This is a case where human nature and arithmetic lead to different results. Depending on the your income, the effective interest rate on the mortgage is probably right around 2.5%.  So purely by arithmetic, the absolute cheapest way to go is to put the $11k to the bigger car loan, then pay off the mortgage, then the smaller car loan. The Debt Snowball is more effective however, because it works better for people. Progress is demonstrated quickly, which maintains (and often enhances) motivation to continue.  I can say as a case in point, having tried both methods, that if does indeed work.  So, I am with you ... pay off the car loan first, and roll that payment into the bigger car loan. If you add no extra dollars, you should get the small loan paid off in 6 to 8 months and the bigger car loan in another 16 to 18 months. It sounds like from your message that you have another $1500 or so a month.  If that is the case ... small loan paid off in two months, bigger loan paid off in another year.  If you stick with the Ramsay program, you then build an emergency fund and start investing. Good luck!


Mark Zuckerburg is a mixture of hard work, intelligence, and soullessness.  He spent more time working, reading, or studying, when others were out drinking.  That's the story of most successful people.  They spend their time taking risk, so they make their own luck.  Sure, it boils down to luck, but you can't be lucky if you don't play.  What people like to hear worse is that they can make their own success.  Though success on the Facebook level seems to have some aspects of luck, most successful people are successful because they spend their time taking risk.  If you are working for someone else, you are not taking a risk.  If you are goofing off, you are not really taking a risk.  Unless you are specifically building project for profit, or performing some service, this luck will never shine down on you.


"I'm not sure if this answer is going to win me many friends on reddit, but here goes...  There's no good reason why they couldn't have just told him the current balance shown on their records, BUT...  **There are some good reasons why they can't quote a definitive ""payoff"" balance to instantly settle the account:**  It's very possible to charge something today, and not have it show up on Chase's records until tomorrow, or Monday, or later. There are still places that process paper credit-card transactions, or that deal with 3rd-party payment processors who reconcile transactions M-F, 9-5ish, and so on.   - Most transactions these days are authorized the instant you swipe the card, and the merchant won't process until they get authorization back from the CC company. But sometimes those authorizations come from third-party processors who don't bill Chase until later. Some of them might not process a Friday afternoon transaction until close-of-business Monday.   - Also, there are things like taxicab fares that might be collected when you exit the cab, but the record exists only in the taxi's onboard machine until they plug it into something else at the end of the shift.   - There are still some situations (outdoor flea-markets, auctions, etc) where the merchant takes a paper imprint, and doesn't actually process the payment until they physically mail it in or whatever.   - Some small businesses have information-security routines in place where only one person is allowed to process credit-card payments, but where multiple customer service reps are allowed to accept the CC info, write it down on one piece of paper, then either physically hand the paper to the person with processing rights, or deposit the paper in a locked office or mail-slot for later processing. This is obviously not an instant-update system for Chase. (Believe it or not, this system is actually considered to be *more* secure than retaining computerized records unless the business has very rigorous end-to-end info security).   So... there are a bunch of legit reasons why a CC company can't necessarily tell you this instant that you only need to pay $x and no more to close the account (although there is no good reason why they shouldn't be able to quote your current balance).   What happens when you ""close an account"" is basically that they stop accepting new charges that were *made* after your notification, but they will still accept and bill you for legit charges that you incurred before you gave them notice. So basically, they ""turn off"" the credit-card, but they can't guarantee how much you owe until the next billing cycle after this one closes:  - You notify them to ""close"" the account. They stop authorizing new charges.   - Their merchant agreements basically give the merchant a certain window to process charges. The CC company process legit charges that were made prior to ""closing"" the account.   - The CC company sends you the final statement *after* that window for any charges has expired,  - When that final statement is paid (or if it is zero), *THAT* is when the account is settled and reported to Equifax etc as ""paid"".   So it's hard to tell from your post who was being overly semantic/unreasonable. If the CC company refused to tell the current balance, they were just being dickheads. But if they refused to promise that the current balance shown is enough to instantly settle the account forever, they had legit reasons.  Hope that helps."


This is a terrible mentality. You don't need to hit another qualification to magically find job offers (though of course it wouldn't hurt). You need to go to some clubs and network. Get to know the industry. Find out what hiring managers want that wasn't apparent with you the first time.


Humans are like a parasite to the planet.  Our Corporatocracy promotes growth because it makes them more money.  People follow suit because they were told it is good.  Those who promote capitalism are the ones who enjoy all the benefits of society.  The rich get socialism and the rest get financial slavery.  Very short sighted and lacking critical thinking.  Man without vision shall perish.


I bought a 4.7 inch Nexus 4 about 18 months ago. At the time, I didn't really want a screen that big - it seemed obnoxiously large. I bought it because there wasn't a smaller-screened similarly priced and specced phone.  It took me about a week of use to get used to it. Now, when I try and use an iPhone the screen seems comically small.  The article is an opinion piece, written by someone who clearly hasn't spent much time using a larger-screened phone. I felt exactly the same way about bigger screens *until I started using one*. The huge advantages in reading and viewing photos quickly became obvious, and I got used to holding a larger phone.


"If you enter the transactions as you execute them (and categorize them then), Quicken will attempt to Match downloaded transactions with ones already in the register.  ""Memorized transactions"" with known parties can also help. My credit card downloads actually come with a rough categorization provided by the vendor; that may or may not be accurate enough to save you some work."


"I saw that page, it's just a **page of text** with some **random buzzwords** and some sentences **bolded at random**  It's a rambling and rather incoherent read and difficult to extract any pertinent information from, but from what I can gather she appears to sell some kind of training materials to freelancers. Well good for her - she can join the countless others who do the same thing but don't brag about it so obnoxiously on interweb message boards and describe themselves as ""bootstrappy""."


If the buyside was showing demand, what's wrong with HFT for reacting with supply?  The example you gave is akin to me going from car dealership to car dealership yelling loudly about what car I want and the price I'd like it at - would you be upset if someone heard you and decided to sell their car to you later down the line? In this case, the buy side trader is being **stupid**. This is a major critique many people have with Brad K. Instead of serially going from exchange to exchange, he could have sent orders to all exchanges at the same time (parallel!) and likely received much better prices. In my opinion, the HFT player here is simply facilitating price discovery by reacting to demand - as a market maker that's his job.   [Here's a good article. Let me know what you think.](http://www.cnbc.com/id/101551570)


Hi, apologize for my English. Extremely moronic question incoming (corporate finance, Modigliani&Miller).  Let's say an unlevered company is valued at 1 bln: it issues 200 mln of debt and the corporate tax is at 40%.  What is its value now? The sum of unlevered value, fiscal shield (200*0.4) and debt or just the sum of unlevered value and fiscal shield?


"Thanks for your contribution. Of course, I won't be growing them into multi-billion dollar centers, but I was hired to ""help"" them grow.   The question is about how I can learn about a specific type of business. Please do share if you have ideas."


It's not primarily more people investing. In the 1980s stock exchanges went from open outcry trading floors where all trades involved actually exchanging pieces of paper to electronic trading. Once that happened, it wasn't long before most trades were executed by computer programs rather than human beings, turning stocks over rapidly for very short-term profits rather than long-term investment, greatly increasing  the number of trades (and also increasing liquidity for the actual investors; it's by no means all bad).


In my area, motor fuel taxes pay for road maintenance. The state of Illinois takes a share and send the rest to my local government. They are required to use the money only for roads. It is never enough to pay for all needed repairs, so roads are repaired based on state use estimates, road commissioner decisions and local board directions.


hmmm. I think it's because in both cases, you must pay for it up front, before the positions are closed out. You own nothing except the right to buy the stock re: the call, and the obligation to buy the stock re: the short.  You buy a call, but must borrow the stock, for which you must put some margin collateral and there is a cost to borrow. You pay for that, of course.  I wouldn't call it lending though.


"Do not use a shared bank account.  One of you can cash/deposit the check in your personal account and then either pay the others in the group cash or write them a check.  You open yourself up to many, many problems sharing a bank account and/or money.  Treat it like a business as far as income goes, but I would not recommend any type of formal business, LLC, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc. For federal taxes, you just keep track of how much ""you"" personally are paid and report that at the end of the year as income, most likely on a 1040EZ 1040SE, along with any other income you have."


Except: it's a material concern at every company.  If the senior executives all quit at the same time, this is going to be problematic no matter what company we're discussing.  I wouldn't be surprised if most 10-Ks have similar generic language.


It depends on the group of Americans that you are focused on.  If you are Mitt Romney or part of his NASCAR Team Owning pals, austerity rocks!  However, if you are Joe Shit the Rag Man wearing a NASCAR T-Shirt. stimulus is sweet.


I think it is just how blatantly they broke these rules and the over the top nature of the questions.  Not only do you have to be Christian but you have to be born again and show up early for Bible study.


Profits and losses in a partnership, LLC or S-corp are always reported proportional to the share of ownership. If you have a 30% share in a partnership, you will report 30% of the profit (or loss) of the respective tax year on your personal return. If you look at Part II, section J of your K-1, it should show your percentage of ownership in the entity. All numbers in Part III should reflect the amount of your share (not the entity's total amounts, which will be on Form 1065 for a partnership):


"Isn't it true that on the ex-dividend date, the price of the stock goes down roughly the amount of the dividend? That is, what you gain in dividend, you lose in price drop. Yes and No. It Depends! Generally stocks move up and down during the market, and become more volatile on some news. So One can't truly measure if the stock has gone down by the extent of dividend as one cannot isolate other factors for what is a normal share movement. There are time when the prices infact moves up. Now would it have moved more if there was no dividend is speculative. Secondly the dividends are very small percentage compared to the shares trading price. Generally even if 100% dividend are announced, they are on the share capital. On share prices dividends would be less than 1%. Hence it becomes more difficult to measure the movement of stock. Note if the dividend is greater than a said percentage, there are rules that give guidelines to factor this in options and other area etc. Lets not mix these exceptions. Why is everyone making a big deal out of the amount that companies pay in dividends then? Why do some people call themselves ""dividend investors""? It doesn't seem to make much sense. There are some set of investors who are passive. i.e. they want to invest in good stock, but don't want to sell it; i.e. more like keep it for long time. At the same time they want some cash potentially to spend; similar to interest received on Bank Deposits. This class of share holders, it makes sense to invest into companies that give dividends, as year on year they keep receiving some money. If they on the other hand has invested into a company that does not give dividends, they would have to sell some units to get the same money back. This is the catch. They have to sell in whole units, there is brokerage, fees, etc, there are tax events. Some countries have taxes that are more friendly to dividends than capital gains. Thus its an individual choice whether to invest into companies that give good dividends or into companies that don't give dividends.  Giving or not giving dividends does not make a company good or bad."


"I agree... I doubt if the people replying actually read the article.. here is her argument ""Millennial consumers are more attracted than their elders to cooking at home, ordering delivery from restaurants and eating quickly, in fast-casual or quick-serve restaurants,"" Smith wrote. ""Mall traffic has slowed. And, surprisingly, television viewership of sporting events (important for us, especially) is down.""  And while the comments regarding the food may be correct, I doubt a CEO is going to publicly state ""oh, and we've been serving shit food""... even if that may be part of the strategy to improve."


">If you can't afford basic goods, why do you consider yourself middle class?   It's been my anecdotal experience that in America, most people consider themselves ""middle class."" The well-off never think they are well-off enough, and the (working class, working poor, etc.) don't want to admit they are in dire straits."


I think Facebook got ripped-off. Lucas film have solid earning and proven franchise that will run for at least several generations to come while Instagrams is more like a fad but then Facebook is a fad so maybe not so much of rip off.


"You raise a good point about the higher marginal rates for 401K but things will be different, in retirement, than they are for you now.  First off you are going to have a ""boat load"" of money.  Like probably a multi-millionaire.  Also your ability to invest will (probably) increase greater than the maximum allowable to invest.  For this money you might choose to invest in real estate, debt payoff, or non-qualified mutual funds.   So fast forward to retirement time.  You have a few million in your 401K, you own your house and car(s) outright and maybe a couple of rental properties.  For one your expenses are much lower.  You don't have to invest, pay social security taxes, or service debt.  Clothing, gas, dry cleaning are all lower as well.   You will draw some income off of non-qualified plans.  This might include rental real estate, business income, or equity investments.  You can also draw social security income.  For most of us social security will provide sustenance living.  Enough for food, medical, transportation, etc.  Add in some non-qualified income and the fact that you are debt free, or nearly so, and you might not need to draw on your 401K.   Plus if you do need to withdraw you can cherry pick when and what amount you withdraw.  Compare that to now, your employer pays you your salary.  Most of us do not have the ability to defer our compensation.  With a 401K you can! For example lets say you want a new car where you need to withdraw from your 401K to pay for it.   In retirement you can withdraw the full amount and pay cash.  Part of this money will be taxed at the lowest rate, part at higher rates.  (Car price dependent.) In retirement you can take a low interest or free loan and only withdraw enough to make the payments this year.  Presumably this will be at the lowest rate. Now you only have one choice:  Using your top marginal rate to pay for the car.  It doesn't matter if you have a loan or not."


https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/GST/ Some of the costs are indeed related to the conversion rate, which, as we all know,changes daily. You don't say whether you're using a credit card. If so, some cards do charge foreign transaction fees; some do not. However, Australia, like many European countries, does use a VAT system. Therefore your charges will be increased. Please be aware that these taxes are built into the economic system. In many cases, you van apply for and receive a waiver to be reimbursed if the purchase is made through a duty free store.


Without running the numbers, if they are close I prefer a 401K over DB.  With a 401K the money is yours, with a DB you are at the mercy of the employer.  Two things could happen:  You could lose your job or they could just take away or reduce the DB.   In my mind DB is much higher risk than 401K.


By definition, this is a payroll deduction. There's no mechanism for you to tell the 401(k) administrator that a Jan-15 deposit is to be credited for 2016 instead of 2017. (As is common for IRAs where you do have the 'until tax time' option) If you are paid weekly, semi-monthly, or monthly, 12/31 is a Saturday this year and should leave no ambiguity about the date of your last check.  The only unknown for me if if one is paid bi-weekly, and has a check covering 12/25 - 1/7. Payroll/HR will need to answer whether that check is considered all in 2016, all in 2017 or split between the two.


What I'm going to write is far too long for a comment, so I'll put it here even though its not an answer. That's the closest thing to an answer you'll get here, I'm afraid. I'm not a tax professional, and you cannot rely on anything I say, as you undoubtedly know. But I'll give you some pointers. Things you should be researching when you have international clients: Check if Sec. 402 can apply to the pension funds, if so your life may become much easier. If not, and you have no idea what you're doing - consider referring the client elsewhere. You can end up with quite a liability suit if you make a mistake here, because the penalties on not filing the right piece of paper are enormous.


The user who wrote the Zerohedge item: The CBS article: The Quora estimate is similar to the Zerohedge one (estimated a round value of 1000 PE and a price of 70-80). Note that it was 30 days after the first 2 items you quoted. You used the CBS numbers except you used the zerohedge price.  It depends on which earnings were for each calculation. Past or future. The CBS numbers make the most sense because you can trace where they come from based on the links in their article.  CBS based their price on the estimates made the day before the stock went on sale. The price in the zerohedge item was based on the early trading numbers.


"This probably won't be a popular answer due to the many number of disadvantaged market participants out there but: Yes, it is possible to distort the markets for securities this way. But it is more useful to understand how this works for any market (since it is illegal in securities markets where company shares are involves).  Since you asked about the company Apple, you should be aware this is a form of market manipulation and is illegal... when dealing with securities. In any supply and demand market this is possible especially during periods when other market participants are not prevalent. Now the way to do this usually involves having multiple accounts you control, where you are acting as multiple market participants with different brokers etc. The most crafty ways to do with involve shell companies w/ brokerage accounts but this is usually to mask illegal behavior In the securities markets where there are consequences for manipulating the shares of securities. In other markets this is not necessary because there is no authority prohibiting this kind of trading behavior. Account B buys from Account A, account A buys from Account B, etc. The biggest issue is getting all of the accounts capitalized initially. The third issue is then actually being able to make a profit from doing this at all. Because eventually one of your accounts will have all of the shares or whatever, and there would still be no way to sell them because there are no other market participants to sell to, since you were the only one moving the price. Therefore this kind of market manipulation is coupled with ""promotions"" to attract liquidity to a financial product. (NOTE the mere fact of a promotion does not mean that illegal trading behavior is occurring, but it does usually mean that someone else is selling into the liquidity) Another way to make this kind of trading behavior profitable is via the derivatives market. Options contracts are priced solely by the trading price of the underlying asset, so even if your multiple account trading could only at best break even when you sell your final holdings (basically resetting the price to where it was because you started distorting it), this is fine because your real trade is in the options market. Lets say Apple was trading at $200 , the options contract at the $200 strike is a call trading at $1 with no intrinsic value. You can buy to open several thousand of the $200 strike without distorting the shares market at all,  then in the shares market you bid up Apple to $210, now your options contract is trading at $11 with $10 of intrinsic value, so you just made 1000% gain and are able to sell to close those call options. Then you unwind the rest of your trade and sell your $210 apple shares, probably for $200 or $198 or less (because there are few market participants that actually valued the shares for that high, the real bidders are at $200 and lower). This is hardly a discreet thing to do, so like I mentioned before, this is illegal in markets where actual company shares are involved and should not be attempted in stock markets but other markets won't have the same prohibitions, this is a general inefficiency in capital markets in general and certain derivatives pricing formulas. It is important to understand these things if you plan to participate in markets that claim to be fair. There is nothing novel about this sort of thing, and it is just a problem of allocating enough capital to do so."


The affordable holiday is perfect for individuals who are on a tight price range or just extremely hate money. Such individuals are misers and like to increase their bank balance every month. These holidays are just as enjoyable as plenty of additional holidays and if you do not let know your close relatives members that it is, in fact, a cheap accommodation, they would certainly not be able to impress the difference. And the credit goes to used TRAVEL GUYS ONLINEr for providing an all inclusive holiday and Hotel Deals.


"Like everybody else I'm picking up on the school loans - you're mother isn't exactly earning a massive amount of money given her cost of living, why is she taking out student loans that benefit you and your sister? I'm not trying to be offensive but it's fairly obvious that she can't afford it. As a first step I think you should at least take over paying your own student loans (you sound like you're out of college already and if you have $8k to ""lend"" to your mother you probably have enough money to pay the student loans that benefited you, after all) or as someone else also recommended, assume your loans. As to your sister, maybe it's time for her to get (another) job to pay for the tuition so her mother doesn't have to go further into debt. Again, I'm not trying to be mean here but your mother is digging herself deeper and deeper into a hole because of the tuition. Something's gotta give, and delivering pizza or getting a paper round is a small sacrifice here. Next, the car - unless she has a managed to work herself out of some of this mess, I would consider getting a much cheaper car instead. This is provided that she isn't upside down on the loan. Personally I wouldn't trade in a vehicle with an upside down loan, if anything that's another bad financial decision. Assuming that she isn't upside down on the loan and has some equity in the car, I would seriously consider selling the car and using the equity to buy something small and cheap. That should also hopefully reduce the cost of gas and maybe insurance somewhat. I think these points are probably the quickest steps that can be taken towards recovering this situation. You already mentioned the longer term plans like downsizing the apartment, but TBH I'm not sure that this is really necessary. The big elephant in the room are the college costs and removing those from the equation would give her a serious amount of breathing room."


"I got $3394.83 The first problem with this is that it is backwards.  The NPV (Net Present Value) of three future payments of $997 has to be less than the nominal value.  The nominal value is simple:  $2991.   First step, convert the 8% annual return from the stock market to a monthly return.  Everyone else assumed that the 8% is a monthly return, but that is clearly absurd.  The correct way to do this would be to solve for m in  But we often approximate this by dividing 8% by 12, which would be .67%.  Either way, you divide each payment by the number of months of compounding.   Sum those up using m equal to about .64% (I left the calculated value in memory and used that rather than the rounded value) and you get about $2952.92 which is smaller than $2991.   Obviously $2952.92 is much larger than $2495 and you should not do this.  If the three payments were $842.39 instead, then it would about break even.   Note that this neglects risk.  In a three month period, the stock market is as likely to fall short of an annualized 8% return as to beat it.  This would make more sense if your alternative was to pay off some of your mortgage immediately and take the payments or yp pay a lump sum now and increase future mortgage payments.  Then your return would be safer.   Someone noted in a comment that we would normally base the NPV on the interest rate of the payments.  That's for calculating the NPV to the one making the loan.  Here, we want to calculate the NPV for the borrower.  So the question is what the borrower would do with the money if making payments and not the lump sum.   The question assumes that the borrower would invest in the stock market, which is a risky option and not normally advisable.  I suggest a mortgage based alternative.  If the borrower is going to stuff the money under the mattress until needed, then the answer is simple.  The nominal value of $2991 is also the NPV, as mattresses don't pay interest.  Similarly, many banks don't pay interest on checking these days.  So for someone facing a real decision like this, I'd almost always recommend paying the lump sum and getting it over with.  Even if the payments are ""same as cash"" with no premium charged."


Credit scoring has changed since the time of this question (July 2017) and it is now possible that having a high available credit balance can negatively affect your credit score. ... VantageScore will now mark a borrower negatively for having   excessively large credit card limits, on the theory that the person   could run up a high credit card debt quickly. Those who have prime   credit scores may be hurt the most, since they are most likely to have   multiple cards open. But those who like to play the credit card   rewards program points game could be affected as well. source


As a customer I absolutely hate aggressive marketing . If a shop aggressively markets to me I avoid it - this is why I avoid [Shell](http://www.shell.com/) and [WHSmith](http://whsmith.com/) . It is also why I prefer to shop at [Morrisons](http://www.morrisons.co.uk/) rather than at [Tesco](http://www.tesco.com/) ( although I will use the machines there ) . And it is also why , as a corpoprate and as a personal buyer , after 15 years , I will no longer be buying Toshiba - their laptops now come infested with spyware and adware . I also pulled out of LinkedIn when they started spamming me repeatedly despite me saying no marketing emails . I also avoid getting my car serviced in the UK because of all the agressive marketing .  I don't put my details on marketing lists - I keep very tight control of address details including email addresses and I use source based email addresses so I can easily cut out any offending party .  Re, Ford - why does he \ they no longer sell just black cars ?!  The companies that do their marketing well succeed very well . From what I have read [Steam](http://store.steampowered.com/) is one of these .  We have a massive situation at the moment where many of the large corporations are having huge problems with getting sufficient sales - they are going the way of the dinosaurs . Part of this is that their customer base has been so impoverished that they can't afford to buy their products . But a large part of it is that they no longer supply the products , the price and the service that the customers are looking for . So customers look elsewhere and they get elsewhere - they find the products they want at a good price and with good service on the Internet and these are usually supplied by small and medium sized companies that are much more nimble . It's a case of bottom up progressive evolution winning over top down mass extinction events .  There are a number of products that I have difficulty locating . One such range is men's clothes . The main stores don't stock what I am looking for . I can find what I am looking for in the odd small store in some parts of the world some of the time and I can find what I am looking for on the Internet - if the vendor's web site would work . Does this mean that I walk around dressed like a 15yr old ? No ! - it means that I hold off purchases - things that I would normally purchase every 2 years now get purchased every 6 years .


We provide the  IELTS certificate services depending on your needs in the world. In the United States and numerous professional organizations across the world also accept ielts. If you want to go to the USA for a job, then you will need ielts certificate. You can buy ielts certificates without taking exams on our website. We will provide the best Ielts online score, No need to Attend any exam.


Rich people don't know what to do with the money they have. Poor people don't know what to do without any money. Idiots are literally running the world. The hardest part of growing up is finding out that no one is in control and no one knows what they are doing.


And emphysema. Smoking causes that. Cannabis also don't have strong pain killing properties...so using it as a pain killer would suck. Just because it's not addictive, you can still develop physical dependency on weed.  I'm not against weed, but I feel it's important to throw in all the facts and let people make an informed decision on whether they want to partake or not.  Opioids are highly addictive. It's a great pain killer through. If controlled properly, it does work.


What you're looking for is expected value. Let's say you invest $1000 in option A, and later discover that you are going to lose 20%.  So the expected value of option A is $800. If option B has a 50% chance of losing 50%, and a 50% of gaining 20%, then your expected value is $650 ($650 = $1000 * (50% * 50% + 50% * 20%)). $800 > $650, so you should stay with option A. In the real world, you usually don't know the exact odds and percentages, so substitute in your best guesses.  This may lead to suboptimal results, but only if your estimations are wrong; the formula itself is ideal.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-rating-idUSKBN18M06Z) reduced by 89%. (I'm a bot) ***** > BEIJING China&#039;s structural reforms will slow the pace of its debt build-up but will not be enough to arrest it, and another credit rating cut for the country is possible down the road unless it gets its ballooning credit in check, officials at Moody&#039;s said.  > While Moody&#039;s believes the reforms may slow the pace at which debt is rising, they will not be enough to arrest the trend and levels will not drop dramatically, Diron said.  > &quot;If in the future China&#039;s structural reforms can prevent its leverage from rising more effectively without increasing risks in the banking and shadow banking sector, then it will have a positive impact on China&#039;s rating,&quot; Li said.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6ejbr3/chinas_reforms_not_enough_to_arrest_mounting_debt/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~133519 tl;drs so far."") | [Theory](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31bfht/theory_autotldr_concept/) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **rate**^#2 **debt**^#3 **year**^#4 **Moody&#039;s**^#5"


Yes, if you gift him with a large amount you may be liable for gift tax. I believe the current limit is still $17k per person per person per year, so between you and your spouse you could give him up to $34k per year without triggering gift tax. If you want to give a larger sum, the standard workaround is an intra-family loan. Websearch for that phrase to learn more about it, but basically you loan the money and then gift the payments on the loan. This gives him the money up front, spreading the gift over subsequent years --but it requires that you declare the interest that he is supposedly paying you as income. There is a lower limit on the interest rate for these loans, but it's a fraction of a percent so this generally isn't a significant cost. (If you are able to structure the loan as a mortgage, he may be able to deduct the interest from his taxes. That usually requires a few hundred dollars if paperwork to set up.) I've done it. It works. And one of the advantages is that it puts the exact terms of the lian on paper where everyone can agree to them, which could be useful should there be arguments later on.  When doing business with friends and relatives, keeping it on a clear business contract basis is the best way to avoid destroying the friendship.


Meanwhile, income tax is still based on the premise that the government owns your income (property).  The government owns all of it and decides how much you get to keep.  This is theft based on force.  Meanwhile, Gary Johnson wants to end all income taxes including business income taxes and replace it with a federal consumption tax.  Doesn't anyone want freedom?


The idea of an index is that it is representative of the market (or a specific market segment) as a whole, so it will move as the market does. Thus, past performance is not really relevant, unless you want to bank on relative differences between different countries' economies. But that's not the point. By far the most important aspect when choosing index funds is the ongoing cost, usually expressed as Total Expense Ratio (TER), which tells you how much of your investment will be eaten up by trading fees and to pay the funds' operating costs (and profits). This is where index funds beat traditional actively managed funds - it should be below 0.5% The next question is how buying and selling the funds works and what costs it incurs. Do you have to open a dedicated account or can you use a brokerage account at your bank? Is there an account management fee? Do you have to buy the funds at a markup (can you get a discount on it)? Are there flat trading fees? Is there a minimum investment? What lot sizes are possible? Can you set up a monthly payment plan? Can you automatically reinvest dividends/coupons?  Then of course you have to decide which index, i.e. which market you want to buy into. My answer in the other question apparently didn't make it clear, but I was talking only about stock indices. You should generally stick to broad, established indices like the MSCI World, S&P 500, Euro Stoxx, or in Australia the All Ordinaries. Among those, it makes some sense to just choose your home country's main index, because that eliminates currency risk and is also often cheaper. Alternatively, you might want to use the opportunity to diversify internationally so that if your country's economy tanks, you won't lose your job and see your investment take a dive. Finally, you should of course choose a well-established, reputable issuer. But this isn't really a business for startups (neither shady nor disruptively consumer-friendly) anyway.


Learn to use contractions before you insult other people's intelligence.  You won't get audited for use tax only, but you might get your tax filings audited. If the state audits you, they will check for online purchases on your credit card statements.   I know from experience that the state of Florida put state troopers in trucking weigh stations on the interstate to look through freight bills from .com companies, gathered the delivery addresses, and audited at least some of those people.  I also know North Carolina and Louisiana look for use tax dodging during a regular audit.   I would urge you to think about why facts upset you to the point of name calling. It make no sense.


Higher business tax rates, incentivises businesses to spend to avoid taxes.  spending is always either on more employees, or buying things that supports more employees in other companies.  Its easily possible (links provided elsewhere in thread) to have higher tax rates without incentivizing the moving of HQs for tax arbitrage.  Globalized production is motivated much more by labour costs than it is by tax rates, but its also easy to use higher tax rates to encourage local spending.  Economists don't lobby politicians.  Only liars need to do that.


Money laundering alarms would definitely be raised, way before you walking in with the cash to deposit. Every cash transaction over $10K will be reported by the bank (and not only banks have to report), so the report will be sent when you withdraw the money, as well. But if the money is legitimately yours and you can show the sources, then you shouldn't be worried. There's no law against having cash. Its just very hard to track down the cash money sources, and if someone asks you and you cannot show the proofs - the problem would definitely be yours.


Seems like the straightforward answer is to call the provider and ask.  They should be able to tell you if you owe them or not.  Unfortunately, with small providers there is always a chance they won't get even that right; I would confirm exactly why they think you don't owe them anything if in fact you don't. Medical providers can go after you for years later, depending on your state; so don't assume just because it's been months that they won't eventually.  Smaller providers aren't terribly organized, but they do usually eventually go after most of those who owe them.


"It's hard to know what to tell you without knowing income, age, marital status, etc., so I'll give some general comments. ETFs come in all varieties.  Some have more volatility than others.  It all depends on what types of assets are in the fund. Right now it's tough to outpace inflation in an investment that's ""safe"" (CDs for example).  Online savings accounts pay 1% or less now. Invest only in what you understand, and only after everything else is taken care of (debt, living expenses, college costs, etc.)  A bank account is just fine.  You're investing in US Dollars.  Accumulating cash isn't a bad thing to do."


You definitely have an argument for getting them to reverse the late fee, especially if it hasn't happened very often. (If you are late every month they may be less likely to forgive.) As for why this happens, it's not actually about business days, but instead it's based on when they know that you paid. In general, there are 2 ways for a company to mark a bill as paid: Late Fees: Some systems automatically assign late fees at the start of the day after the due date if money has not been received. In your case, if your bill was due on the 24th, the late fee was probably assessed at midnight of the 25th, and the payment arrived after that during the day of the 25th. You may have been able to initiate the payment on the company's website at 11:59pm on the 24th and not have received a late fee (or whatever their cutoff time is). Suggestion: as a rule of thumb, for utility bills whose due date and amount can vary slightly from month to month, you're usually better off setting up your payments on the company website to pull from your bank account, instead of setting up your bank account to push the payment to the company. This will ensure that you always get the bill paid on time and for the correct amount. If you still would rather push the payment from your bank account, then consider setting up the payment to arrive about 5 days early, to account for holidays and weekends.


"Concerning the general problem of short selling and the need to borrow shares to complete the transaction : Selling short is a cash transaction.  Unlike a futures contract, where a short seller is entering into a legal agreement to sell something in the future, in the case of short selling a share the buyer of the share is taking immediate delivery and is therefore entitled to all of the benefits and rights that come with share ownership.  In particular, the buyer of the shares is entitled to any dividends payable and, where applicable, to vote on motions at AGMs.  If the short seller has not borrowed the shares to sell, then buyer of non-existent shares will have none of the rights associated with ownership. The cash market is based on the idea of matching buyers and sellers.  It does not accommodate people making promises. Consider that to allow short sellers to sell shares they have not borrowed opens up the possibility of the aggregate market selling more shares than actually exist.  This would lead to all sorts of problematic consequences such as heavily distorting the price of the underlying share.  If everyone is selling shares they have not borrowed willy-nilly, then it will drive the price of the share down, much to the disadvantage of existing share holders. In this case, short sellers who have sold shares they have not already borrowed would be paying out more in dividends to the buyers than the total dividends being paid out by the underlying company. There are instruments that allow for short selling of unowned shares on a futures basis.  One example is a CFD = Contract for Difference.  In the case of CFDs, sellers are obliged to pay dividends to buyers as well as other  costs related to financing. EDIT Regarding your comment, note that borrowing shares is not a market transaction.  Your account does not show you buying a share and then selling it.  It simply shows you selling a share short.  The borrowing is the result of an agreement between yourself and the lender and this agreement is off market.  You do not actually pay the lender for the shares, but you do pay financing costs for the borrowing so long as you maintain your short position. EDIT I realise that I have not actually read your question correctly.  You are not actually talking about ""naked"" short selling.  You are talking about selling shares you already own in a hope of maintaining both a long and short position (gross).  The problem with this approach is that you must deliver the shares to the buyer.  Otherwise, ask yourself what shares is the buyer actually buying if you want the bought shares to remain in your account. If you are not going to deliver your long position shares, then you will need to borrow the shares you are selling short for the reasons I have outlined above."


The best way to make money during a market correction is to be a financial services company handling transactions for people who think they can beat the market, and charging a percentage commission on each transaction, while keeping your own money somewhere nice and safe, stable and low-fee.


"as someone that works in finance, i will say it is really hard to get out of the sales web, regardless of where you are.  i don't want to discourage you, but you will need to get advanced degrees/certification to get into analysis or fund management. there are plenty of broker/service roles available at large broker-dealers, but you will take a pay cut and likely only advance to your current pay in those roles. and you will still have some ""soft"" sales responsibilities.  all that being said, if you want to go this route, go for it - and the sooner the better. if you are smart and hardworking, you can wrap up your bachelors in 2 years and then go for the CFA over the next 3. you'll need some luck to do the CFA in that amount of time (as there are 3 levels that take a minimum of 1 year each to complete), but you could potentially have some traction in 5-6 years.   so it would be difficult, but achievable. the CFA will qualify you for some corporate finance roles as well. i have some friends that were hired to these positions after only passing the first or second levels of CFA, but i believe they had accounting/finance background already.  i think that, regardless of your intermediate term plan, getting a bachelors is a great next move. it's a minimum in a growing number of financial roles. you can also look at getting the CFP, which is less demanding and quicker, but it will remove you less from the sales process. (you need a bachelors to qualify for the CFP, too)"


How many cable providers can you choose at your house? We can choose from exactly one. We could get DSL at 1/3 the speed.   High speed internet is pretty much a monopoly in this country, and is able to charge monopoly prices.


If your property has been affected by the disaster of fire or smoke damage, it is important for you to have a specialist who can handle your entire situation from initial damage assessment to decontamination to rebuild. Our experience and certifications give us an edge over our competitors. http://www.securerestorationfla.com/fire_smoke_damage.php


You are always best off investing in things you understand. If you have a deep understanding of the aeronautical industry, say, you are a Vice President at Boeing and have been working at Boeing for 40 years, then that would be a reason for investing in that sector: because you may be able to better evaluate different companies in that sector. If you are a novice in the sector, or just have an amateur interest in it, then it may not be a good idea, because your knowledge may not be sufficient to give you much of an advantage. Before focusing on one investment of any type, industry sector based, or otherwise, you want to ask yourself: am I an expert in this subject? The answer to that question will have a big impact on your success.


Same problem. I'm not suggesting there's a perfect formula that describes the world. I'm only suggesting that the axiomatic method used in pure math to derive new theorems (essentially formal logic) is a valid approach to understanding economics.   I'm sorry if I was less than clear about that.


Well, with TiSA, even the smallest government procurements, down even to the municipal level, those contracts will have to [be liberalised](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_pPqnbXpA4), opening them to bidding from companies from all around the world.  This will end those programs that steer jobs to a country's own companies or farms, often by means of means tested subsidies or carve outs for certain favored groups, stealing money from corporations.   Conservatives will be happy because all those New Deal style programs will be a thing of the past. The FTAs should also result in a vast expansion of the educational marketplace. [Like GATS](http://www.iatp.org/files/GATS_and_Public_Service_Systems.htm), the TiSA mandates massive irreversible privatization, but it [goes much further](http://www.world-psi.org/en/psi-special-report-tisa-versus-public-services).


They are the worst.  I knew all about these deceptive practices when I decided to open a checking account for my business with them in 2015.  I was working in a remote place and it was one of the two banks that had locations germane to both work sites.I didn't like signing up with them because of all this bullshit but hey, they had the branches, right?  Then I found out they were charging my workers $5 to cash checks.  Pressured them to open an account or else: $5.  Fuck you and the carriage you rode in on, Mr. Wells.  I went to the other small regional bank and even though they don't have a slick web interface that makes it easier for me they DON'T charge my guys to get their money.  Never again.


Many mortgages penalize early payment, and I assume it's possible to disallow it altogether. It makes sense why they don't want early payment. If you pay off the loan early, it is usually because you re-financed it to a loan with a lower rate. You would do this when the interest rate is low (lower than when you got your original loan). If you pay it off early, that means they will have to re-invest the money again, or they will lose money if they just have it sitting around. However, recall above that people pay it off early when the interest rate is low; that is the worst time for them to re-invest this into another mortgage, because the rate will not be as good for them as the one you were originally going to keep paying.


"It is going to save you more money in the long run to pay at once with cash. If you take out a loan, you will pay interest on the balance, costing you money. If you pay off the balance immediately, there is no difference between the options and your question becomes irrelevant.  There is no credit rating benefit to placing large purchases on your cards, especially since your credit is fine. My advice is to pay in cash in this case, mostly because it makes you 'feel' the purchase. This is what you are describing in your question. This instinct helps you recognize potential problems, instead of masking them with debt. Questions like: ""Do I need this?""  ""Am I overextending myself financially with this purchase?""  ""Am I holding enough cash-on-hand for emergencies?"" You may be fine in these areas, but I would still argue that cash makes you a better buyer because the expense feels much more significant, making you more cautious and discerning.  You are right to feel these things before dropping a large sum of money. Let it inform you and help you make better decisions. Don't mask it or be paralyzed by it!"


"This is an idea that was actually put into place more than a 100 years ago, in 1896 and even before, when the first electric cars were introduced and they even built ""service stations"" for them so you can swap the batteries. [read it here](https://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/26/electric-car-history/)  Even electric cars made by Tesla are nothing new.  And recently, a company called ""Better Place"", in Israel, produced modern electric cars with automated and robotic service stations that will swap the batteries for them. Read about ""Better Place"".  Bottom line: nothing new here for more than 100 years."


The simple fact of the Matter is this, that the US will not attack NK because it has nuclear weapons, The Orange Tangerine may like to talk out of his ass all day long, its simply not something that is going to happen.  Countries that do not have nuclear weapons, get attacked and invaded, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Crimea and soon unless they detonate a nuclear weapon and demonstrate the ability to deliver it . .Iran  It is a simple fact of life, it is important for anybody wishing for survival not to depend on the good wishes of a nation that is unable to recognize the Human right abuses and systemic genocide of the Palestinian people because of a handful of Jews that have them by the balls,, yet stand in front of the world and pretend to be the last bastion of Humanity and still lead the charge of Islamophobic hatred against all Muslims because the Israelis need to steal more land from the Palestinians. It has been 50years of Apartheid and ethnic cleansing and mass murder.  Its not about cute one liners pumpkin


hledger fits your criteria, have you tried it ? Here's the web interface.


That would be great, I'm just skeptical that it's possible to make green energy cheaper than fossil fuels. I guess you could do this by subsidizing research on green energy, which is not a bad idea.  >If you make conventional energy artificially expensive to nudge people towards renewables then you open the door to politicians gaining power by promising to reduce energy costs to the consumer via removing those taxes you're advocating for.  This is actually a great criticism, but I don't see any better solution (unless we are going to create an alternative to state-capitalism).


so newscorp is split into two classes of stock, A and B with B having voting power and A non voting. This gives the Murdoch family quite some power however their voting power is 40%, why didnt they make it 50%+1 so they could have full un opposed control of the business?


Carmax will be interested in setting a price that allows them to make money on the reselling of the vehicle. They won't offer you more than that. The determination of the value compared to the BlueBook value is based on condition and miles. The refinancing of the auto loan could lower your monthly payment, but may not save you any money in the short term. The new lender will also want an evaluation of the vehicle, and if it is less than the payoff amount of the current loan they will ask you to make a lump sum payment. This is addition to the cost of getting the new loan setup. If you can pay the delta between the value of the car and loan then do so, when you sell the car. Don't refinance unless you plan on keeping the car for many months, or you are just adding paperwork to the transaction.


"An actual degree may not be necessary in 18 years as ""non-traditional"" education becomes more openly available. Sources such as Lynda.com, Coursera, MIT's OpenCourseWare, Duolingo, etc, are dramatically lowering the bar to getting a decent education.  While these types of resources won't take the place of a degree, if only the ultra-wealthy can afford college in the future (at least in the States), we'll see even more jobs being taken by people from other countries, where education is free or, at least, significantly less expensive due to the lack of education and experience our own over-priced universities will cause."


Both US GAAP and IFRS are accrual basis frameworks. 99.9% of businesses report under those frameworks (or their local gaaps, but still accrual based). Usually it's public sector entities which are cash-basis in my experience.   Anyway, accrual basis has more to do with revenue recognition, not taxation, so that's not really relevant here. The value date of an invoice (ie in which moment it becomes taxable) depends on tax legislation (which sets the rules to determine the so called date of taxable event), not so much on accounting principles.   In many cases taxable rules are intertwined with cash collection/payment, however, to prevent creative accounting for tax evasion purposes. For example, provisions for various uncertain future events might be required by accounting rules, but the corresponding expenses are generally not deductible for tax purposes (so you won't be able to deduct them until the event actually occurs and you pay).


"Ok, since you asked, I'll explain. If you are middle class in the US, that means you make more money than 90% of the world's population (maybe even more than 90%). You just have to save more than what you spend and invest instead of spending on credit. In 30 years you will have enough money to live very comfortably. You just have to have the commitment and the focus to do it. When you reach 50 you'll have enough money to be considered rich, ie. your house paid for, a nice savings account, investments, retirement accounts and no debt. I've been ""preaching"" this for a long time and none of my friends/family wanted to listen. Read ""[The Wealthy Barber](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealthy_Barber)"" for more if you are curious.  ***Edit, provided a link."


Its a huuuuuuuuuuuge topic, and to answer your question in full will require a book, with a small booklet of legal advice attached to it. I'm not going to write it here, but I'll give you some very specific points to start your research with: ARM/Baloon - big NO NO. Don't touch that. Get rid of those you have any way you can, and then never ever do it again. That's the kind of crap that got us into the housing bubble mess to begin with. Especially with the rates as low as now, the only future with ARM/Baloon is that you're going to pay more, way more, than your initial period payments. Rates - the rates now are very low. They were even lower 12-24 months ago, but are still extremely low. Make sure you get a fixed rate loan, in order to lock these rates in for the remainder of the loan. Any ARM loan will have higher rates in the future. So go with FIXED RATE. Period - fixed rate loans are given for periods up to 30 years. The shorter the period, the lower the rate. However, at the level they're now, you're practically getting money for free (the APR is comparable to the inflation) even for 30 yr/fixed loans. PMI - private mortgage insurance - since you don't have much equity, the lender is likely to require you paying PMI. This is a significant amount of money you pay until you have at least 20% equity. It changes from lender to lender, so shop around and compare. Government assistance - that's what the broker was referring to. There were programs allowing people refinance even under-water mortgages. Check what programs are still available in your area. Some banks will not refinance with less than 20% equity, but some government assistance programs may help you get a loan even if you don't have enough equity. Closing fees and points - that's the money out of your pocket. Shop around, these vary wildly. Generally, Credit Unions, being non-profits, are cheaper on this item specifically, while comparable to big banks on everything else.


Companies need to go public before you can buy their shares on a public stock exchange, but all companies have shares, even if there's only one share. And anyone who owns those shares can give them to whoever they like (there are generally restrictions on selling shares in unlisted companies to unsophisticated investors, but not on giving them away).


For video games the S&P home entertainment software index will probably work. For airlines there's the S&P airlines index but that may not work well for private jets.  You should browse different S&P indicies based on GICS classifications or any other indicies you may find and then download their returns for the past few years and run a regression analysis on excel. Find the correlation between the indicies and the stock you're looking at then select the index with the highest correlation.


Anyone with a computer can check out the gross private domestic investment chart that the St. Louis Fed supplies to the public. Flattening like a pancake. Doesn't take a genius to realize this is a leading indicator for the economy. I would be more worried about another recession and potential negative nominal rates before I'd be worried about Fed asset sales.


I'll start with the bottom line. Below the line I'll address the specific issues. Becoming a US tax resident is a very serious decision, that has significant consequences for any non-American with >$0 in assets. When it involves cross-border business interests, it becomes even more significant. Especially if Switzerland is involved. The US has driven at least one iconic Swiss financial institution out of business for sheltering US tax residents from the IRS/FinCEN. So in a nutshell, you need to learn and be afraid of the following abbreviations: and many more. The best thing for you would be to find a good US tax adviser (there are several large US tax firms in the UK handling the US expats there, go to one of those) and get a proper assessment of all your risks and get a proper advice. You can get burnt really hard if you don't prepare and plan properly. Now here's that bottom line. Q) Will I have to submit the accounts for the Swiss Business even   though Im not on the payroll - and the business makes hardly any   profit each year. I can of course get our accounts each year - BUT -   they will be in Swiss German! That's actually not a trivial question. Depending on the ownership structure and your legal status within the company, all the company's bank accounts may be reportable on FBAR (see link above). You may also be required to file form 5471. Q) Will I need to have this translated!? Is there any format/procedure   to this!? Will it have to be translated by my Swiss accountants? - and   if so - which parts of the documentation need to be translated!? All US forms are in English. If you're required to provide supporting documentation (during audit, or if the form instructions require it with filing) - you'll need to translate it, and have the translation certified. Depending on what you need, your accountant will guide you. I was told that if I sell the business (and property) after I aquire a   greencard - that I will be liable to 15% tax of the profit I'd made.  Q) Is this correct!? No. You will be liable to pay income tax. The rate of the tax depends on the kind of property and the period you held it for. It may be 15%, it may be 39%. Depends on a lot of factors. It may also be 0%, in some cases. I   also understand that any tax paid (on selling) in Switzerland will be   deducted from the 15%!? May be. May be not. What you're talking about is called Foreign Tax Credit. The rules for calculating the credit are not exactly trivial, and from my personal experience - you can most definitely end up being paying tax in both the US and Switzerland without the ability to utilize the credit in full. Again, talk to your tax adviser ahead of time to plan things in the most optimal way for you. I will effectively have ALL the paperwork for this - as we'll need to   do the same in Switzerland. But again, it will be in Swiss German. Q) Would this be a problem if its presented in Swiss German!? Of course. If you need to present it (again, most likely only in case of audit), you'll have to have a translation. Translating stuff is not a problem, usually costs $5-$20 per page, depending on complexity. Unless a lot of money involved, I doubt you'll need to translate more than balance sheet/bank statement. I know this is a very unique set of questions, so if you can shed any   light on the matter, it would be greatly appreciated. Not unique at all. You're not the first and not the last to emigrate to the US. However, you need to understand that the issue is very complex. Taxes are complex everywhere, but especially so in the US. I suggest you not do anything before talking to a US-licensed CPA/EA whose practice is to work with the EU/UK expats to the US or US expats to the UK/EU.


Well consider this, even if you bought some at every all time high prior to this one, you would have still made a profit. I was kicking myself when I passed up an opportunity to buy some at $30. After its wild ride up to $1,200 and subsequent fall, I made sure to start buying around $250. Bitcoin is not going away. There are hundreds of different cryptos out there, but Bitcoin is the gold standard and it is becoming more legitimized every day. Regulators and governments passed it off as a fad for years but are now paying attention because people are actually using it to get around all kinds of bottlenecks that exist due to the structure of the current global banking system. If you feel like it will continue to be used more extensively and become more scarce over the next several years, then it is probably worth investing at least something into it. Of course, never invest more than you can afford to lose.  Full disclosure: I hold some Bitcoin but I am mostly in Ethereum right now because I think there is greater potential there. Bitcoin is pretty expensive right now and Ethereum is still catching up to it in market cap. I think we will see some great practical uses for it in the coming years. There are already some major players involved, including the Russian State owned banks.


I'd like to propose a 4th option: Let your kid(s) take out their own student loans, and then you can make payments directly to help them pay them down. Some advantages to this method: Note the many similarities to the HELOC, which would probably be my second choice.


"The stock should fall by approximately the amount of the dividend as that is what is paid out. If you have a stock trading at $10/share and it pays a $1/share dividend, the price should drop to $9 as what was trading before the dividend was paid would be both the dividend and the stock itself. If the person bought just for the dividend then it would likely be neutral as there isn't anything extra to be gained. Consider if this wasn't the case. Wouldn't one be able to buy a stock a few days before the dividend and sell just after for a nice profit? That doesn't make sense and is the reason for the drop in price. Similarly, if a stock has a split or spin-off there may be changes in the price to reflect that adjustment in value of the company. If I give you 2 nickels for a dime, the overall value is still 10 cents though this would be 2 coins instead of one. Some charts may show a ""Dividend adjusted"" price to factor out these transactions so be careful of what prices are quoted."


"2.5%? Whoa, you are being robbed there.  Straight-up, stripped-down, and bent-over-a-table robbed. Never agree to ""fees"".  If they don't want to do the work to give you a loan, there are other lenders who do. Rarely agree to ""points"".  If you know -- and I don't mean ""think"", I mean ""know"" -- if you know that you are going to hold that loan much longer than it would take to repay those points, then maybe.  For example, if they are charging one point to lower your rate 0.25%, you want to be totally sure you will stay in the house at least four years, and probably more like six or eight years before moving or refinancing. It's more-or-less OK to pay for the appraisal.  If something goes wrong with the loan application, the appraisal will be valid for a few more months, you can try again. I once had 14% cash for a down-payment.  The loan officer said if I could come up with 15%, the rate would be reduced by 0.25%.  To get the money, I took a ""reverse point"", which paid me 1% but raised my the rate by 0.25%. The loan officer, who wasn't too bright, asked, ""Why did you do that?  The two things cancel each other out."" ""I did it,"" I explained, ""because you paid me 1% of the value of my house to sign my name twice."""


"Save the effort.  For personal finance purpose, just use the simple tools.  For example, if you like P&G very much but you want to diversify with ETF, use: http://etfdb.com/stock/PG/ https://www.etfchannel.com/finder/?a=etfsholding&symbol=PG Pick a ETF with highest weighting. Replace ""PG"" in the link with other tickers."


The other answer is awesome and complete, but I will say that, to charge my car, it takes a few seconds.  I plug it in, go inside, and don't think about it until I go back to my car.  That's something that people who don't have an EV don't understand - most of the time, it's more convenient.  On long trips, you use superchargers, and the trip takes a little bit longer counting stops - because you were already stopping for food and bathrooms anyway so might as well charge while you do.  But, overall, unless a huge amount of your driving is long trips, then you will end up saving time with an EV over a gas car (because you don't have to go to gas stations and mostly charge at home, which is more convenient).


As I commented, there's confusion on withholding. The 20% pertains to 401(k) accounts, not IRAs.


Assuming it's your business, endorse the check as yourself and your DBA name, payable to your personal account


"I am interested in seeing what happens to your report after you test this, but I don't think it's possible in practice, would not affect your credit score, and also wouldn't be worth it for you to carry a negative balance like that. Having a -1% credit utilization essentially means that you are lending the credit card company money, which isn't really something that the credit card companies ""do"". They would likely not accept an agreement where you are providing the credit to them. Having credit is a more formal agreement than just 'I paid you too much this month'. Even if your payment does post before the transaction and it says you have a negative balance and gets reported to the credit bureau like that, this would probably get flagged for human review, and a negative credit utilization doesn't really reflect what is happening. Credit utilization is 'how much do you owe / amount of credit available to you', and it's not really correct to say that you owe negative dollars. Carrying a negative balance like that is money that could be invested elsewhere. My guess is that the credit card company is not paying you the APR of your card on the amount they owe you (if they are please provide the name of your card!). They probably don't pay you anything for that negative balance and it's money that's better used elsewhere. Even if it does benefit your credit score you're losing out on any interest (each month!) you could have earned with that money to get maybe 1-2% better rate on your next home or car loan (when will that be?).  TLDR: I think credit utilization approaches a limit at 0% because it's based on the amount you owe and you don't really owe negative dollars. I am very interested in seeing the results of this experiment, please update us when you find out!"


">>  Thirteen out of 41 republicans voted against Carswell, and 17 out of 43 for Haysworth. > >And 6 out of 46 Republicans voted against Bork. >  So, a lot fewer. And those cross-party votes weren't going to change the result, unlike in your examples. It was the first time in the modern era that a Senate majority had enough votes to block a nomination without any help from the right, and the did so, on purely ideological grounds. I'm glad Bork's not on the court, but it definitely was unprecedented.   > >Several of the Republicans I have talked to about this don't realize what the Republicans did.  One even wondered why Obama never appointed anyone. > >I guess I think the partisans are going to be fired up about something regardless. Might as well make it about a real topic.  Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. The Republicans I know are all back-slaps and McConnell love for the ""genius"" of the thing. It was a victory they celebrated. Trying to take it back Would *infuriate* them... but it wouldn't really be about the ""real topic"", it would be about everything that divides us. They're going to get fired up regardless, but that doesn't mean that stoking the flames is without harm.   >1) Do you think the Democrats did any doubling down to warrant this campaign?  If so, what?  Honestly, with hindsight I think passing PPACA without at least some GOP support was a pretty big mistake, and seemed to the right to be a thumb in the eye that they still haven't let go of. Him saying ""we have the votes to do this, so we'll do this"" is how they justified ""we have the state legislatures to neuter this, so we'll neuter this"". If they had somehow, someway, gotten even a tiny bit of Republican buy-in, we'd be having the debate about fixing and not replacinng.  I have no idea how that could've been done given the GOP players at the time, but pushing it through anyway has proven to be a pretty big problem in terms of politics, and not as helpful as it should be to citizens because of the political reprisal.  > >2) Trump won on balls and showmanship. He lied often but never backed down. He made tons of nebulous promises without giving specifics.  He stoked the ""us versus them"" climate and then he won.  Doesn't that suggest to you that modern American politics are not about issues or compromise but mostly about fanning flames?   Of course that's the way politics are working in this country nowadays... it's exactly that poisonous climate I'm so opposed to, and want to see diminished. Fighting fire with gasoline isn't going to help."


"There you go:  *Since 2008.*  Lots of crap has been predicted ""since 2008.""  Soaring interest rates.  A collapse of the dollar.  The Yuan as the world's reserve currency.  A collapse in ""the stock market bubble,"" which is ""clearly fueled by Federal Reserve policies,"" Etc.  People like yourself continue to believe that these things will occur, despite annual evidence that it will not.  Rather than adjust your views, you are holding on to them tighter.  It reminds me of people who deny climate change - more evidence simply hardens their views against the phenomenon."


Most dating websites provide dating service after pay registration fee. But we provide the dating service without any cost. Through our website, you will meet each other and if you want to Girls to fuck in the Australia, then you can visit our website. After registration, you can get more contacts for a girl which you want to meet each other. At first glance and it's only until you get interested and decide to sign up when you discover.


Remember both sides of the isle are playing the American public against each other. Don't let them win! Most Americans want the same things.   Random Quote:  *The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.* - **John Adams**


Indirect exchange (the common units of which are called 'money') is not debt (though the commodity of indirect exchange may be debt). Physical gold is not debt (it is mined, not conjured into existence from someone's promise of future goods). Gold-backed paper currency is gold debt.  Indirect exchange is an extension of barter, not a replacement. The advantage of indirect exchange over direct exchange is that it solves the coincident of wants problem. (Alice may want a telescope, but Charlie doesn't want 500 apples for it. Alice finds out that Charlie would trade the telescope for 1 unit of gold. Alice then finds Bob who is willing to trade 1 unit of gold for 500 apples. Alice then trades with Bob and then trades with Charlie to get what she wants.)


I agree that voicing your concerns can help change policy, but there is a degree of tact required. There are designated channels for complaints and concerns. Sending an email rant to coworkers is not the right way.  Edit: He posted it on an internal social network, not an email.


If I understand you right, what you need is the minimum amount in the account until your next deposit.  So for example, if today is the 10th and you get paid on the 15th, how much do I need to have in the account, so I know how much I can spend?  That amount should be all of the bills that will be paid between today and the 15th. An alternative would just to keep a running balance and see what the minimum value is. My personal finance software does that for me, but it's possible, although a little more complicated, in Excel.  You'd have to find the date of the next deposit, and do a SUMIF looking for dates between today and that date.  That's about as far as I can get without getting off-topic.


The net gain isn't $0.  An employer prefers candidate A over candidate B because he thinks A is worth more.  To give the employer adequate incentive to go with B over A, the incentive would have to be worth about as much as A's margin over the expected duration of A's employment.  That's probably not just like $5k.


Please refer to this question to understand the basics of how an order is matched. How do exchanges match limit orders?  Now most of the times even Block orders follow the same matching criteria. I think you are assuming that for every large buy order there is a matching large sell order. This is not true.     So on the Buy side at various point in times there were Buy Orders, with Single order more than 10,000 shares. On the sell side to fulfil these orders there may or may not be a single order of 10,000. More often there will be quite a few smaller orders or 500, 1000 or whatever amount that are present in the queue based on the amount & time sort order or even partially matching out of a sell order of 10,000 ... Similarly when there is a large sell order of more than 10,000 , these may not have got filled in by a large buy order but by smaller buy orders etc ...   So if you average out the amounts on the buy side and the sell side there would definately be a difference. The analysis of this difference is as indicated in your question, buy price is more than sell price and hence people are bullish ...


"First, a clarification. No assets are immune to inflation, apart from inflation-indexed securities like TIPS or inflation-indexed gilts (well, if held to maturity, these are at least close). Inflation causes a decline in the future purchasing power of a given dollar1 amount, and it certainly doesn't just affect government bonds, either. Regardless of whether you hold equity, bonds, derivatives, etc., the real value of those assets is declining because of inflation, all else being equal. For example, if I invest $100 in an asset that pays a 10% rate of return over the next year, and I sell my entire position at the end of the year, I have $110 in nominal terms. Inflation affects the real value of this asset regardless of its asset class because those $110 aren't worth as much in a year as they are today, assuming inflation is positive. An easy way to incorporate inflation into your calculations of rate of return is to simply subtract the rate of inflation from your rate of return. Using the previous example with inflation of 3%, you could estimate that although the nominal value of your investment at the end of one year is $110, the real value is $100*(1 + 10% - 3%) = $107. In other words, you only gained $7 of purchasing power, even though you gained $10 in nominal terms. This back-of-the-envelope calculation works for securities that don't pay fixed returns as well. Consider an example retirement portfolio. Say I make a one-time investment of $50,000 today in a portfolio that pays, on average, 8% annually. I plan to retire in 30 years, without making any further contributions (yes, this is an over-simplified example). I calculate that my portfolio will have a value of 50000 * (1 + 0.08)^30, or $503,132. That looks like a nice amount, but how much is it really worth? I don't care how many dollars I have; I care about what I can buy with those dollars.  If I use the same rough estimate of the effect of inflation and use a 8% - 3% = 5% rate of return instead, I get an estimate of what I'll have at retirement, in today's dollars. That allows me to make an easy comparison to my current standard of living, and see if my portfolio is up to scratch. Repeating the calculation with 5% instead of 8% yields 50000 * (1 + 0.05)^30, or $21,6097. As you can see, the amount is significantly different. If I'm accustomed to living off $50,000 a year now, my calculation that doesn't take inflation into account tells me that I'll have over 10 years of living expenses at retirement. The new calculation tells me I'll only have a little over 4 years. Now that I've clarified the basics of inflation, I'll respond to the rest of the answer.  I want to know if I need to be making sure my investments span multiple currencies to protect against a single country's currency failing. As others have pointed out, currency doesn't inflate; prices denominated in that currency inflate. Also, a currency failing is significantly different from a prices denominated in a currency inflating. If you're worried about prices inflating and decreasing the purchasing power of your dollars (which usually occurs in modern economies) then it's a good idea to look for investments and asset allocations that, over time, have outpaced the rate of inflation and that even with the effects of inflation, still give you a high enough rate of return to meet your investment goals in real, inflation-adjusted terms. If you have legitimate reason to worry about your currency failing, perhaps because your country doesn't maintain stable monetary or fiscal policies, there are a few things you can do. First, define what you mean by ""failing."" Do you mean ceasing to exist, or simply falling in unit purchasing power because of inflation? If it's the latter, see the previous paragraph. If the former, investing in other currencies abroad may be a good idea. Questions about currencies actually failing are quite general, however, and (in my opinion) require significant economic analysis before deciding on a course of action/hedging. I would ask the same question about my home's value against an inflated currency as well. Would it keep the same real value. Your home may or may not keep the same real value over time. In some time periods, average home prices have risen at rates significantly higher than the rate of inflation, in which case on paper, their real value has increased. However, if you need to make substantial investments in your home to keep its price rising at the same rate as inflation, you may actually be losing money because your total investment is higher than what you paid for the house initially. Of course, if you own your home and don't have plans to move, you may not be concerned if its value isn't keeping up with inflation at all times. You're deriving additional satisfaction/utility from it, mainly because it's a place for you to live, and you spend money maintaining it in order to maintain your physical standard of living, not just its price at some future sale date. 1) I use dollars as an example. This applies to all currencies."


Purchasing stock doesn't affect your immediate taxes any more than purchasing anything else, unless you purchase it through a traditional 401k or some other pre-tax vehicle. Selling stock has tax effects; that's when you have a gain or loss to report.


Target absolutely could have done more to prevent this, but that doesn't change the fact that these people were willfully cheating the system.  But really, the cashiers letting one gift card to be paid for with another gift card, and *still* giving out the $10 card?  That's just stupid.


"Sell 200 at 142. What does that mean? I haven't seen the movie, so I won't try to put anything in story context.  ""Sell 200 at 142"" means to sell 200 units (usually shares, but in this case it would likely be gallons or barrels of orange juice or pounds or tons of frozen juice).   In general, this could mean that you have 200 units and want to sell what you have.  Or you could borrow 200 units from someone and sell those--this is called a naked short.  In this case, it seems that what they are selling is a futures contract.  With a futures contract, you are promising to obtain orange juice by some future date and sell it for the agreed price.  You could own an orange grove and plan to turn your oranges into juice.  Or you could buy a futures contract of oranges to turn into juice.  Or you could arbitrage two futures contracts such that one supplies the other, what they're doing here.   In general people make profits by buying low and selling high.  In this case they did so in reverse order.  They took the risk of selling before they had a supply.  Then they covered their position by purchasing the supply.  They profited because the price at which they bought was lower than the price at which they sold.   The reason why this is necessary is that before buying the oranges, the orange juice makers need to know that they can make a profit.  So they sell orange juice on the futures market.  Then they know how much they can afford to pay for oranges on a different market.  And the growers know how much they can get for oranges, so they can pay people to water and pick them.   Without the futures markets, growers and orange juice makers would have to take all the risk themselves.  This way, they can share risks with each other and financiers.  Combined with insurance, this allows for predictable finances.  Without it, growers would have to be wealthy to afford the variation in crop yields and prices."


How are they going to know?  You're going to be wearing dress shirts at that stage of your professional career.  (*Not actual advice.  I work in a different area of finance, however one of my coworkers had full sleeves done at some point prior to joining and just wore long sleeve shirts to work every day)


It's a good question. We can't know for sure, but here are some things to think about. Paypal advertises a discounted transaction rate for non-profit organizations.  In the U.S. at least, the rate they advertise is 2.2% + 0.30 USD.  There are lots of things that can come into play here, such as international rates or any special deal that Wikimedia has struck with Paypal, but it seems reasonable to guess that of your 2€ donation, Wikipedia sees perhaps 1.65€.  Note that most of the fee is a flat rate; of the next 2€ in your donation, Wikipedia gets 1.96€. Direct debit probably has lower fees.  Paypal has to account for some credit card transaction fees in their fee structure, and direct debit does not.  Therefore, I would guess that to maximize your gift, direct debit might result a little better than Paypal.   Charities, in general, don't want to tell you the best way to donate, because they want it to be as easy for you as possible, and don't want to discourage any type of donation at all.  They are very happy to get any donation, even if one method over another results in slightly higher fees.  Wikimedia, in particular, offers many different options for donating.


Family Life Insurance Adviser Sydney is one of the biggest names in providing advice for family life insurance in Sydney. We have an expert team of advisers who will help you to choose best and suitable family life insurance plan as per your needs and requirements.


"Dividend yields can also reflect important information about the company's status. For example, a company that has never lowered or stopped paying dividends is a ""strong"" company because it has the cash/earnings power to maintain its dividend regardless of the market. Ideally, a company should pay dividends for at least 10 years for an investor to consider the company as a ""consistent payer."" Furthermore, when a company pays dividend, it generally means that it has more cash than it can profitably reinvest in the business, so companies that pay dividends tend to be older but more stable. An important exception is REIT's and their ilk - to avoid taxation, these types of funds must distribute 90% of their earnings to their shareholders, so they pay very high dividends. Just look at stocks like NLY or CMO to get an idea. The issue here, however, is two fold: So a high dividend can be great [if it has been paid consistently] or risky [if the company is new or has a short payment history], and dividends can also tell us about what the company's status is.  Lastly, taxation on dividend income is higher than taxation on capital gains, but by reinvesting dividends you can avoid this tax and lower your potential capital gain amount, thus limiting taxes.  http://www.tweedy.com/resources/library_docs/papers/highdiv_research.pdf is an excellent paper on dividend yields and investing."


A long call options spread. In this case, a bet that the USO ETF would recover to $35. You can see, I got in when USO was $28, and it's continued to drop, but it has till Jan '17 to recover. The spread is set up to give leverage, when I entered the trade, a 50% recovery would result in a 200% gain, or 3X my bet. An option spread can be bought using any two strikes, and with different payouts depending on how far out of the money the strikes are.


If you are convinced/sure its legit. Is doing a bank transfer to correct their mistake, actually the right way to do it in the first place?  Best is to write to University and ask if this extra can be adjusted towards future payments. Not sure how much that is and would one or two future payments cover it off.  The second best thing would be to ask if University can take it up with Bank and have this reversed? If the above don't work, then request for an address where you can send the check for the refund.


"Chris - you realize that when you buy a stock, the seller gets the money, not the company itself, unless of course, you bought IPO shares. And the amount you'd own would be such a small portion of the company, they don't know you exist.  As far as morals go, if you wish to avoid certain stocks for this reason, look at the Socially Responsible funds that are out there. There are also funds that are targeted to certain religions and avoid alcohol and tobacco. The other choice is to invest in individual stocks which for the small investor is very tough and expensive. You'll spend more money to avoid the shares than these very shares are worth.  Your proposal is interesting but impractical. In a portfolio of say $100K in the S&P, the bottom 400 stocks are disproportionately smaller amounts of money in those shares than the top 100. So we're talking $100 or less. You'd need to short 2 or 3 shares. Even at $1M in that fund, 20-30 shares shorted is pretty silly, no offense.  Why not 'do the math' and during the year you purchase the fund, donate the amount you own in the ""bad"" companies to charity.  And what littleadv said - that too."


I didn’t say everything is ok, I said things are improving. I also have been speaking generally about the world in the entirety of this comment thread, but you’ve apparently decided that only Americans in poverty matter. I view that as myopic and selfish, but hell let’s go with that for a second.   Regarding specifically the US - it turns out poverty is decreasing here as well:  http://www.povertyusa.org/the-state-of-poverty/poverty-facts/  Also by your own definition, no one in the middle class is in poverty. The census bureau says 43 million people in the us live in poverty. This is way too many, but it is less than 25%. It’s closer to 12%.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States  So once again, I’ve shown how nothing you say has any basis in reality. I’ve also never said everything is fine, I’ve only said it’s improving systematically.   What I say is true and based in fact. What you say is based on your feelings and categorically not true by any measure, and can’t even be saved by your fluid redefinition of terms.  Please understand that things aren’t perfect and the world isn’t fair, but poverty in the US and elsewhere are improving. Feelings can’t change facts, and you’re feelings simply don’t line up with the facts.


I happen to be one such person. When I looked at what I was being offered for a lump sum, then shopped around to see what annuity I could replace it with, the difference between retail and wholesale was blindingly obvious. GM was offering me the wholesale cost (or less), while all the replacement annuities (retail prices) were offering me 1/2 the monthly payment that I'm expecting from the GM pension.   After the financial market's meltdown in 2008 lost me between 45 and 55% of my mutual funds' values (some lost more than others), I no longer have the fantasy belief that I can do better managing my money than professional investors. Learning that lesson cost me about $75k - which is several times the amount that I was offered for a buy out. As someone in my 50s, I am far more concerned about outliving my money than I am concerned about having a larger stash of chips. I won't be making $100k/year forever, as age discrimination in software development is widespread, and all the developers I personally know who are older than me, they all mention hitting brick walls getting hired when they hit 54-55 years old.   You may notice from the article that this is only for the salaried workers. The hourly workers are due to be shafted some other way.


This article highlights Romney's true position on outsourcing of jobs. He cares about the bottomline. He was like any other businessman, after profit. So, he understands and sympathizes with companies that outsource their business activities. He's a politician now, and the people are the number one priority, not corporations. I doubt he will institute hardline policies on keeping companies in the US, especially if it will lead to decreased profit. It goes against his political beliefs.


"Here is another quote from the same speech:  >“I just got back from Israel, Ireland and France – three countries that deeply recognise the importance of having a business tax scheme for jobs and wage growth. We don’t have that.”  >Dimon lamented US failure to build an airport in the last 10 years and the opiate addiction epidemic.  You don't build airports by cutting taxes, and you don't cite FRANCE's tax scheme to advocate for cutting taxes.  Here is what Wikipedia says about taxes in France:  >""France continues to be among the OECD countries whose tax rate is the highest. Taxes account for 45% of GDP against 37% on average in OECD countries.""  https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Taxation_in_France"


Aeroprop is a propeller service, it is an FAA certified repair Station for quality aircraft propeller and governor overhaul, repair, and sales, including all McCauley Propellers and Governors, all Hartzell Propellers and Governors, Black Mack and Ontic Governors, Sensenich and Governors, Dowty Propellers and all Sensenich Propellers. We use Goodrich device products unless otherwise specified and have been servicing Propeller for over 65 years. The propeller is intended to deal with these strengths securely, however elements, for example, erosion, exhaustion, splitting, wear, and glitch can bargain auxiliary honesty some of the time with disastrous outcomes. For further more information about the servcies and support in the Rocky, Mountain, feel free to get in touch with us.


Home painters are in high demand in Vancouver, which is why we want you to give us a call as soon as you have figured out what project(s) you need to do. Get an appointment with us as soon as possible so that we can get your home looking great before the busy season starts! http://barwickpainting.com/contact-us/


"If I had to guess, I think Chipotle's queso is the way it is because Chipotle is trying to maintain their ""wholesome, quality ingredients"" approach to queso.  But that's the problem: naturally made cheeses don't melt into liquids. If anyone has worked in the pizza business for any period of time, then they might know at least one thing about cheese: melted cheese has a very high oil content.  Mix your cheese with a shit load of oil and it can melt beautifully. Want your cheese to stay in a liquid state at a lower temperature? Add more oil.  So if you want to maintain wholesome, arguably healthy ingredients and make queso at the same time, then you've got a problem because it's damn hard to make liquid cheese without having it be the worst thing imaginable for your health.  After trying Chipotle's queso last week, I guessed that they were trying to make a not-so-miserable-for-your-health version of queso, so they made a queso without all of the added oil.  But that's the problem: oil is fucking delicious. Pretty much anything that is high in fats (like oil) or sugars tastes amazing. The higher the fat and/or sugar content, the better it tastes, but also the worse it is for your health, generally.  So Chipotle has a queso that isn't godawful for your health, but it also tastes like it.  I applaud Chipotle's willingness to experiment with new products and try new things, but I'm projecting that this queso won't have mass appeal because it doesn't taste great. A group of us bought a cup of it, and we didn't finish it.  Sorry, Chipotle. I like the effort; but if I want chips & queso, my ass is rollin' across the street to Q'doba to get some of that terrible-for-my-health, zero-nutritional-value, yellow-oil-cheese-product deliciousness."


Yeah, that's in the public knowledge. What I actually want to know is who runs the foundation after the current co-chairs Mr. & Ms Gates, Gates Sr., and Buffett are gone.   Will the juniors be in the payroll? Will the juniors be living in the houses owned by the foundation?   Question is what kind of relationship will the juniors have with that foundation after the seniors have gone?