billionaires. Hm.   Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, was the son of a professor who immigrated from Russia. Steve Jobs was the adopted child of two blue collar workers.  Of course, if we move out of just Silicon Valley, your narrative really, *really* falls apart, since Silicon Valley of course has a little bit of a lean towards the wealthy,  as computers aren't cheap and getting started in that arena requires the use of a computer.   [Take a look at billionaires in general](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/photo-essays/2010-12-06/twenty-billionaires-who-started-with-nothing). Most billionaires [did not inherit their wealth](https://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/self-made/#7d08bb1941cb). And, something like a [third](https://blog.adioma.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/from-poor-to-rich-billionare-infographic.jpg) of the richest billionaires came from 'poor' parents, in addition to simply not inheriting their wealth.  >whats the fucking difference between someone who inherits their money and someone who practically has a trust fund?  A trust fund is a sort of an inheritance. I'm not sure why you're bringing this up?  >Again he is not self made. He's just an extension of his parents achievements...  Source? I saw that someone who shares the name Knopf is wealthy (posted in this thread), but are those actually his parents? Do you have proof of that? Or are you just guessing that since he's made it to an executive position and shares the name of someone wealthy, that those are his parents? Further, *if* those are his parents, how does wealth from publishing transferring into a job at a consumer staples company work?  Why is your first assumption when you see someone successful that they had it handed to them? Why do you need to selectively choose a small subset of people (Silicon Valley startups) out of an already limited group (billionaires) to be able to even attempt to make your point?"


For cash, SIPC insurance is similar to FDIC insurance. Your losses are not covered, but you're covered in case of fraud. Since your cash is supposed to be in a trust account and not commingled with brokerage's funds, in case of bankruptcy you would still have your cash unless there was fraud.


>I disagree and see it all the time.  Here's one example: people who grow up in towns where business has died off and don't move because it's all they have ever known.   I'm talking about the economy as a whole. There are more towns where business has died off/is dying off than there are towns with business booning/on the rise. You are highlighting the extent of the problem, not a potential solution to it.  >Sure there are legit reasons to hang around (family obligations, etc..) and not leave, but many just don't take the initiative to go where they can earn.   If the stability of your economy depends on people *having* to leave the majority of towns in order to go to cities where they can make money, your infrastructure will crumble and the society will fall apart.   >People did it all the time before the New Deal but afterwards are more content to draw off the government and stay poor.  [It's time to stop blaming Bob] (https://i.redd.it/4vxalvvyl0dz.jpg).


"I'm not so sure, most of these ""savings"" from the report is from the construction industry, they're struggling as it is and the fact they are adding jobs is a good sign even if the wages are less than before. We just saw a bubble  burst in real estate, of course any company that is benefiting from a growing bubble is going to be able to pay their employee's a lot more than they could after the bubble burst, assuming the companies are even around still."


You haven't mentioned how much debt your example company has. Rarely does a company not carry any kind of debt (credit facilities, outstanding bonds or debentures, accounts payable, etc.) Might it owe, for instance, $1B in outstanding loans or bonds? Looking at debt too is critically important if you want to conduct the kind of analysis you're talking about.  Consider that the fundamental accounting equation says: or, But in your example you're assuming the assets and equity ought to be equal, discounting the possibility of debt.  Debt changes everything.  You need to look at the value of the net assets of the company (i.e. subtracting the debt), not just the value of its assets alone. Shareholders are residual claimants on the assets of the company, i.e. after all debt claims have been satisfied.  This means the government (taxes owed), the bank (loans to repay), and bondholders are due their payback before determining what is leftover for the shareholders.


"This has been me for the past few weeks.  Side by side, the iphone has a superior screen and build quality. Screen is much brighter stock and I don't want to root android to tweak the settings and crash battery life, while build quality doesn't feel cheap. I checked out an HTC that had a brighter screen than the gs3 but its specs were poorer and os was dated. There is no ideal phone for consumers like me, and it feels intentional. What I really dislike about the iphone are the cut google apps, elongated screen with no horizontal-display growth, and very easily scratchable Al back. Bezel-less display would have been great.  Ideal:   4.5"" screen, iphone-quality no-bezel display, speed, build, while android-powered."


"Let's start with income $80K. $6,667/mo. The 28/36 rule suggests you can pay up to $1867 for the mortgage payment, and $2400/mo total debt load. Payment on the full $260K is $1337, well within the numbers. The 401(k) loan for $12,500 will cost about $126/mo (I used 4% for 10 years, the limit for the loan to buy a house) but that will also take the mortgage number down a bit.  The condo fee is low, and the numbers leave my only concern with the down payment. Have you talked to the bank? Most loans charge PMI if more than 80% loan to value (LTV). An important point here - the 28/36 rule allows for 8% (or more ) to be ""other than house debt"" so in this case a $533 student loan payment wouldn't have impacted the ability to borrow. When looking for a mortgage, you really want to be free of most debt, but not to the point where you have no down payment.  PMI can be expensive when viewed that it's an expense to carry the top 15% or so of the mortgage. Try to avoid it, the idea of a split mortgage, 80% + 15% makes sense, even if the 15% portion is at a higher rate. Let us know what the bank is offering.  I like the idea of the roommate, if $700 is reasonable it makes the numbers even better. Does the roommate have access to a lump sum of money? $700*24 is $16,800. Tell him you'll discount the 2yrs rent to $15000 if he gives you it in advance. This is 10% which is a great return with rates so low. To you it's an extra 5% down. By the way, the ratio of mortgage to income isn't fixed. Of the 28%, let's knock off 4% for tax/insurance, so a $100K earner will have $2167/mo for just the mortgage. At 6%, it will fund $361K, at 5%, $404K, at 4.5%, $427K. So, the range varies but is within your 3-5. Your ratio is below the low end, so again, I'd say the concern should be the payments, but the downpayment being so low.  By the way, taxes - If I recall correctly, Utah's state income tax is 5%, right? So about $4000 for you. Since the standard deduction on Federal taxes is $5800 this year, you probably don't itemize (unless you donate over $2K/yr, in which case, you do). This means that your mortgage interest and property tax are nearly all deductible. The combined interest and property tax will be about $17K, which in effect, will come off the top of your income. You'll start as if you made $63K or so. Can you live on that?"


To be fair, I learned about HN on Reddit myself, and I would say it has made me think twice about commenting superfluously. (Not that I don't, I just do it less now)  I was thinking I could just mention it and the people who were truly interested would search for it, it's almost the same title there as here. But then I got downvoted hard so fuck it.


Buy best phones within affordable prices, now you can buy the Samsung, android smart phones online through at shopallitems,which is one of the best online stores in the Dubai, UAE. We are offering a Samsung J1 mini and new samsung phone J1 prime which available in the AED350. 00 and AED249.00 and along with these things we offer brand warranty and genuine delivery to your place. Apart from this you can also check our sale of Samsung phones which are running and get a new branded phones within reasonable prices.


"From the banks point of view the point of a current account like this is to get you as a regular customer. They want to be your ""main bank"", the bank you interact with the most, the bank you turn to first when you need financial products and services, the bank whose advertising you see every time you log into online banking or walk into a branch. The bank knows that if they just offer the unprofitablly high interest rate or other perks with no strings attatched that people will open the account and dump a bunch of savings in it but won't actually move their financial life over, their old bank will still be their main bank. So they attatch strings like a required minimum deposit, a minimum number of direct debits and similar. These have minimal effect on people actually using the account as their main current account while being a pain for people trying to game the system. Of course as you point out it is still possible to game the system but they don't need to make gaming the system impossible, they just need to make it inconvianiant enough that most people won't bother."


From experience, Mastercard and Visa charge vendors about the same (around 2%-5%) while American Express and Diners Club are astonishingly expensive (6%-10%) and you'll find that few small retailers are very comfortable accepting these. The variation comes from the volume of trade that vendors provide.  A big retailer will negotiate a very low rate while smaller businesses will be hit with higher charges.


That's true about normalizing but that's not the problem with TV advertising; the problem is compressing.  If you've ever listened to talk radio, sometimes the host gets really quiet and almost whispers... and then he lights up and begins yelling and shouting.  Yet during this time, you don't need to adjust your radio's volume; the sound from the radio studio has been very heavily compressed so that the quiet and loud parts are all the same volume.  If you compress the crap out of your commercial's sound and then normalize it to 95% of the peak of the TV show's sound, which is typically not nearly as compressed, then your commercial is going to be perceived as *vastly* louder than the TV show, even though it never exceeds 95% of the TV show's peak volume.  Thus a law referencing the average volume is thought to be more effective than one that simply requires normalization.  It still seems easy to work around though; just have 29 seconds of silence and 1 second of horrendously loud, house-waking marketing slime.  What they need to do is require that neither the average *nor* the peak dB level of the commercial may exceed the average dB level of the show.  There might be cute little tricks that can get around that too, but at some point the ad agency has to actually talk and sell their product rather than performing mathematical backflips on the audio just to wake everyone up.


Yes, you can do this.  I do this for my own single-member LLC, but I usually do it online instead of writing a check. Your only legal obligation is to pay quarterly estimated tax payments to the IRS. I'm assuming you are not otherwise doing anything shady. For example, that you have funds in your business account to pay any expenses that will be due soon or that you are trying to somehow pull a fast one on someone else...


Interested in getting an MBA in economics or getting an MBA after Economics  undergrad? If you want an MBA in economics I don't believe that exists. If you want an MBA after undergrad usually you will need work experience first to get into the best (worth the cost) programs.   As to the best major to acquire well rounded skills in that area I see I was not clear in my wording. I meant that the best major to acquire well rounded skills in business is literally the major of business itself no matter what you specialize in. Depending on how your school does it the majors may actually be the specializations but any marketing, finance, operations, supply chain, etc. major should have more practical and directly applicable business skills from what they learned in class than an Economics major, BS or BA, will have.


"Facebook is an ""online social networking service"" which I'd categorize as an ad-supported social media platform for a type of company. Facebook makes money from advertisers and applications on the site, so there are a couple of different income streams though in recent years Facebook has done a number of acquisitions that should be noted as the company is much more than just the FB site. In terms of B2C or B2B, I see Facebook as being a B2C where businesses are paying for access to consumers rather than businesses looking for other businesses. Some of the posts on Facebook can be ""Sponsored posts"" that are where things can be a bit blurry for what is an advertisement. At the same time, various games run through Facebook may also make Facebook some money since some games may use in-game purchases that are worth noting. B2B requires one to have 3 companies in the overall system: One that is the middle, one that is providing a service and one that is consuming a service. While Facebook is selling advertising on this site, I don't see this as that different from TV Networks and other distribution channels that ads are bought for consumers to use. There is something to be said for what audience is one aiming. B2B implies corporate customers which I doubt is what Facebook's customers want. Rather they are personal consumers that aren't companies on their own to my mind. If you want something closer to B2B consider Amazon.com's cloud services where companies may buy resources from Amazon as part of the systems they may use to interface with others. I can remember in a previous job that we used Clay Tablet for doing translation services that took content from my employer's servers to Amazon's cloud that would then be taken by the translation company for more than a few different pieces to the puzzle. While part of Facebook could be seen as B2B, I doubt I'd see them as a large part of it but I could be wrong as B2B/B2C distinctions aren't my specialty. Are they yours? Consider Paypal in contrast where a business may use Paypal for payment processing. Paypal has agreements that enable them to process payments either through individual bank accounts or merchant accounts as well as for the company that wants to use Paypal for their e-commerce site. Thus, there can be businesses on each side which is where I see this being a B2B company that is also B2C as some people may just be consumers. Consider Google as another contrast where companies may pay to use Google for e-mail and the Office-like products like Google Docs and Google Drive that I'm not sure is B2B as this is just a business buying services from Google that doesn't involve another company. While there is B2C, B2B and B2G, not every business has to tie into a specific category here for something else to consider."


Then we are on the same page. However realistically we cannot change some of the stupid tax laws fast enough. The fact is, how I see it, is we must do something two years ago to fix this. This means cuts. I can be as idealistic as I want, but that will not fix anything.  (yes I'm fucking frustrated)


i am used to there being misinformation out there, and plenty of it.  but this kind of stuff is now so prevalent, and sounding like a drumbeat for war.  its like being deliberately, misleadingly instructed to hate each other in groups.    is it even legal to publish such misleading and inflammatory information?


It depends what rate mortgage you can get for any extra loans...  If you remortgage you are likely to get a rate of 3.5-4%... depending who you go with. With deposit accounts in the UK maying around 1% (yes, you can get more by tying it up for longer but not a huge amount more) clearly you're better off not having a mortgage rather than money in the bank. Does your 8k income allow for tax? If it does, you are getting 6% return on the money tied up in the flat. If you are getting 6% after tax on the invested money, that's way better than you would get on any left over cash paid into an investment. Borrowing money on a mortgage would cost you less than 6%... so you are better off borrowing rather than selling the flat. If you are getting 6% before tax... depending on your tax rate... it probably makes very little difference. You'd need to work out how much an extra 80k mortgage would cost you, how much the 50k on deposit would earn you and how much you make after tax. There is a different route. Set up a mortgage on the rental flat. You can claim the interest payment off the flat's income... reduce your tax bill so the effective mortgage rate on the flat would be less than what you could get with a mortgage on the new house. Use the money from the flat's mortgage to finance the difference in house price. In fact from a tax view, you may be better off having a mortgage free house and maxing out the mortgage on the flat so you can write off as much as possible against your tax bill. All of the above assume ... that the flat is rented all the time. The odd dry spell on the flat could influence the sums a lot. All of the above assume that  your cash flow works whichever route you choose. As no-one on stack exchange has all of the numbers for your specific circumstances it may be worth talking to a tax accountant. They could advise you properly, knowing the numbers, which makes the best sense for you in terms of overall cost, cash flow, risk and so on.


There are 3 options (option 2 may not be available to you) When you invest 18,000 in a Traditional 401k, you don't pay taxes on the 18k the year you invest, but you pay taxes as you withdraw.  There's a Required Minimum Distribution required after age 70.  If your income is low enough, you won't pay taxes on your withdrawals.  Otherwise, you pay as if it is income.  However, you don't pay payroll tax (Social Security / Medicare) on the withdrawals.  You pay no tax until you withdraw. When you invest 18,000 in a Roth 401k, you pay income tax on the 18,000 in the year it's invested, but you pay nothing after that. When you invest 18,000 in a taxable investment account, you pay income tax on that 18,000 in the year it's invested, you pay tax on dividends (even if they're re-invested), and then you pay capital gains tax when you withdraw. But remember, tax rules and tax rates are only good so long as Congress doesn't change the applicable laws.


You are obligated to return it, and they will come after you as soon as they figure out the error. You probably need to notify somebody as soon as possible and keep records of your correspondence showing you performed due diligence in returning the funds.  Transferring the money into an account at the same institution is also wise.  You can't look like you are hiding it, but keeping it mixed with your actual funds is also asking for extra trouble or work.


In the United States investing towards donation is a great idea because you can donate appreciated securities directly rather than donating cash.  Notice how much this can benefit you: So you get to both (a) donate untaxed money and then (b) deduct that unrealized money from your income total on your tax return. With the above in mind, a good strategy for investing towards this type of donation would be to pick securities that are likely to increase in market value but not likely to produce any other sort of income.  So bonds (which produce lots of interest income), or stocks with dividends, or equity mutual funds (which distribute dividends as capital gains) would all be suboptimal for this purpose. Of course, an even better strategy would be to establish a widely diversified investment portfolio without thought to future donations.  Then, once a year (or whenever), evaluate all your investments and find some where the market value has increased.  Then donate some of those shares.  No special advance planning necessary. Note that your tax consequences could be more complicated depending on your exact situation.  Read the section about Capital Gain Property in IRS Pub. 26 for all the details.  There may be special limits on the amount you can deduct.  Also, donations of short term capital gains are treated much less favorably, so make sure you donate only long term capital gain property.


last time I checked this market the cards themselves were pretty cheap, the decision was really  more about the POS system and how to tie everything into customer loyalty / marketing database etc.    so, first / easiest choice, see if your POS vendor has a recommendation. Make sure you understand any tech requirements for the reader / cards but they are pretty common and simple.   second, more advanced - use this as a step to get into loyalty marketing / reward cards etc... that involves a lot more software and training but pays off.


Most corporations have a limit on the number of shares that they can issue, which is written into their corporate charter.  They usually sell a number that is fewer than the maximum authorized number so that they have a reserve for secondary offerings, employee incentives, etc. In a scrip dividend, the company is distributing authorized shares that were not previously issued.  This reduces the number of shares that it has to sell in the future to raise capital, so it reduces the assets of the company. In a split, every share (including the authorized shares that haven't been distributed) are divided.  This results in more total shares (which then trade at a price that's roughly proportional to the split), but it does not reduce the assets of the company.


Markets tend to go up over time, so most things you could buy would make money. A benchmark is meant to represent the market as a whole (or a subset that is relevant to what you are trading), so you can tell if your specific choices helped or hurt your return. As an example, say you pick two financial stocks, Citi and Goldman.  They get you a return of 10% for the year, so you think you made good choices.  But if the financial sector as a whole had a return of 20%, your choices weren't actually that great.


"So your evidence for them being legit is them saying they are legit on their website?  Why don't they list the credentials of their ""collective of volunteers who assist in research for many sources listed on these pages""?  Scroll down the methodology page, see the part where they say their methodology is not scientific or tested? And that none of their contributors are experts in anything relevant to media/communications research?   Reread my previous comment, some of it got deleted so I re-uploaded it."


Jeebus... I don't normally agree with this guy, but he's talking sense. Regulations used as entry barriers are stopping the formation of small business. Crippling student loan debt is destroying our young workforce before it has a chance to get started. And another housing bubble is scaring first time home buyers out of the market. All so a select few can stay comfortable and add another zero to ridiculously sized balance sheets.


Other way around chief:  >Alibaba is paying $7.1 billion in cash and stock to buy back half of Yahoo's holdings. Another $550 million is being paid to Yahoo under a revised technology and patent licensing agreement with Alibaba.  Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/yahoo-closes-7-6-billion-deal-alibaba-group-161614948--finance.html


They're also getting a premium for having to breath exhaust fumes all day. It's not a pleasant work environment, and probably has long-term health implications. I'd bet if you checked COHb levels on a random sampling of toll booth workers, a significant number would be over 10%.