From India Tax point of view: Some one else may give the US tax treatment. Refer to this similar question what taxes I need to pay in India Capital Gains. My accountant never asked or reported the bought property in taxes- should he reported in taxes?Did he do wrong not reporting   should I report the property in my next year taxes?   If you mean in IT Returns, yes it should be declared. Can i bring the money back if needed? By Back if you mean repatriate to US, The capital portion would be Ease if the loan property was purchased or loan repaid from NRE. Else there is limit on the amount and paperwork. Consult a CA. If I rent the property instead of selling, do I have to report the income and what income?   should I be filling taxes on the rental income in India or just in USA or both   You are taxable for the rent and have to report it as income and pay taxes in India.


A 529 has a custodian and beneficiary. If, say, my Mom is custodian and my daughter the beneficiary, neither my daughter, my wife, nor I can access this account. In fact, if my daughter chooses not to attend college, Mom can change beneficiaries.  So, a 529 is ideal for what you have described.  By the way, your wife may have broken the law. Money in your child's name/SSN cannot simply be taken from the account at a parent's whim. You have every right to ask for an accounting of that money and insist she return it to your child's account.  Edit - I was going to add that UTMA money may only be spent for the benefit of the child, and not for day to day items, food, clothing, etc. The article The proper use of UTMA funds provides a bit of support to my position on that.


As an investment, the trend doesn't really matter, what matters is the price which you buy the house, and the price at which you sell.  Say you buy a house for $250k today.  In general, it doesn't matter if the house is worth $200k or $300k tomorrow (neglecting things like refinancing and home equity loans).  What matters is the price when you sell.  The longer you plan to stay, the less the current market conditions mean. Of course there is a lot more that goes into the decision to buy a house, since you are going to live in it. You also need to take into account things like how long you plan on staying in the area, the stability of your job, and future family size.


Life Strategy funds are more appropriate if you want to maintain a specific allocation between stocks and bonds that doesn't automatically adjustment like the Target Retirement funds which have a specific date.  Thus, it may make more sense to take whichever Life Strategy fund seems the most appropriate and ride with it for a while unless you know when you plan to retire and access those funds. In theory, you could use Vanguard's Total Market funds,i.e. Total Stock Market, Total International, and Total Bond, and have your own allocations between stocks and bonds be managed pretty easily and don't forget that the fees can come in a couple of flavors as betterment doesn't specify where the transaction fees for buying the ETFs are coming out just as something to consider.


Another option is to short whatever interest rate you think will go up.  For example, if you think that interest on treasuries will go up, then short treasuries.


What about web-hosting fees? Cost of Internet service? Cost of computer equipment to do the work? Amortized cost of development? Time for support calls/email? Phone service used for sales? Advertising/marketing expenses? Look hard--I bet there are some costs.


I wasn't 100% on which columns of the scale you were referring to, but think I captured the correct ones in this comparison, using the scale for BA and MA (MA scale starting 2 years later, with decreased income reflected for first two years), applying a 1% cost of living increase each year to the scale or to prior year after the scale maxes out and assuming you borrow 40k and repay years 3-10, then the difference and cumulative difference between each scenario:  So it would be about 16 years to start coming out ahead, but this doesn't account for the tax deduction of student loan interest. Some things in favor of borrowing for a MA, there are loan forgiveness programs for teachers, you might only make 5-years of minimum payments before having the remainder forgiven if you qualify for one of those programs. Not sure how retirement works for teachers in WA, but in some states you can get close to your maximum salary each year in retirement. Additionally, you can deduct student loan interest without itemizing your tax return, so that helps with the cost of the debt. Edit: I used a simple student loan calculator, if you financed the full 40k at 6% you'd be looking at $444 monthly payments for 10 years, or $5,328/year (not calculating the tax deduction for loan interest).


>The point is, the worker deserve a share of those profits. It is their work that has made them - in addition to the work of the CEO  Uh, no. The main purpose of a corporation is to increase shareholders' wealth. Neither the workers, nor the CEO *deserve* anything from the profits, their pay has already been deducted as an expense. Profit is the residual income that is left to distribute to shareholders (you know, the guys who are risking everything. i.e. they are last to receive anything, if left, when a company goes bankrupt) as a dividend, or to reinvest in the company.   If salaries are inadequately low, that is a whole different problem. Increase them, and have more adequate profit levels *next year*. But let's not get confused as to who deserves what.  Personally, I find both Cat's remuneration's policy and the union's demands disgusting. So don't take this the wrong way. CEO is clearly overpaid already, but they did not just decide to give him a raise or something. Pay for performance measures are probably already in his contract. Maybe next time when that contract is renegotiated the remuneration board will propose more normal terms. The union on the other hand, with its unreasonable demands about seniority, and god knows what else, is likely to lead to many cut-backs (at the new terms), and unlikely, but possible, closure of the plant, leading to even more unemployment.


How do you manage things like right of way? Duplication of services etc?  Are we to assume that all actors will build in good faith and allow all to access these pieces of infrastructure. What happens if we clog up all the first few meters of underground with network cable and the one water company needs to upgrade piping to meet population needs?  Who co-ordinates all these kinds of things to ensure it works well? How are these people paid? Where do their interests lie? In the event of a big highway project tearing through a neighborhood who represents the people of the neighborhood and ensures their interests are heard as well?  What about public services that are in no way profitable for a company to run or manage?  I would love to just let the perfect free market reign however it completely ignores all kinds of physical and logistic realities.


Yep that wasn't a shot at you. I had to read the article to determine if it meant that:  A.) A rule exists that makes it easier to sue banks, and republicans are killing it, OR  B.) Republicans are killing a rule, creating a situation that makes it easier to sue banks


it seems you have 3 concerns:


"What would be the ""up front"" stuff?  I make more than 40k, and have no debt. 0 debt. I don't own a house yet, so I pay rent and bills. No car loan, no school loans, etc. Don't run a balance on my credit card.   Yet I still feel financially strained. I don't make 75k, although I do believe that would make me feel much *closer* to stable"


Apparently Amazon's legal team that is battling to prevent online retailers from getting taxed was not consulted as to whether an idea like this would look *really* bad for their case. It's brilliant, but a wee bit diabolical. Brick and mortar retailers really have no recourse against something like this.


"From Wikipedia - Stock: The stock (also capital stock) of a corporation constitutes the equity   stake of its owners. It represents the residual assets of the company   that would be due to stockholders after discharge of all senior claims   such as secured and unsecured debt. Stockholders' equity cannot be   withdrawn from the company in a way that is intended to be detrimental   to the company's creditors Wikipedia - Dividend: A dividend is a payment made by a corporation to its shareholders,   usually as a distribution of profits. When a corporation earns a   profit or surplus, it can re-invest it in the business (called   retained earnings), and pay a fraction of this reinvestment as a   dividend to shareholders. Distribution to shareholders can be in cash   (usually a deposit into a bank account) or, if the corporation has a   dividend reinvestment plan, the amount can be paid by the issue of   further shares or share repurchase. Wikipedia - Bond: In finance, a bond is an instrument of indebtedness of the bond issuer   to the holders. It is a debt security, under which the issuer owes the   holders a debt and, depending on the terms of the bond, is obliged to   pay them interest (the coupon) and/or to repay the principal at a   later date, termed the maturity date. Interest is usually payable   at fixed intervals (semiannual, annual, sometimes monthly). Very often   the bond is negotiable, i.e. the ownership of the instrument can be   transferred in the secondary market. This means that once the transfer   agents at the bank medallion stamp the bond, it is highly liquid on   the second market. Thus, stock is about ownership in the company, dividends are the payments those owners receive, which may be additional shares or cash usually, and bonds are about lending money. Stocks are usually bought through brokers on various stock exchanges generally. An exception can be made under ""Employee Stock Purchase Plans"" and other special cases where an employee may be given stock or options that allow the purchase of shares in the company through various plans. This would apply for Canada and the US where I have experience just as a parting note. This is without getting into Convertible Bond that also exists: In finance, a convertible bond or convertible note or convertible debt   (or a convertible debenture if it has a maturity of greater than 10   years) is a type of bond that the holder can convert into a specified   number of shares of common stock in the issuing company or cash of   equal value. It is a hybrid security with debt- and equity-like   features.  It originated in the mid-19th century, and was used by   early speculators such as Jacob Little and Daniel Drew to counter   market cornering. Convertible bonds are most often issued by   companies with a low credit rating and high growth potential."


One way to think of net worth is to think if you sold everything you owned, how big of a pile of money would be standing next to you (assuming your net worth is positive). If you started with $100K and then bought a house worth $100K you would have $0 in the bank and a house.   If you sold that house for $100K you would pay the realtor 6% (typically) or $6K leaving you with $94K.    This means the act of buying your house has reduced your net worth by $6K. I asked a related question about how to value your home in your net worth.


"I don't want to sue them on my own.  I don't want them sued in the first place.  Anyone could see that this was a typical class-action suit with minimal merits that companies usually just pay off to make go away.  Fucking ambulance chasing lawyers are fucking us all over, and those idiots like yourself who cover up for them.  If only the judges would get some balls and say, ""Hey, this so called 'settlement' doesn't benefit the class at all and is basically a payoff for the scum sucking lawyers, so I'm going to deny it"".  Good luck with that happening."


Without more information about what tax bracket you are in, I cannot make a recommendation about what your best option is, but here are a few things to consider:


More than likely you have signed an NDA with your employer with a non-compete clause within it. From what I have seen this clause would be in place for two years following the date you left your firm. So, leaving your firm and consulting as a 1099 for your current client is more than likely a violation of your NDA for 2 years or some period of time. With that being said, there is nothing keeping you from going off on your own as an independent and finding work, so long as that work isn't from one of the current clients of your firm.   I am not a lawyer and everything above is what I have seen in my personal experience.


Please don't waste any more time feeling bad for merchants for the charges they incur. I don't know who supported the lobby for this rule, but issuers no longer can demand that merchants accept all transactions (even the unprofitable ones).  I discussed this at length on my blog. Merchants accept credit cards for one reason, and one reason only: it brings them more business.  More people will buy, and on average they'll buy more.  They used to take the occasional hit for someone buying a pack of gum with a credit card, but they don't have to anymore.  The new law restricts issuers from imposing minimum transactions that are less than $10. I use a rewards card wherever possible.  I get a cheaper price.  In most cases I don't care what the merchant has to pay.  They've already factored it into their prices. But if you are concerned, then as fennec points out in his comment, cash is the way to go.


"The question ""do they?"" is a fair one, but the answer, ""we can only observe the past, and that's what they did,"" may not be so satisfying to you.  It's safe to say that any longer term view of any market will show far less volatility than a short one. It only takes a glance at the return of the 2000's  2009 27.11   2008 -37.22  2007      5.46  2006  15.74 2005  4.79   2004 10.82   2003  28.72  2002    -22.27  2001 -11.98 2000     -9.11 (for the S&P) to see that in an awful decade containing -37% and -22% that the full decade was ""only"" down 9% in total or just less than 1% per year compounded. I'm not predicting any particular returns forward, just noting this is how the math works.  DCA performs well through such a decade, better than in a rising one. You are offered the opportunity to buy into a market selling below the long term trend.  Added note in response to Enno's answer below - On rereading the linked article, I see where the author cites Zvi Bodie who clearly made a logical error. He concludes that since a 20 month S&P put costs triple what a 2.3 mo put costs, that there's more risk the market falls over the longer period, not less. American options can be sold or exercised at any time. If a 2 year option were cheaper than a 2 month option, no one would buy the shorter term. It's pretty simple that the Options Pricing Models take time into account and their value, put or call, increases along with the time till expiration.  On a lighter note, when I take the S&P data for 1871-2012 (I know, no S&P back then, but it's Schiller's data) I get average 40 year returns of 44X, similar to the author's conclusion, $1K growing to $44K. But, the Standard deviation is 28. So the high end of +1 STDEV is $72K, not the author's $166K. Although, the low end 44-28=16 comes close to his $14K figure. $16K is a 7.18% long term return which today doesn't look bad. When the article was written, the author was looking at a 6% short term risk free rate."


"I mean ""predestination"" in the context that some people ""have it"" to be entrepreneurs and some people don't.  The requirements are for entrepreneurship are intangible - if we knew what they were then we'd be able to follow a checklist when starting a business, no business would ever fail and we'd all be multimillionaires.  IMO some people have a ""natural aptitude"" for entrepreneurship - I don't know whether that's born or part of upbringing.  But you can often see someone talking about their great idea or their plans for a fledging business and you think ""you don't have a chance, mate"" or ""that's just ridiculous - who'd pay for that?"" (or maybe just ""you've misjudged the market""). These people don't have that natural aptitude, as they prove when they fail.  If you're a budding entrepreneur your parents, other members of your family and your friends are *not* qualified to assess your abilities - only other entrepreneurs are. Family and friends just have the wrong biases - if your family tell you that you'll never succeed then you can only prove them wrong by succeeding; if your friends tell you you have a great idea then fear that they may just be saying that to keep the peace and to avoid conflict. Chances are that neither of these two groups have entrepreneurship experience - the same applies to many people here on Reddit ascribing success to luck.  If you approach an entrepreneur and tell them about your great idea then they'll be too polite to say ""you're an idiot"", so you have to ask them for their opinion, for mentoring (and then you'll probably have to read between the lines, because people are still too polite).  What I'm not seeing is people with nous and who also work hard - I'm not seeing them failing. Not dramatically. The people I see failing there has always been a clue beforehand, I thought ""why the heck are you doing it that way, mate?"""


I was wondering why equity is reflecting ownership of the issuing entity?  That is the definition of equity in this regard. My understanding is that for a stock/equity, its issuing entity is a company/firm that sells the stock/equity, while its receiving entity is an investor that buys the stock/equity Correct. equity reflects ownership of the receiving entity i.e. investor Incorrect. Equity reflects ownership by the receiving entity of the issuing entity. That is, when you buy stock in a company (taking an equity stake in the company) you buy a piece of the company.  It would be rather odd for the company to own a piece of you when you buy their stock.


"You're potentially in very deep water here. You don't know who this person is that you're dealing with.  Before you'd even met him, he just gave you his banking info, seemingly without a second thought.   You have no idea what the sources of his money are, so what happens if the money is stolen or otherwise illegal?  If it is determined that you used any of that money, you'll be on the hook to return it, at the very least.  Who knows what the legal ramifications are either? So it sounds like you began spending his money before you had any kind of written agreement in place?  Doesn't that seem odd to you to have someone just so trusting as to not even ask for that? Was the source of the email about the $2500 from PayPal, or from him or his advisor?  PayPal always sends you a notice directly when funds are received into your account, and even if they were going to put a temporary hold on them for whatever reason (sometimes they do that), it would still show up in your account. I would HIGHLY (can I be more emphatic?) advise you not to go anywhere NEAR his bank account until or unless you can absolutely verify who he is, where his money comes from, and what the situation is. If you start dipping into his account, whether you think you're somehow entitled to the money or not, he could cry foul and have you arrested for theft. This is a very odd situation, and for someone who says he's normally cautious and skeptical, you sure let your guard down here when you started spending his money without making any serious effort to confirm his bona fides. Just because he passes himself off as smart and the ""doctor type"" doesn't mean squat.  The very best scammers can do that (ever see the movie ""Catch Me If You Can"", based on a true story?), so you have no basis for knowing he's anything at all. I am thoroughly confused as to why you'd just willfully start using his money without knowing anything about him.  That's deeply disconcerting, because you've opened yourself up to a world of potential criminal and civil liability if this situation goes south. If this guy was giving you money as an investment in your business and you instead used some of that money for your own personal expenses then you could land in very serious trouble for co-mingling of funds.  Even if he told you it was okay, it doesn't sound like there's anything in writing, so he could just as easily deny giving you permission to use the money that way and have you charged with embezzlement. You need to step back, take a deep breath, stop using his money, and contact a lawyer for advice.  Every attorney will give you a free consultation, and you need to protect yourself here. Be careful, my friend.  If this makes you suspicious then you need to listen to that voice in your head and find a way to get out of this situation."


Think of Ether (the units of Ethereum) as the gas that's required to power applications and transactions on a decentralized version of AWS.   If you foresee a future that involves an internet that runs applications without central ownership of the cloud servers, then investing in Ethereum is a good idea. Think of it as buying futures on computational power.  Keep in mind, Ethereum (unlike Bitcoin) isn't designed to be a long-term store of value. ~95 million Ether exist today and ~10 million more are mined each year. That being said, demand still seems to be greater than existing + new supply.   **Disclosure** - I hold a signifiant amount of my net worth in bitcoin with a much smaller position in Ethereum.


"Tivo and listerine strips in my humble opinion are examples of ""first movers""who stopped innovating after entering their product to the market. The competition simply developed better products or a new tech came along and they were unresponsive to those changes."


You missed the point of my post entirely. I don't have an issue with Walmarts tax rate, I'm stating that if all their employee's unionized and demanded livable wages that the corporation could pay them without even losing 20% of their net profits.  At that point, perhaps the U.S. govt wouldn't have to pay the est 3 billion in assistance payments these employee's currently get.  Comes down to making a company pay it's work force. Don't even imply that it would hurt their bottom line. It wouldn't.


It isn't illegal to hold money in overseas accounts.  It is illegal if you don't report it.  If the money is outside the US, it is hard for IRS to know about it.  That's the reason people who have money to hide take their chances with overseas accounts. Hope this simple explanation helps.


Yeah 50 peaople in one slim industry that is mostly exempted. Thats a real study right? The reality is there is less jobs. You can't  raise the price of labour and still be competitive with technology. Every extra dollar up just goes to taxes any way. All those people who used to get returns will now be getting a nice bill to welcome them to their new tax bracket. But keep lying to yourself as you edge towards the Venezuela model of starvation.


I think you need to go to a local bank and ask. The key thing is paper trail. For any mortgage I've gotten on a new purchase, the bank needs to see where the down payment came from and how it got to the seller. In this case, it can go either way. If the value is truly 100% to the 80% you are looking to finance, and the paper trail is legit, this may work just fine.  The issue others seem to have is that simply buying at a 20% discount is not a legit way to finance the 80%. Here, it appears to me that the 20% came from you in installments, via the rent.


Read more closely:   If you do not change your current withholding arrangement, you will have $7,817 withheld for 2014 resulting in an overpayment of   $2,467. and later... Assuming this recommendation is in effect for the rest of 2014... If you do nothing you would get a refund of the full $2,467. If you follow the advice of whoever wrote that you wouldn't pay as much tax for the rest of the year and consequently will get back less when you file, because you are getting it back now.


You need a source of delisted historical data. Such data is typically only available from paid sources. According to my records, Lawson Software Inc listed on the NASDAQ on 7 Dec 2001 and delisted on 6 Jul 2011.  Its final traded price was $11.23.  It was taken over by Infor who bid $11.25 per share. Source: Symbol LWSN-201107 within Premium Data US delisted stocks historical data set available from http://www.premiumdata.net/products/premiumdata/ushistorical.php Disclosure: I am a co-owner of Norgate / Premium Data.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/100000-per-parking-space-costs-soar-for-sound-transits-kent-park-and-ride-garage/) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The agency says cost estimates have soared to $65 million, compared to the previous $35 million, to add as many as 550 spaces by 2023 at the Sounder train station in Kent, which already has one big garage.  > Staff will present options and answer questions from 4-7 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 19, at the station, 23 A St. S.W. Sumner Station: Sound Transit will build a garage, sidewalks and lighting, adding a net 505 stalls by 2021, for $52 million.  > Sound Transit says 51 percent of riders drive to Kent Station, but the 12 percent &quot;Walk&quot; share includes many who park off-site.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/70d07p/100000_per_parking_space_costs_soar_for_sound/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~210651 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **park**^#1 **station**^#2 **garage**^#3 **Sound**^#4 **Kent**^#5"


It pretty much comes down to where you interview and what you are trying to do.  Finance is something that you learn.  While yes, you can major in it (I did), it is really about how clever you are.  You need to be creative in the way you perceive the problems that come at you.  Since you seem to be quantitative in nature, you should be fine.  When a hiring manager reads your resume he/she will see that.  They are probably tired of hearing interviewees drone on about how they would buy this vanilla stock because of a PE ratio or a solid balance sheet.  Everyone is the same.  If you can stand out, you can probably get a job wherever you want to within the realm of finance (with some minor exceptions).  Odds are if you work at  BB I-bank you will be trained in any sort of finance they deem necessary for you to be aware of.  Know some basic stuff.  If you major in mathematics or stats or what-have you, you must be intelligent.  Buy a few novels.  The Quants, FIASCO, The Big Short, Liars Poker, Black Swan, Boomerang, A Random Walk Down Wall Street.  These will expose you to the ethos of a typical wall streeter.  You will also learn a few things about major events of the past and what is going on in the present.  Over all: Math is key.  Know some programming (R, python, maybe perl).  VBA is whack.  Know your Excel (no mouse!) Programming is a huge skill set that will set you apart from kids who were involved in random clubs.  If you have a skill you are more valuable to a company compared to someone with a supposed knowledge of a subject matter.  When I came out of school I knew my academics, but never had applied any of it to a real world problem.  Your resume is not about what you have learned in the past, it is all about demonstrating what you are capable of learning.  If you can show that you are intelligent and a go-getter from your resume, you will do fine no matter what you studied.  Best of luck!


Have seen analysis that at least one state won't be able to repay their obligations using reasonable assumptions, I'm sure it applies to more.  A lot of greed went into securitizing those payments the way they did.


No. $188.23 has $11.76 tax = $199.99 $188.24 has $11.77 tax - $200.01 So, unless the based price contained the half cent for $188.235, the register would never show $200.00 even. How does the receipt to customer look?


"A retail revolving account is essentially a credit card offered by a store (or chain of stores) and usable only at that store. In my area, the Sears department store's ""Sears card"" would be a good example. Stores offer these to capture a bit more profit from the transaction. They don't have to pay someone else's processing fees, and they get to keep any interest you pay. Of course they also accept the costs that go along with retail lending. It operates just like any other revolving-credit card. Read the fine print of the agreement to see what the grace period is, if any, and what APR they're charging after that. These cards also serve as a marketing tool. Some stores don't accept any other card. Some can do ""instant approvals"" to encourage you to make a large purchase now rather than continuing to shop around. Some may offer special deals only if you use their card -- I paid 0% interest for a year on my refrigerator, which was convenient for me. And so on. Gasoline stations also used to offer their own cards... though these days it's common for them to offer a branded version of one of the major credit cards instead."


"A major thing to consider when deciding whether to invest or pay off debt is cash flow. Specifically, how each choice affects your cash flow, and how your cash flow is affected by various events. Simply enough, your cash flow is the amount of money that passes through your finances during a given period (often a month or a year). Some of this is necessary payments, like staying current on loans, rent, etc., while other parts are not necessary, such as eating out. For example, you currently have $5,500 debt at 3% and another $2,500 at 5%. This means that every month, your cashflow effect of these loans is ($5,500 * 3% / 12) + ($2,500 * 5% / 12) = $24 interest (before any applicable tax effects), plus any required payments toward the principal which you don't state. To have the $8,000 paid off in 30 years, you'd be paying another $33 toward the principal, for a total of about $60 per month before tax effects in your case. If you take the full $7,000 you have available and use it to pay off the debt starting with the higher-interest loan, then your situation changes such that you now: Assuming that the repayment timeline remains the same, the cashflow effect of the above becomes $1,000 * 3% / 12 = $2.50/month interest plus $2.78/month toward the principal, again before tax effects. In one fell swoop, you just reduced your monthly payment from $60 to $5.25. Per year, this means $720 to $63, so on the $7,000 ""invested"" in repayment you get $657 in return every year for a 9.4% annual return on investment. It will take you about 11 years to use only this money to save another $7,000, as opposed to the 30 years original repayment schedule. If the extra payment goes toward knocking time off the existing repayment schedule but keeping the amount paid toward the principal per month the same, you are now paying $33 toward the principal plus $2.50 interest against the $1,000 loan, which means by paying $35.50/month you will be debt free in 30 months: two and a half years, instead of 30 years, an effective 92% reduction in repayment time. You immediately have another about $25/month in your budget, and in two and a half years you will have $60 per month that you wouldn't have if you stuck with the original repayment schedule. If instead the total amount paid remains the same, you are then paying about $57.50/month toward the principal and will be debt free in less than a year and a half. Not too shabby, if you ask me. Also, don't forget that this is a known, guaranteed return in that you know what you would be paying in interest if you didn't do this, and you know what you will be paying in interest if you do this. Even if the interest rate is variable, you can calculate this to a reasonable degree of certainty. The difference between those two is your return on investment. Compare this to the fact that while an investment in the S&P might have similar returns over long periods of time, the stock market is much more volatile in the shorter term (as the past two decades have so eloquently demonstrated). It doesn't do you much good if an investment returns 10% per year over 30 years, if when you need the money it's down 30% because you bought at a local peak and have held the investment for only a year. Also consider if you go back to school, are you going to feel better about a $5.25/month payment or a $60/month payment? (Even if the payments on old debt are deferred while you are studying, you will still have to pay the money, and it will likely be accruing interest in the meantime.) Now, I really don't advocate emptying your savings account entirely the way I did in the example above. Stuff happens all the time, and some stuff that happens costs money. Instead, you should be keeping some of that money easily available in a liquid, non-volatile form (which basically means a savings account without withdrawal penalties or a money market fund, not the stock market). How much depends on your necessary expenses; a buffer of three months' worth of expenses is an often recommended starting point for an emergency fund. The above should however help you evaluate how much to keep, how much to invest and how much to use to pay off loans early, respectively."


I think people are worried that this woman is going to become the sole scapegoat for the whole fiasco and the rest of the Equifax leadership is going to walk away scot-free. The CEO won't face any penalties for selling his shares after the incident, the board won't be held to task for waiting six weeks to reveal the hack, and any legislation that could prevent such incidents from occurring again will be nipped in the bud.


If you truly believe your idea is viable, I'd reccommend against going to kickstarter for funding.  There are people who make a living by beating kickstarters to market (see the article I linked below).  Think about it; you'll have to wait 30 days, employ a developer, then wait for your app to be developed.  If you launch on kickstarter, more talented and organized competition will start making competitors once your project gains traction.  I'm not entirely sure that a software patent can protect you from this.  If you believe in your idea and can adequately explain your vision I'd suggest you pitch it to investors or people you know who may be willing to invest and develop it away from the public eye.  Apps don't really have a great track record on kickstarter anyways, and you do need a working orototype IIRC


the difference is whose money is being invested. when you deposit money in a bank, it is FDIC insured and capital requirements are set to ensure the preservation of your deposits. if the bank wants to make huge derivative bets, with leverage inherent in the instrument or provided by another bank, deposits are involved in the equation.


Is my financial status OK? If not, how can I improve it? I'm going to concentrate on this question, particularly the first half.   Net income $4500 per month (I'm taking this to be after taxes; correct me if wrong).  Rent is $1600 and other expenses are up to $800.  So let's call that $2500.  That leaves you $2000 a month, which is $24,000 a year.   You can contribute up to $18,000 a year to a 401k and if you want to maintain your income in retirement, you probably should.  The average social security payment now is under $1200.  You have an above average income but not a maximum income.  So let's set that at $1500.  You need an additional income stream of $900 a month in retirement plus enough to cover taxes.  Another $5500 for an IRA (probably a Roth).  That's $23,500.  That leaves you $500 a year of reliable savings for other purposes.  Another $5500 for an IRA (probably a Roth).  That's $23,500.  That leaves you $500 a year of reliable savings for other purposes.   You are basically even.  Your income is just about what you need to cover expenses and retirement.  You could cover a monthly mortgage payment of $1600 and have a $100,000 down payment.  That probably gets you around a $350,000 house, although check property taxes.  They have to come out of the $1600 a month.  That doesn't seem like a lot for a Bay area house even if it would buy a mansion in rural Mississippi.  Perhaps think condo instead.   Try to keep at least $15,000 to $27,000 as emergency savings.  If you lose your job or get stuck with a required expense (e.g. a major house repair), you'll need that money.   You don't have enough income to support a car unless it saves you money somewhere.  $500 a year is probably not going to cover insurance, parking, gas, and maintenance.   It's possible that you could tighten up your expenses, but in my experience, people are more likely to underestimate their expenses than overestimate.  That's why I'm saying $2500 (a little above the high end) rather than $2000 (your low end estimate).  If things are stable, wait a year and evaluate.  Track your actual spending.  Ask yourself if you made any large purchases.  Your budget should include an appliance (TV, refrigerator, washer/dryer, etc.) a year.  If you're not paying for that now (included in rent?), then you need to allow for it in your ownership budget.   I do not consider an ESPP to be a reliable investment vehicle.  Consider the Enron possibility.  You wake up one day and find out that there is no actual money.  Your stock is now worthless.  A diversified portfolio can survive this.  If you lose your job and your investment, you'll be stuck with just your savings.  Hopefully you didn't just tie them up in a house that you might have to sell to take your next job in a different location.  An ESPP might work as savings for the house.  If something goes wrong, don't buy the house.  But it's not retirement or emergency savings.   I would say that you are OK but could be better.  Get your retirement savings started.  That does two things.  One, it gives you money for retirement.  Two, it keeps you from having extra money now when it is easy to develop expensive habits.  An abrupt drop from $4500 in spending to $1200 will hurt.  A smooth transition from $2500 to $2500 is what you would like to see.  You are behind now, but you have the opportunity to catch up for a few years.   Work out how much you'll get from Social Security and how much you need to cover your typical expenses with the occasional emergency.  Expect high health care costs in retirement.  Medicare covers a lot but not everything, and health care is only getting more expensive.  Don't forget to assume higher taxes in the future to help cover that expense and the existing debt.  After a few years of catch up contributions, work out your long term plan assuming a reasonable real (after inflation) rate of return.  If you can reduce the $23,500 in retirement contributions then, that's OK.  But be pessimistic.  Most people overestimate good things and underestimate bad things.  It's much better to have extra than not enough.   A 401k comes with an administrator and your choice of mutual funds.  Try for diversification.  Some money in bonds (25% to 30%).  The remainder in stocks.  Look for index funds.  Try for a mix of value and growth, as they'll do better at different times.  As you approach retirement, you can convert some of that into shorter term, lower yield investments.  The rough rule of thumb is to have two to five years of withdrawals in short term investments like money market funds.  But that's more than twenty years off.   You have more choices with an IRA.  In particular, you can choose your own administrator.  But I'd keep the same stock/bond mix and stick to index funds if you're not interested in researching the more complex options.  You may want to invest your IRA in a growth fund and your 401k in value funds and bonds.  Then balance the stock/bond mix across both.   When you invest each year, look at the underrepresented funds and add the most to them.  So if bonds had a bad year and didn't keep pace, invest in bonds.  They're probably cheap.  You don't want to rebalance frequently, but once a year might be a good pace.  That's about how often you should invest in an IRA, so that can be a good time.   I'll let the others answer on the financial advisor part.


Group home riches help to initiate a noble cause with a proper guidance as regards to How to start a Halfway home? It basically instills the knowledge of a social responsibility in a profit-making way. Group home riches teach the ways to acquire freedom emotionally, spiritually and last but not the least financially by helping others.


Years ago, I just stopped watching TV with all the bullshit.  At best, I'll DVR something and just skip the bullshit.  The household is much nicer without some braindead racket always spouting off.  As far as I can tell, Television's tactics are just driving the tech savvy to get content via the internet in one fashion or another.


There is something special that binds workers together, and too few of us recognize it. We work. Every man for himself? If only that were true. Capital is very well-organized and working collectively for its best interests, and you can bet your ass they look out for each other. And it's better for them if they keep the rest of us divided and hating on the people slightly worse-off than we are.


The short Answer is NO, HMRC do not like disguised employment which is what this is as you fall under IR35 you can bill them via an umbrella company and you should be charging the contractor rate not a permie rate.  http://www.contractoruk.com/


You don't get any tax benefit.   When you are helping a relative or a friend in such situations the income is just gone.   The only way to get around this is if you contribute to a charity, and they give it to your mom.  You can then deduct the contributions to that charity.  However, the IRS has cracked down on such situations and it probably is not worth pursuing.  By the recent tax rules, that charity can use those contributions in which every way they choose, they cannot guarantee they go to your mom. Given that you are closed to your allowed exclusion (14K for 2017), I would work to keep your number under that.  If you are married, you each get that exclusion so you can give up to 28K.   I can't really speak to the reduction of benefits part as I am knowledgeable and more details on the type of transfer payments she receives would be germane to the discussion.


The simple answer is that whatever strategy is implemented with e-series, could be implemented at a lower cost with ETFs.


Having stock options means that you have worked for and rightfully earned a part of the company's capital appreciation. Takeover of the company would indicate someone is interested in the company (something should be valuable). It would be unwise to not strike before the period lapses since the strike price is always lower than market price and takeovers generally increases stock values ... it is capital gains all the way my friend. Good luck. *observations not in professional capacity. pls consult a professional for investment related advice.


I wonder if any successful artificial intelligence project will ultimately need to make shortcuts that lead to the same flaws as human intelligence? (If I might pretend greater knowledge of the human mind than I have - this means: tendency to be correct to a certain level of precision rather than completely correct, to fudge, to round edges, to go by guidelines rather than rules.)


Indeed, I've read that financial shenanigans account for over 40% of all wealth generated now, with the vast majority going to the already wealthy.  So, basically, financial gaming of the system, which creates nothing except for massive wealth inequity, is on its way to becoming the top generator of wealth in out country.


It's not really like im am going to lose my money unless I was doing penny stocks. And throwing away that much for a vacation when student debt will probally exist in my life later on appears not wise.


Pear Plaza Building là Tòa nhà văn phòng cho thuê được thiết kế với diện tích sàn và bước cột lớn, không gian văn phòng tại Pearl Plaza có khả năng bố trí linh hoạt các mặt bằng làm việc và tận dụng tối đa các diện tích sử dụng đem lại hiệu quả kinh tế cao. Giải pháp thiết kế tiết kiệm năng lượng và hướng đến mục tiêu công trình xanh là định hướng thiết kế chủ đạo của khối văn phòng tại Pear Plaza Building, mặt tiền được tiết giảm các mặt kính nhằm giảm lượng bức xạ mặt trời nhưng vẫn duy trì sự cân bằng chiếu sáng và thông thoáng tự nhiên, đem lại không gian làm việc năng động và thịnh vượng.


One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just isn't the same...  >We watch TV and movie content on 4 different screens, depending on which is convenient (***TV, laptops, phones, iPad***)  Three of these are a class. One of these is an instance. We do not group classes with instances.


The idea here is to get an idea of how to value each business and thus normalize how highly prized is each dollar that a company makes.  While some companies may make millions and others make billions, how does one put these in proper context?  One way is to consider a dollar in earnings for the company.  How does a dollar in earnings for Google compare to a dollar for Coca-cola for example?  Some companies may be valued much higher than others and this is a way to see that as share price alone can be rather misleading since some companies can have millions of shares outstanding and split the shares to keep the share price in a certain range. Thus the idea isn't that an investor is paying for a dollar of earnings but rather how is that perceived as some companies may not have earnings and yet still be traded as start-ups and other companies may be running at a loss and thus the P/E isn't even meaningful in this case. Assuming everything but the P/E is the same, the lower P/E would represent a greater value in a sense, yes.  However, earnings growth rate can account for higher P/Es for some companies as if a company is expected to grow at 40% for a few years it may have a higher P/E than a company growing earnings at 5% for example.


I can't immediately think of a reason to keep your paycheck and spending account separate, unless it be because you want to keep your savings in a money market or savings account and you deposit your paycheck into a checking account. However, I do have one reason from my experience to keep the bulk of your savings away from accounts that you transfer stuff out of.  I used to keep all my cash savings in an account from which I transferred money into my brokerage account (my paycheck was also deposited there).  A couple of years back a state that I haven't lived in since I was a child took $40,000 out of my account.  The broker mistakenly told the state I lived there and the state made some mistakes about how much tax I would owe.  Without either one telling me, the state helped themselves to my checking account to cover the bill.  When I called, both acknowledged that they were wrong, but it still took a long time (many months) and lots of letters and threats (I was close to paying a lawyer) before they returned my money.  It was worse because this was my savings for a down payment on a home and having it taken and not returned affected my ability to buy the house I wanted. If I hadn't had my money in that account, they would have tried to garnish my wages, and would have immediately stopped their attempt once they found out they were in the wrong. Now I keep cash savings in an account that I never pay taxes out of and do not use to transfer money directly to any broker or anyone who might give my account number to an inept government.


"> I'm not sure how to answer that. It's all just speculation. The competition is waiting for the first big mover to do just what TSLA is going.. being the first mover, then coming in and wiping the floor with them.  It's very funny that you call an analysis of the *current* state of the industry speculation, and then go on to talk about something you think is going to happen...which, by the way, has had six years to happen and hasn't yet.  Also, it's as if you don't think first mover advantage exists.  Six years is a long time to build up a lead, especially in automotive, where product cycles and development times are so long.  >If you want to argue that all of the last 30 years of free markets and the value of specialization is wrong, go ahead.  Honestly, look up the words ""vertical integration"" before continuing the conversation.  And the word ""Panasonic"" as well.  >They are committing massive capital to old technology. That's a loser play, but it will help the industry as a whole and those that are going to come in with the next generation of batteries while TSLA is stuck with massive capital in lithium ion.  But wait, I thought you said they were wrong because ""ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES"" aren't involved?  And that ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES know better than them?  But I guess the ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES don't actually know anything, and they should listen to an idiot on the internet who has so far proven himself to be wrong about everything he's said?  >It seems Panasonic is not as optimistic about the plant as you are.  Well, again, if you listened to the call, which is a pretty basic first step to talking about the quarterly results, which for some reason you insist on continuing to do despite being completely ignorant of them, then you might not be saying such stupid things.  Panasonic, you see, is a rather conservative Japanese company.  This is even mentioned in your article when they talk about plasma displays.  This is why they are always measured in their public statements, because that's what Japanese companies do.  But, as specified in the call, Panasonic's actions as a partner to Tesla have always been excellent.  And if you actually bothered to read your own article, you would see that they've committed to 2 billion cells and 200-300 million for the factory.  You know, an ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANY.  And if you actually bothered to read any *other* article, you would see that that very same quote of yours was followed up with ""However, Tesla is a very important partner to us and discussions are continuing. We need to look very carefully at auto demand and respond appropriately so of course that means taking a step-by-step approach to investment.""  Also, there have been rumors of talks with LG and Samsung should Panasonic not decide to partner.  I'm not sure I believe the rumors, and also I think they're unnecessary, because Panasonic will be a full partner in the gigafactory.  They know that Tesla has been a huge source of profit for them, and their automotive supply (i.e. Tesla) has been one of the best-performing parts of their company for some time now.  Mark my words, Panasonic's investment will end up being approximately $1 billion, all told.  You can come back in a few years and check, if you like.  >To keep the sucks putting up money.  You mean, like an ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANY?  The ones putting up the money?  So, since your point was so reliant on ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES having expertise and specialization and so on, does that mean you're now dropping that point, because you realized your bullshit wouldn't fly, and moving on to another sort of bullshit until one of them sticks?  Because if you'd like to fix your ignorance, I can help you with that.  But if you wouldn't, as seems to be the case, it seems somewhat like a waste of time to continue trying to explain basic concepts to you."


Did I ever say that? You are putting words in my mouth. There have been many cases of supposed contamination from fracking. None yet *confirmed*. That's all I'm saying, it's all I have ever said, and you posted a title that is *probably* not correct.


It may work with an individual selling things but not for a retailer.  Imagine the price of an iPhone increasing week on week and then stabilising. Again, this won't work for luxury/veblen goods.  How do we go about it? Focus groups, user surveys, test markets. Not second guessing the price. You will lose all customer loyalty, piss of the later buyers who paid more for it, you'll be seen as fickle and not trustworthy. One pricing, all people, all markets, all time.


Open an account with a US discount online broker, or with a European broker with access to the US market.  I think ETRADE allow non-resident accounts, for instance, amongst others.  The brokerage will be about $10, and there is no annual fee.  (So you're ~1% down out of the gate, but that's not so much.)   Brokers may have a minimum transaction value but very few exchanges care about the number of shares anymore, and there is no per-share fee. As lecrank notes, putting all your savings into a single company is not prudent, but having a flutter with fun money on Apple is harmless. Paul is correct that dividend cheques may be a slight problem for non-residents.  Apple don't pay dividends so there's no problem in this specific case.  More generally your broker will give you a cash account into which the dividends can go. You may have to deal with US tax which is more of an annoyance than a cost.


"i hate to say it, and i will probably be downvoted to oblivion, but i don't think you can do anything.  i'm not an expert, so i might be wrong, but if greece (or any euro country, for that matters) decides to exit the euro, the currency will be dead within the week. that, from what i've read in various newspapers, will be an incredibly bad news for the european economy. which *will* collapse in a very short period of time. then the collapse would propagate (more or less slowly, more or less significantly) to other economies, especially china and US, possibly middle east, too.  at that point, you (well, we) have a major economic cataclysm. would it really matter if you had a tiny bit more money than your neighbour, if production stops, goods don't move that much anymore, and your country is generally in such a deep shit that the potato famine will look like a day in eurodisney?  i agree with what other people are saying: they will not allow the euro to fall. ""they"" sounds like hidden conspiracies, but even if european leaders have taught us that we can expect the worse from them (2 world wars in the last centuries are just the quicker reminder of their stupidity), there's the americans, the chineses, and so on.  i think the worst thing you, or anyone else in europe, can do is panicking and moving their money around. if the exchange rate with the euro is not fixed (and nothing is) you still have a chance to lose a significant amount of money in the short-medium run, in a worst case scenario.  chill. relax. if you're really desperate and think that things *will* go bad, try turning a hobby into another job, especially if you can do it online and can bring you a steady income eventually.  **TL; DR: if the world economy collapse, you will still lose money. live happy. chill.**"


"Does your job give you access to ""confidential information"", such that you can only buy or sell shares in the company during certain windows?  Employees with access to company financial data, resource planning databases, or customer databases are often only allowed to trade in company securities (or derivatives thereof) during certain ""windows"" a few days after the company releases its quarterly earnings reports.  Even those windows can be cancelled if a major event is about to be announced.  These windows are designed to prevent the appearance of insider trading, which is a serious crime in the United States. Is there a minimum time that you would need to hold the stock, before you are allowed to sell it?  Do you have confidence that the stock would retain most of its value, long enough that your profits are long-term capital gains instead of short-term capital gains? What happens to your stock if you lose your job, retire, or go to another company? Does your company's stock price seem to be inflated by any of these factors: If any of these nine warning flags are the case, I would think carefully before investing. If I had a basic emergency fund set aside and none of the nine warning flags are present, or if I had a solid emergency fund and the company seemed likely to continue to justify its stock price for several years, I would seriously consider taking full advantage of the stock purchase plan.  I would not invest more money than I could afford to lose. At first, I would cash out my profits quickly (either as quickly as allowed, or as quickly as lets me minimize my capital gains taxes).  I would reinvest in more shares, until I could afford to buy as many shares as the company would allow me to buy at the discount. In the long-run, I would avoid having more than one-third of my net worth in any single investment.  (E.g., company stock, home equity, bonds in general, et cetera.)"


It is crazy.  The same guy (Madigan) has been in power since the EARLY 80's, and yet public opinion is split about 50/50 between whether he or governor Rauner who has been in power 2 years is to blame.       Politicians paid off unions through unfunded pensions to members to ensure support.   This has happened for decades, and has finally gotten to the point where the money ran out and the pensions are falling due.       Illinois and Chicago also regularly borrow for day to day government expenses (as opposed to infrastructure).  This means much of the debt being paid off today, paid for government expenditure decades ago in areas today's residents gain no benefit.


First, I would agree with you that the Stock market is too high and risky now. I became extremely conservative with my investments in the last 3 months.  But that high stock market is an indicator about the expectations that the economy will do good (under Trump). If there was a projection that the economy is going to be harmed by Trump, there would be a big correction soon after the elections.  Remember: one wrong statement of even action from Trump, and the stock market crashes.  Whether Trump is responsible in the last 6 months to the improvement in the economy or not, do you see anything he does in regards to the economy (economy, not politics) that will hurt the economy?


It sounds like you're starting a fitness club. Consult your tax professional, but likely you will need to at a minimum report the $100 / year per member as income and pay taxes accordingly. Your friend is simply paying less per year if he introduces someone to your gym, so he should be fine since it is just an expense reimbursement. In addition, you should verify the laws in your area relating to fitness facilities, the required permits, etc.


Investing in mutual funds, ETF, etc. won't build a large pool of money. Be an active investor if your nature aligns. For e.g. Invest in buying out a commercial space (on bank finance) like a office space and then rent it out. That would give you better return than a savings account. In few years time, you may be able to pay back your financing and then the total return is your net return. Look for options like this for a multiple growth in your worth.


My former accountant, used to provide this service as part of him doing my taxes.  During the off season, he would provide a planning session and he would review strategies that I might look into.  Since he did not make any money off of providing investments, he was about as unbiased as one could be.  However, something like that might not be enough for you guys. You could go with someone online, Scottrade is going into the business of providing advice, as well as Charles Schwab or Fidelity, but you might need someone more personal. In that case, I would use my network.  Talk to people, ask who they use, like, and respect.  I would say it is very easy to find mediocre investment advisers, the good ones are hard. I would look for one that teaches.  It is very easy to tell someone what to do, much harder to teach them what is the right thing.   One thing that is easy about your situation:  Planning to buy a home.  Put money for a down payment in a high interest savings account.  What I mean by high interest, is they still pay almost nothing.  You can't really make a mistake.  If you find one with .5% instead of .85%, what is the real difference after 5 years?  About $180?


You'd probably have to sue them to get the money. In most cases those statements have disclaimers all over them telling you about the vesting period and technically that extra money was probably never really in your account.  Normally the statements also break out the actual contributions from the employer match part and have a footnote about the vesting policy. Unless the employer was completely incompetent in their management of this account, I am betting they will have documentation of the policy that you supposedly were given.  You probably have very slim chances of prevailing on this unless they were very lax in their documentation. I'd say re-check the statements and your employee manually carefully for any mention of vesting. If you don't find it, ask the employer (nicely) where you were notified of this. If they still can't produce any documentation, then sue them.


"In the United States, copyrights are [automatic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Copyright_notices_in_the_United_States).  If you are the first to publish your name and logo, they're yours.  All done.  If you want to be official you can use the little © and the year, but it is unnecessary.  If you want better protection, you can register for a trademark with the [United States Patent and Trademark Office](http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/).  There are probably ""sites"" that will help you do this, but I would get a real attorney if it's that important to you."


"The general answer is: ""it depends on how long you want to live there"". Here is a good calculator to figure it out: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calculator.html Basically, if you plan to move in a few years, then renting makes more sense.  It is a lot easier to move from an apartment when your lease is up versus selling a house, which can be subject to fluctuations in the real-estate market.  As an example, during the real estate bubble, a lot of ""young professional"" types bought condos and town homes instead of renting.  Now these people are married with kids, need to move somewhere bigger, but they can't get rid of their old place because they can't sell it for what they still owe.  If these people had rented for a few years, they would be in a better position financially.  (Many people fell for the mantra ""If you are renting, you are throwing your money away"", without looking at the long-term implications.) However, your question is a little unique, because you mentioned renting for the rest of your life, and putting the savings into an investment, which is a cool idea.  (Thinking outside the box, I like it.) I'm going to assume you mean ""rent the same place for many years"" versus ""moving around the country every few years"".  If you are staying in one place for a long time, I am going to say that buying a house is probably a better option.  Here's why: So what about investing?  Let's look at some numbers: So, based on the above, I say that buying a house is the way to go (as long as you plan to live in the same place for several years).  However, if you could find a better investment than the Dow, or if mortgage interest rates change drastically, things could tip in another direction. Addendum:  CrimsonX brought up a good point about the costs of owning a house (upkeep and property taxes), which I didn't mention above.  However, I don't think they change my answer.  If you rent, you are still paying those costs.  They are just hidden from you.  Your landlord pays the contractor or the tax man, and then you pay the landlord as part of your rent."


"The spin off and IPO were not to avoid conflicts of interest. They were to make money for the Consulting and non-Consulting partners.  A lot of spinoffs weren't friendly. For example, KPMG partners didn't want to break off into BearingPoint but were pushed out by more senior partners.  But in all these cases, the sale/spinoff of consulting arms made a lot of money for the partners (usually more for the non-consulting partners).  edit: also Accenture can't really be considered ""Big4"" anymore and doesn't really compete with the Big4 consulting groups as they are a different kind of consulting company. Accenture is more in the lines of IBM, Dell, etc since they don't have the whole ""get rich as a partner scheme"" going for them like all the private Big4s."


It says expense ratio of 0.14%. What does it mean? Essentially it means that they will take 0.14% of your money, regardless of the performance. This measures how much money the fund spends out of its assets on the regular management expenses. How much taxes will I be subject to This depends on your personal situation, not much to do with the fund (though investment/rebalancing policies may affect the taxable distributions). If you hold it in your IRA - there will be no taxes at all. However, some funds do have measures of non-taxable distributions vs dividends vs. capital gains. Not all the funds do that, and these are very rough estimates anyway. What is considered to be a reasonable expense ratio? That depends greatly on the investment policy. For passive index funds, 0.05-0.5% is a reasonable range, while for actively managed funds it can go up as much as 2% and higher. You need to compare to other funds with similar investment policies to see where your fund stands.


Let me first start by defining an emergency fund. This is money which is: Because emergency's usually need to be deal with ASAP, boiler breaks, gears box in a car. Generally you need these to be solved as soon as possible, because ou depend on these things working and you can't budget for this type of expenditure using just your monthly salary. This is a personal opinion but I prefer investment types that don't have another fee on access. I really don't like having another fee on top on money that I need right now. Investment Options: Market based investments should be seen as long term investments, therefore they do not really satisfy requirement one, they can also have broker fees, therefore you might pay a small extra charge for taking money out, and so do not satisfy requirement two. Investment Options for Emergency Funds You want to get the best return on your money even if it's your emergency fund. So use regular saving accounts, but from you emergency fund or use tax effective savings accounts, like a cash ISA if based in the UK. Don't think of an emergency money as just sitting there, you have options just makes sure the options fit the requirements. UPDATE Given feedback I appreciate there are levels of emergency fund, the above details things which might be about 1-2 month salary in cost, car repairs, leaks, boiler repairs. Now I have another fund which is in P2P funds which is higher risk than a deposit account but then gives me a better return and is less subject to market fluctuations and it would be the place I go to for loss of job level emergencies say 6 months of salary, this takes a bit longer to access but given I have the above emergency fund I have given myself time to get the money from the P2P account.


I think it's a little too early to be attributing job losses/hour losses/*potential* job or hour losses to the wage hikes thus far. For one thing, there are other factors at work in the economy than just the hourly wage hikes. For another, these hikes JUST happened over the past 2-3 years. Wait until 2021 for the minimum wage to hit its target, and even then wait a couple years to gather data while it's at $15.   Even in the article it looks like Berkeley and UW can't agree on their models and data. It sounds like it's all just mixed messages right now.


"Do not be worried.  Read ""The Millionaire Next Door"" -it's dated, but the fundamentals are precisely correct.  Blue-collar entrepreneurship is the gateway to prosperity.  Gratian wrote that knowledge and the will to act are the two elements of greatness. Each man is only as much as he knows, but that knowledge without the will to act upon it is sterile and impotent.  Intellectualism is **not** being sidelined.  We -meaning the Market, really- are simply demanding that the intellect apply itself."


"mhoran_psprep has answered the question well about ""shorting"" e.g. making a profit if the stock price goes down. However a CEO can take out insurance (called hedging) against the stock price going down in relation to stocks they already own in some cases.    But is must be disclosed in public filings etc. This may be done for example if most of the CEO’s money is in the stock of the company and they can’t sell for tax reasons.    Normally it would only be done for part of the CEO’s holding."


"AFAIK, It's also possible that the ETF company is paying Ameritrade for every trade you make. Even if your brokerage doesn't make you pay a fee to trade ETFs, the company that created and runs the ETF is still making money when you purchase and use their ETFs. See ""What motivates each player?"" at Yahoo Finance."


"Maybe the source is too biased. From Wikipedia: The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative opinion magazine published 48 times per year. (...) Currently edited by founder William Kristol and Fred Barnes, the Standard has been described as a ""redoubt of neoconservatism"" and as ""the neo-con bible"".  Any other source on the story?"


"Retail purchases are purchases made at retail, i.e.: as a consumer/individual customer. That would include any ""standard"" individual expenditure, but may exclude wholesale sales or purchases from merchants who identify themselves as service providers to businesses. Specifics of these limitations really depend on your card issuer, and you should inquire with the customer service at what are their specific eligibility requirements. As an example, here in the US many cards give high cash-back for gasoline purchases, but only at ""retail"" locations. That excludes wholesale/club sellers like Costco, for example."


"Discussing individual stocks is discouraged here, so I'll make my answer somewhat generic. Keep in mind, some companies go public in a way that takes the shares that are held by the investment VCs (venture capitalists) and cashes them out of their positions, i.e. most if not all shares are made public. In that case, the day after IPO, the original investors have their money, and, short of the risk of being sued for fraud, could not care less what the stock does.  Other companies float a small portion up front, and retain the rest. This is a way of creating a market and valuing the company, but not floating so many shares the market has trouble absorbing it. This stock has a ""Shares Outstanding"" of 2.74B but has only floated 757.21M. The nearly 2 billion shares held by the original investors certainly impact their wallets with how this IPO went.  See the key statistics for the details."


Leave your money at home?  I don't carry cash therefore if I make a purchase I make it on plastic and have to explain myself to my spouse.  It isn't that either of us is particularly brutal about it, but we have agreed that neither of us wants to waste money we don't have.   The downside to my plan is that the guilt comes later, after the damage is done.


That's absolutely what will happen. Computers are far safer behind the wheel than people. We're distractible. We drink. We talk on the phone. We speed. We get sleepy. We don't leave enough space between us and the car in front of us. We pull out into the intersection and get stuck there by traffic so the cross traffic can't move. The list goes on and on. Driverless cars are going to change the world. That's what I'm investing in.


It is my understanding that banks pay less than the going rate on savings accounts and require that the person who takes out a loan pay more than the going rate. That is how the bank gets its money.  Usually the going rate is affected by the current inflation rate (but that has not been true for the last few weeks). So that means that, typically, the money you have in the bank is, gradually, losing purchasing power as the bank typically pays you less than the inflation rate.  So if you want your money to keep pace with inflation (or do a bit better) then you should buy bonds.


I don't intend to live in the UK again If you don't intend to live in the UK again, my advise would be to move this back to Germany in EUR in the near future. Generally taking Fx [Currency] risk is not advisable unless the portfolio is large. I don't need the money in the short term As you don't need the money immediately, you can afford to wait and watch a bit. Whether the rate will be more favourable or worse can't be predicated with certainty. So you can wait for few weeks / months and pick up a week when it is slightly favourable and convert them into EUR.


"There's a couple of considerations here.   Firstly, would this activity count as ""trading"". If you're trading you are legally required to register as self-employed.  The line between a hobby activity and trading can be blurred but a key feature is whether you're aiming to make a profit (whether you manage it or not!). Secondly are you actually making any money?  Even if what you're doing counts as self-employment, self-employed people pay tax on the profits they make from their activities, not on the total amount of money they take in.  If you spend all the money you take in on keeping the server running then you're not making any profit so there's nothing to pay tax on."


"When you say ""set aside,"" you mean you saved to pay the tax due in April? That's underpaying. It's a rare exception the IRS makes for this penalty, hopefully it wasn't too large, and you now know how much to withhold through payroll deductions.  Problem is, this wasn't unusual, it was an oversight. You have no legitimate grounds to dispute. Sorry."


This just shows how rediculous a one size fits all requirement on wages is...   15 an hour is enough to get you a 2-bed apartment in most states (well above minimum in my opinion)...   While other states you're nowhere close...   Why should the cost of living in Seattle hold merit to the wages in Bumfukt Kentucky?


As long as someone is willing to take it, you can write it!  I personally wrote a check for a new car.   The dealership didn't bat an eye.


Over the last ten years you have reaped the benefits of a good financial decision. (Presumably your low mortgage has freed up money for other financial priorities.) There would be no harm in making a clean break by selling as is.  On the other hand, the resale value would probably be rather low considering the condition and the neighborhood. I don't want to assume too much here, but if a potential buyer is interested in the house by virtue of not being able to afford a house in a better neighborhood or better condition, their finances and credit history may make it difficult for them to be approved for a mortgage. That would reduce the potential buyer pool and further reduce the sale price. If you can pull more in rent than the mortgage, you definitely have an opportunity to come ahead. Maybe window A/C units and a repaired chimney are enough if you're renting. Your rental income would pay for that in less than a year even while paying your mortgage for you. (Of course you don't want to become a sleazy slumlord either.)


Why the hell is health care still tied to employment?  Does anyone really think that is a reasonable function of business?  All this does is make hiring human workers less attractive.    Guess what.  Thanks to automation and outsourcing business owners increasingly have the choice to do without the hassle of hiring people, especially poor, unskilled people these sorts of 19th century programs are designed to help.  My heart goes out to those these sorts of short-sighted programs hurt the most (the poor), but blaming businesses for the mess is misdirected in the extreme.  Maybe you think that business is evil, but in this case it is clearly and unquestionably the system created by the regulatory environment that has created the undesired outcome.  The thing to always remember and keep in mind is the fact that businesses first and formost provide goods and services at the highest quality and lowest cost possible. Making labor more expensive means that businesses will do everything possible to use as little of it as possible when creating their good/service.  If you want socialized health-care then fine, advocate for the government providing this service directly.  Attempting to get 'health-care for free' by mandating businesses pay for it is simply a wrong-headed way to go about it that guarantees less employment **and** less health-care for the poor.


Some times you need to go through a stage of suffering before we see the long term benefit. Ideally these beautiful animals shouldn't ever had been bred for a life in captivity.   I'm not completely innocent. I've visited zoos in my life, but only those where the animals live a good life, have plenty of open space and are not distressed in any way.  The problem that SeaWorld have is that these animals are so large it would be next to impossible to build a tank that resembles anything close to what they would experience in the wild.  I'm not sure if these animals can be released into the wild now and would presume they lack the many skills needed to survive; but what one can hope for is for their breeding program to come to an end if customer numbers continue to dwindle.


1.) Corporations are very lean. They can't cut any jobs because all the jobs they were able to cut have been cut. 2.) They pay the lowest wages possible without causing mass turnover. 3.) They have already added all the global customers who can still pay for their service or product.    But, they can still turn a profit if they invite illegals to do the work for 5 dollars an hour. So don't worry investors. There is still one more thing you can exploit.


There's an interview with Andrew Lo on the WSJ that's worth a listen. One idea he touched on briefly is how the rise of index funds may be creating an investor monoculture. If this is the case, then he thinks it could lead to more market volatility. Interesting stuff.  http://www.wsj.com/podcasts/andrew-w-lo-talks-how-to-evolve-with-adaptive-markets/4B141ED2-23EA-409E-BFEE-96791EEB473E.html


Here is my perception of the situation, obtained from reading Degiro's Client Agreement. If Degiro shuts down, it will notify you about the fact at least one month in advance, and you will have enough time to order a transfer of your positions to a different broker. If Degiro shuts down unexpectedly, your assets will remain to be held at SPV, a separate legal entity which Degiro uses to hold the financial instruments belonging to the clients. Since SPV does nothing else but holding the assets, it is very unlikely that something bad will happen with it on its own. With some help from Degiro and/or the regulator (AFM) you should be able to transfer your assets from SPV to a different custodian and broker and thus regain control over them. If you have a non-Custody account, you have slightly higher chances of losing your assets, because Degiro can borrow your securities held at SPV. If both the client for whom Degiro borrowed a security and Degiro itself go bankrupt at the same time, the lent security will not be returned to SPV, there will arise a shortage, which will be proportionally distributed among the accounts of the clients holding this particular security. However, then the investor compensation scheme should kick in and help you recover up to 20000 EUR of your losses.


Rocky is right on the money, +1 from me.  I will adjust the convince and money issue: You don't mention your country, but here in the US several companies make it very easy to rent.  For example, with a reservation National will allow you to pick any car you want.  Just walk up, jump in, and ride away.  Avis and Hertz will have your car ready, just find your name, go to your spot and jump in and go.  All the paperwork is done electronically in both cases. Enterprise will come and pick you up, at just about any location, bring you to the shop and allow you to do the paperwork there.  I am not sure if that paperwork can be done electronically, but perhaps it can.  They will do the same in reverse once the rental is over. The key here is budget.  You will save a lot of money by renting when needed over your peers that own a car.  However, you will need to plan to have the money each month.   I'd plan on having 50*2*4.*75 = 300 in a four weekend month, and 375 in a five weekend month.  Carry over any excess not spent to the subsequent months.  You will be well ahead of the game and not feel restricted in spending the money to rent.


If it were me, I would create a website for him.  Take a look at all the other local plumber websites and identify the things they get right and wrong and then do or don't do those things, as appropriate.  My feeling is that when someone wants a plumber, they are often anxious and may be in a hurry, so the first thing you need to say on that site is something that is brief and reassuring. The text needs to be clear and easy to read - no white text on a black background, or text placed over a picture.  You also need to answer all the key questions they are likely to ask - how much, how soon, can I trust you to do the right thing, how much experience do you have?  Basically, you need to put yourself in the shoes of that anxious customer and say the things that will strike a chord with them - obviously, any promises he makes on the site he then has to deliver.


All fair points.  I don't mean to say that Jamie Dimon is smart or responsible, and it is possible that he intends high personal taxes and low corporate taxes, although even high personal taxes would be a controversial view among today's conservative/business groups.  In my experience with senior corporate executives (and it is a LOT of experience), they are a lot like artists in that they tend to be highly skilled and knowledgeable within their domain, but they actually don't have a good sense of how politics works -- they may have studied psychology but not sociology, government, or history -- and so they subscribe to political views that are naive in the same way that their understanding of astrophysics is unsophisticated.  Only they don't pontificate about astrophysics and attempt to change the laws of physics, both of which they DO do with politics.


One rule of thumb is that having regular activity on at least three different revolving accounts will improve your score: I agree that it may not be a great idea to have too many open credit accounts (Trade Lines) reporting on your credit report but if you don’t have enough active accounts, it will  prevent you from being approved for a home mortgage. Both Conventional (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) mortgage loans and Government loans (such as FHA and VA) require that you have a minimum number of reporting trade lines that are active or have been active within the most recent 24 month period of time. An example of meeting the mortgage loan requirement is having a revolving account (credit card) that has been reporting activity for the past 24 months plus 2 other trade lines that have had activity reported for 12 months each, both within the past 24 months.


More importantly, index funds are denominated in specific currencies. You can't buy or sell an index, so it can be dimensionless. Anything you actually do to track the index involves real amounts of real money.


To expand on mhoran's answer - Once you mention the 401(k), we're compelled to ask (a) what is the match, if any, and (b) what are the expenses within the funds offered.  Depositing to get the full match is going to get you the biggest return on your money. It's common to get a dollar for dollar match on the first 5 or 6% of your income. If the fees are high, you stop at the match, and move to an IRA for the next money you wish to save.  At 22, I'd probably focus on the Roth. If you have access to a Roth 401(k), that's great, the match will be pre tax dollars and you'll get started with a decent tax status mix.  These accounts can form the core of your investing. Most people have little left over once their retirement accounts are fully funded. And yes, reading to understand stocks is great, but also to understand why stock indexing is the best choice for most investors.


My brain seems to tune out ads now on TV even if I don't switch to another channel. I just feel so bored, and zone out like I'm in a boring class waiting for it to be over.  And when it comes to internet ads my automatic thoughts are malware.  The type of advertising that has been effective is word of mouth from those I perceive to be regular users.


"Now I say this with all due respect, and I mean with all due respect. You sound like a bitch. I've never witnessed someone take criticism so personally. For someone who claims to ""[not] really care what strangers on the internet think about [them]"", you seem to be doing an awful lot of caring."


The founding fathers designed senators to be appointed by the state legislatures.  Instead we elect them and they vote for federal bills which commit state taxes to some federal issue.  They also designed a house where each representative was elected by 3,000 voters.  Now each represents 700,000 and spends all their time getting money from donars instead of representing people they actually spoke to when campaigning.  Maybe we need to go back to the way it was originally set up.


I had a 2000 Chevy Cavalier until late 2011. It worked well, but was very definitely at the end of its life. This was a low-end car, certainly, but I dispute your claim that cars last 20 - 25 years. Consumer Reports apparently says the average life expectancy of a new vehicle is around 8 years or 150,000 miles. When it came time to replace my Cavalier, I was significantly concerned about car safety and about the ability to handle Canadian winters (-40 temperatures, lots of snow). I chose a Subaru Forester as a good match for me. I could have bought one second-hand, but I wasn't willing to get one as old as five years. Car manufacturers constantly improve safety and features over that time period. The Forester is massively more capable of handling Canadian winters than the Cavalier was. If I was buying a Forester now, I'd want the EyeSight Driver Assist System which Subaru added a couple of years after my model year. The newer models score slightly higher in crash tests, too. That would limit me to 2014 or later models, and I'd be concerned someone selling a 2014 or 2015 knew something I didn't, knew they had purchased a lemon. I didn't need financing for my vehicle. On the other hand, I could have invested the money I saved, so if all I wanted was something to get me from point A to point B, my choice does not make much financial sense. But Canadian winters are brutal and car safety is massively important to me. I'm well aware that I paid considerably for this, and I'm comfortable with my decision.


It's great that vets have loans available to the that offer additional protections, but in a seller's market, which we are completely in, buyers should realize they need to make their offers as attractive as possible with as few barriers as possible. I recently put in an offer on a house, but was outbid by another offer to only have the seller come back a week later willing to accept my offer for 5K less because the other offer was a VA loan and they didn't want to deal with the hassle.  That being said, affordability aside, vets can get non-VA loans, so it's not like they have no options to make themselves more appealing to sellers.


Pai's nomination very narrowly passed the Senate. If your senator was one of the 52 that voted in Pai's favor, start showing up at their town hall events and making this an issue they have to defend their stance on. Turn this into another thing that senators are running from their constituents on.


"Please clarify your question. What do you mean by ""..loan in Greece""? If you are referring to taking a mortgage loan to purchase residential property in Greece, there are two factors to consider: If the loan originates from a Greek bank, then odds are likely that the bank will be nationalized by the government if Greece defaults. If the loan is external (i.e. from J.P. Morgan or some foreign bank), then the default will certainly affect any bank that trades/maintains Euros, but banks that are registered outside of Greece won't be nationalized. So what does nationalizing mean for your loan? You will still be expected to pay it according to the terms of the contract. I'd recommend against an adjustable rate contract since rates will certainly rise in a default situation. As for property, that's a different story. There have been reports of violence in Greece already, and if the country defaults, imposes austerity measures, etc, odds are there will be more violence that can harm your property. Furthermore, there is a remote possibility that the government can attempt to acquire your private property. Unlikely, but possible. You could sue in this scenario on property rights violations but things will be very messy from that point on. If Greece doesn't default but just exits the Euro Zone, the situation will be similar. The Drachma will be weak and confidence will be poor, and unrest is a likely outcome. These are not statements of facts but rather my opinion, because I cannot peek into the future. Nonetheless, I would advise against taking a mortgage for property in Greece at this point in time."


"TL;DR: Sure, ""do your own homework"" is sometimes a cop out. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do our homework. I agree that in many cases this is a cop-out by commentators. However, even if you believe in perfect market efficiency, there is benefit in ""doing your homework"" for many reasons. One of which you already mention in the question: different stocks all with the same ""value"" might have widely ranging risk. Another factor that might vary between stocks is their tax consequences. High dividend stocks might be a better fit for some buyers than others. One stock might be priced at $40 because there is a small chance they might get regulatory approval for a new product. This might make this stock very risky with a 20% of being $150 in 12 months, and a 80% chance of being $20. Another stock might be priced at $40 because the company is a cash cow, declining in revenues but producing a large dividend of $0.40 per quarter. Low risk, but also with some potential tax disadvantages. Another stock might be priced at $40 because it's a high growth stock. This would be less risky than the first example, but more risky than the second example. And the risk would be more generalized, i.e. there wouldn't be one day or one event that would be make or break the stock. In short, even if we assume that the market is pricing everything perfectly, not all stocks are equal and not all stocks are equally appropriate to everyone. Sometimes when we hear an analyst say ""they should have done their homework"" they are really saying ""This was a high risk/high reward stock. They should have known that this had a potential downside."" And that all assumes that we believe in 100% pure market efficiency. Which many disagree with, at least to some extent. For example, if we instead subscribe to Peter Lynch's theories about ""local knowledge"", we might believe that everyone has some personal fields of expertise where they know more than the experts. A professional stock analyst is going to follow many stocks and many not have technical experience in the field of the company. (This is especially true of small and mid cap stocks.) If you happen to be an expert in LED lighting, it is entirely feasible (at least to me) that you could be able to do a better job of ""doing homework"" on CREE than the analysts. Or if you use a specialized piece of software from a small vendor at work, and you know that the latest version stinks, then you will likely know more than the analyst does. I think it is somewhat akin to going to a doctor. We could say to ourselves ""the doctor is more knowledgeable about me than medicine, I'm just going to do what they tell me to do."" And 99% of the time, that is the right thing to do. But if we do our ""homework"" anyway, and research the symptoms, diagnoses, and drugs ourselves as well, we can do get benefits. Sometimes we just can express our preferences amongst equal solutions. Sometimes we can ask smarter questions. And sometimes we have some piece of knowledge that the doctor doesn't have and can actually make an important discovery they didn't know. (And, just like investing, sometimes we can also have just enough knowledge to be dangerous and do ourselves harm if we go against the advice of the professionals.)"


My mortgage started out with an escrow, but it seemed like they were mismanaging it. They often over-collected it and locked up my money unnecessarily or under-collected and had to catch up later to pay the tax bill. Despite what Vitalik said, I told them I would pay my own taxes and insurance and to stop the escrow and they did without argument. Keep in mind, you should only do this if you are good about saving money. The banks know that many people aren't and will have trouble at the end of the year when a multi-thousand dollar tax or insurance bill comes due, hence the reason they try to get you to do the escrow.  In my case, I just had the estimated tax/escrow amount automatically deposited from my paycheck into a special interest bearing savings account that I manage.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/02/the-strong-case-for-a-land-value-tax) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Several parties&#039; manifestos gave land value tax a nod.  > The advantages are that land cannot be placed tax-free in an overseas bank, taxing land forces into use the 600,000 plots of unused land owned by the big builders, it is progressive, it relieves the incomes of hardworking people and companies by enabling the abolition of inefficient taxes such as council tax, business rates and stamp duty.  > Land nationalisation has a long history, relevant today when private profit from land has overwhelmed public interest.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6gkcny/the_strong_case_for_a_land_value_tax_letters/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~141482 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **land**^#1 **housing**^#2 **tax**^#3 **need**^#4 **Such**^#5"


You're assuming a lot about specific forms the upload process would take. Those assumptions are **not** safe ones.  Consider for example the notion of an augmented mind that is given a presence in cyberspace... which wouldn't *stop* if the meat-brain died. Genuine *transfer* of continuity.


"nicodiangelo16.blogspot.com — Tired of falling for business opportunities and franchises that don't live up to their promises? Try our revealing reviews - unique forensic analyses that expose the good, the bad and the ugly This site is financed by you, instead of by biz opp ads and commission links You pay us to be unbiased - so we are ""It's the only unbiased info on the market that I've come across.""Carl, Business Opportunity Watch member since 2005 Review of SHARON FUSSELL SOLD DISPATCH NOW GOLD Make money selling books on Amazon Canonbury Publishing Sharon Fussell Sold Dispatch Now Gold Review extract from: August 2009 BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY WATCH Issue No. 30 Buy the Sharon Fussell Sold Dispatch Now Gold Review for £3 or Members Only Area - Free Trial - Read All Reviews Extract from review of Sold Dispatch Now Sharon Fussell: Sharon Fussell says that her Sold Dispatch Now Gold business ""is as simple as buying books for pennies from easy-to-find sources - and then reselling them on for huge profits"". She says you can make £200 to £300 every week with Sold Dispatch Now Gold and ""you can set it up in just 10 minutes!"", it's not hard work and you don't need computer experience. You don't need a lot of books either - according to Sharon Fussell, a stock of 500-600 books means that you can sell 25 per week and make £6,000 a year. You just buy the books from easy-to-find sources (she tells you how) and list them for sale on Amazon. Sharon Fussell has been following the Sold Dispatch Now Gold system for three years and she now has a turnover of £26,741 a year. She's given up her old day job. The Sold Dispatch Now Gold manual costs £77 and it does come with a CD Rom demonstration of how Sharon Fussell operates her business and it includes her email support and a 28-day no-quibble money back guarantee. Is it really that easy to make £200 to £300 a week? We sent the company a number of questions"


Windows 10 is trash and is outclassed by Linux, OS X and Windows 7. Over two years after its release and it still has not eclipsed Windows 7, and it isn't even close.  Just because he replaced someone that the press loved to hate does not mean we should all get on our knees and start sucking Satya's dick.


Jeepers . .its been a tough week huh?  People got really serious, with missiles flying and what not . . Hydrogen bombs in the Pacific  Well thank god its Friday and our orange baby can head off for a week end holiday so he can make sense of all the big boy words, can sink his head into a soft fluffy pillow to drown out the sobs as reality sinks in and the truth is exposed . . .nothing so cool as a Russian spy op . . just a simple shmeckle puppet  Melania . . .see if you can bring yourself to maybe give him a hug with out retching . . Kim was so mean to him I think he hurt his feelings and the Chinese just ran circles around him and Putin . . damn . .so cold . .he just ignored him all together  If all else fails Donald, grab a bottle of shampoo and put those little hands to work, maybe if there is some left and you can squeeze out a drop or two . . .the world wont look so hostile on Monday  I bet you wish you took the blue pill


Altough this may vary a lot depending on where you live and your actual finance, here what convinced me buying a home instead of renting : Other benefits :