"I don't think this is ""curious"" at all.  A large part of Bitcoin's value is based on speculation currently, and since it's both a global currency and a relatively small one, global changes can greatly affect it without having a huge impact on the US Dollar (e.g., the article mentions that much of Bitcoin's trade, and therefore its value, is coming from Japan right now).  The symmetry you're looking for can also be deceiving when talking about currencies of dramatically different values.  The US M2 money supply is worth over $13 trillion (measuring in US Dollars).  The Bitcoin money supply is currently worth about $66 billion (also measuring in US Dollars).  If Bitcoin spiked 10% and the change in value was completely symmetric with the US dollar, the US dollar would fall in value by only 0.05% (i.e. move $6.6 billion in market cap from the USD to Bitcoin).  That's also greatly exaggerating the impact of changes in value of Bitcoin on the US Dollar since Bitcoin and the USD aren't the only currency pair in existence.  Far from it, in fact.  This is why you see, for example, the Venezuelan Bolivar tank against the US Dollar without feeling immensely more wealthy.  People in the US also tend to price things in USD, including foreign currencies, because that's what they're used to doing as they're most familiar with the value of a dollar from everyday experience."


"This formula is not calculating ""Earnings"".  Instead, it is calculating ""Free Cash Flow from Operations"". As the original poster notes, the ""Earnings"" calculation subtracted out depreciation and amortization.  The ""Free Cash Flow from Operations"" adds these values back, but for two different reasons:"


For any truck owner, the need to repair their vehicle is bound to arise at one time or another. This is simply unavoidable. Since a truck has to operate in unfriendly weather conditions and dense traffic, the need to keep it in good running condition is essential. This means you need to be on the lookout for a good truck repair shop.


That's because the only reason HR exists at all, *is to justify its own existence*. It is, in fact, the one division of a company you can completely get rid of, and the only effect it will have is to make the company run an awful lot better, and be much more efficient.  HR people are usually the most hated in any business. And for good reason.


I am not hooked up to the US MSM, so i dont know if they have really said what the article claims it is saying. (or that way, or that much) But the whole article claims the idea there will be more oil is bullshit, and that the MSM is covering it ... poorly.


You're crazy to cash out your Roth or take on 401k loan, as that is addressing a short-term problem without doing anything about the longer-term issue. Just don't do it. Through no fault of her own, your mom is insolvent. It happens to people all of the time, and the solution is chapter 7 bankruptcy.  The only thing that I would do with my money in this situation is help her with bankruptcy attorney fees if needed, and maybe bid on it at auction, if the house in in good shape.


Probably talking about different things. For example, there are almost certainly CEOs of startups that don't even take a salary and while they may have huge equity in their firm, if it doesn't get off the ground they make $0. I'm assuming the original comment about worst CEOs probably was excluding these types of situations.


I think you are interpreting their recommended numbers incorrectly.  They are not suggesting that you get 13-21 credit cards, they are saying that your score could get 13-21 points higher based on having a large number of credit cards and loans. Unfortunately, the exact formula for calculating your credit score is not known, so its hard to directly answer the question.  But I wouldn't go opening 22+ credit cards just to get this part of the number higher!


You can invest another $5,500 in your Roth IRA each year, so you can invest up to $11,000 between the two tax years. Additionally you can make investments for the previous year up until 15 April the following year. In your case that will be close to graduation time, and you may decide to max out the contribution for 2014, but wait until you are settled into a new job before setting those savings aside long-term. When you start your first job, there will likely also be an option to invest in a 401k. You can still have the advantages of a Roth, but you will be limited to the investments available in the plan. Most employers I've seen today still offer a low-cost index fund, but you may have to speak up at a company meeting to pressure them to include one of those options in the plan. With a 401k your limit increases to $17,500/year. Make sure that the index fund you invest in has the lowest possible expense ratio. I use VOO. Depending on trading fees, etc., you might pick something else.


Just guessing here… How about Daily Median price?  StockCharts provides a similar value they call VWAP. Which stands for Volume-Weighted Average Price. I believe it is a better 'average' for the day (click on link).


Ownership has everything to do with it. If I created a block-wide lawn mowing service and forced you to pay for it but I mowed your lawn, your objection to buying my service wouldn't make you the bad guy. You'd say that you don't want my lawn mowing service, and even if you did enjoy the lawn after I took your money and mowed it, you could still object to it and want a different method of taking care of your lawn. The same could be said for any other good/service out there.


Yeah, BK does very little in terms of running restaurants, they are like hotels in that they run a brand and let individual owerns pay the fees to sign up. I don't get why they should be paying US taxes if someone in London decides to open a BK and pays their fee to BK, PLC based out of the UK.


I actually use a service called etorro, there are social trading and normal trading. It allows me to put money into the service, follow other people or just pick my own shares to buy and sell with a load other features.  It does cost a small amount to extract money but the app is really good, the website is well designed and I've made a bit of money being 23, and in the It industry with no financial training ever it seems like a good way to start.


Thanks to this youtube video I think I understood the required calculation. Based on following notation: then the formula to find x is: I found afterwards an example on IB site (click on the link 'How to Determine the Last Stock Price Before We Begin to Liquidate the Position') that corroborate the formula above.


To deduct medical expenses (in the US), your expenses must first be reduced by 10% of your AGI. So a $30K earner can only deduct expenses over $3K, for example.  Then, the deduction is added to your other itemized deductions, and it's only taken if it exceeds the standard deduction, $6300 for a single person. In the end, you need to do the math and see is the savings is worth it.  If the tooth makes you self conscious or insecure, it may be worth every cent to do it ASAP.


As non-EU citizen who went to university in England and also doing an MBA in Spain, I can assure you they are not hard to get. It literally is filling out a form.  I went to university in England because of England's strong university status and I went to university in Spain because I wanted to improve my Spanish.  I'm sure a small percentage of people will maybe go to a different country due to having to fill out a visa application (maybe. We don't know if U.K. will allow visa-free studies for EU), but we don't have any way to measure the *possible* impact (if it even happens) right now.  If visas were such a hurdle then why do so many students from around the world come to the USA and Canada to study? They do it because US and Canada have some of the best universities in the world and students want to improve their English - all factors that British universities still have.  I get it. You don't like Brexit. But just try and look at it objectively.


"You are still paying a heavy price for the 'instant gratification' of driving (renting) a brand-new car that you will not own at the end of the terms. It is not a good idea in your case, since this luxury expense sounds like a large amount of money for you.  Edited to better answer question The most cost effective solution: Purchase a $2000 car now. Place the $300/mo payment aside for 3 years. Then, go buy a similar car that is 3 years old. You will have almost $10k in cash and probably will need minimal, if any, financing. Same as this answer from Pete: https://money.stackexchange.com/a/63079/40014 Does this plan seem like a reasonable way to proceed, or a big mistake? ""Reasonable"" is what you must decide. As the first paragraph states, you are paying a large expense to operate the vehicle. Whether you lease or buy, you are still paying this expense, especially from the depreciation on a new vehicle. It does not seem reasonable to pay for this luxury if the cost is significant to you. That said, it will probably not be a 'big mistake' that will destroy your finances, just not the best way to set yourself up for long-term success."


"In my experience, no. You are not ""out if pocket"" for that amount. Remember, the purpose of that number is to set a limit on how much of your own money you might have to spend during the year, not on how much is spent/discounted/reimbursed on your behalf."


Lol, sorry buddy. Must be so hard to read that you couldnt even bother to refute anything I said. The never Trump crowd loves to deflect by either defaming character or nitpicking the silliest reasons to argue about instead. You are just another anecdotal experience I have in my life that continues to confirm what I already believe.


Yeah I have credit cards now but his credit line got me jumped up from maybe a 200 to a 650 in a few months or a year or so.   My bad I figured I posted it in the wrong sub!   So if he cancels it, will this cause me to lose points? Considering the credit line is about 20K?


Even then, I've noticed a personal shift away from fast food as a whole, and more toward fast casual (is that what they're calling it?) places like Chipotle, Panera, that Noodle Company place, etc. Less in the $2-5 price range, and more $6-10. People want quality shit now, and we're clearly willing to spend a bit more.   I truly don't know what these fast food places' next step should be. They try to emphasize superior quality but at the price points we see, it's all talk.


"In practice No, not at zero. Banks currently have the ability to borrow at very low interest rates but not quite at zero.  Using the Fed Funds Range as a metric we can see that recently (Nov 2015) the lower bound of the fed funds range was 0.05%.  Fed funds are overnight lend/borrow transactions between banks (often between the federal home loan banks and other institutions) 0.05% is also the FED's current Reverse Repo Program rate (RRP), which is the rate at which certain counterparties can deposit cash with the FED overnight in exchange for collateral.  The collateral (US Treasuries) is insurance against the FED defaulting, a very low risk considering the FED has the ability to create more US Dollars out of thin air.  In theory the RRP rate should be a lower bound for the fed funds rate however in practice it is possible to see lower rates trade in the street. What do you mean by ""Third party institutions""? Only banks of the highest credit quality are able to borrow at the lower bound of the Fed Funds range.  These are usually large domestic banks like JP Morgan, Bank of NY etc...  As credit quality decreases the rate at which they borrow increases. Currently Skandinavien, German, French banks have relatively good credit and borrow overnight money towards the lower part of the fed funds range.  Italian, Spanish and smaller regional US banks have lesser credit quality and borrow at the higher end of the Fed Funds range. Institutions with lower credit quality would borrow at still higher rates."


We are a part of the modern world where technology plays a brilliant role in making our lifestyle more exuberant, comfortable and flamboyant. In this contemporary world, the combination of photography and printing is considered an asset to turn any simple effect into an extraordinary upshot! For instance, addition of some art work and picture frames to a bedroom can turn it into a master suite.


How to solve pet pee needs in the middle of the night when you live in a high-rise apartment can be a real challenge. A San Diego start-up company has come up with a unique product that helps both property managers and tenants.


I was interested in this article until I realized I had to click for each prediction/article. Then I shook my head in slight disgust and clicked the back button.     So, who wins? Does the dog die? Is the baby ok?     *edit: not a slam on the OP*


Your heart doesn't need to be anywhere when your wallet grows. Extra cash can be invested in future passions and who knows, with a bit of distance, the love for it might come back. Once the door is completely closed, you'd have to start at 0.


**[Julian Rinaldi](http://www.swspar.com/about/newspage.php?newsid=64)**, who owns Musbury Garage near Axminster, has been elected to the Wessex Guild of **[SPAR.](http://www.swspar.com/)**  Julian joins 11 other Retailers from throughout the South and West on the Wessex Guild. He is pictured here (left) being welcomed by Wessex Guild Chairman Nick Kenworthy.  Each committee member represents a designated area throughout the Guild and Julian will represent an area covering South Somerset and East Devon. “I see the Guild as an important link between the Retailer and Appleby Westward,” he said.  Julian joined SPAR three years ago when he converted his garage shop into a 1,000 sq.ft. SPAR forecourt store serving the local community.  He took over Musbury Garage when his parents Frank and Barbara retired in 2008. They had originally acquired the site in April 1981. It originally opened as a garage in the 1930s under the ownership of a Mr. Snell who later sold the business on to Jim Hendin before he in turn sold it to Frank and Barbara.


My son who is now 21 has never needed me to cosign on a loan for him and I did not need to establish any sort of credit rating for him to establish his own credit.  One thing I would suggest is ditch the bank and use a credit union. I have used one for many years and opened an account there for my son as soon as he got his first job. He was able to get a debit card to start which doesn't build credit score but establishes his account work the credit union. He was able to get his first credit card through the same credit union without falling work the bureaucratic BS that comes with dealing with a large bank. His interest rate may be a bit higher due to his lack of credit score initially but because we taught him about finance it isn't really relevant because he doesn't carry a balance. He has also been able to get a student loan without needing a cosigner so he can attend college.  The idea that one needs to have a credit score established before being an adult is a fallacy. Like my son, I started my credit on my own and have never needed a cosigner whether it was my first credit card at 17 (the credit union probably shouldn't have done that since i wasn't old enough to be legally bound), my first car at 18 or my first home at 22. For both my son and I, knowing how to use credit responsibly was far more valuable than having a credit score early. Before your children are 18 opening credit accounts with them as the primary account holder can be problematic because they aren't old enough to be legally liable for the debt. Using them as a cosigner is even more problematic for the same reason. Each financial institution will have their own rules and I certainly don't know them all.  For what you are proposing I would suggest a small line of credit with a credit union. Being small and locally controlled you will probably find that you have the best luck there.


"Following comments to your question here, you posted a separate question about why SPY, SPX, and the options contract don't move perfectly together.  That's here Why don't SPY, SPX, and the e-mini s&p 500 track perfectly with each other? I provided an answer to that question and will build on it to answer what I think you're asking on this question.  Specifically, I explained what it means that these are ""all based on the S&P.""  Each is a different entity, and different market forces keep them aligned.  I think talking about ""technicals"" on options contracts is going to be too confusing since they are really a very different beast based on forward pricing models, so, for this question, I'll focus on only SPY and SPX. As in my other answer, it's only through specific market forces (the creation / redemption mechanism that I described in my other answer), that they track at all.  There's nothing automatic about this and it has nothing to do with some issuer of SPY actually holding stock in the companies that comprise the SPX index. (That's not to say that the company does or doesn't hold, just that this doesn't drive the prices.)  What ever technical signals you're tracking, will reflect all of the market forces at play.  For SPX (the index), that means some aggregate behavior of the component companies, computed in a ""mathematically pure"" way.  For SPY (the ETF), that means (a) the behavior of SPX and (b) the behavior of the ETF as it trades on the market, and (c) the action of the authorized participants.  These are simply different things. Which one is ""right""?  That depends on what you want to do.  In theory you might be able to do some analysis of technical signals on SPY and SPX and, for example, use that to make money on the way that they fail to track each other.  If you figure out how to do that, though, don't post it here.  Send it to me directly. :)"


I live right beneath the epicenter of this eclipse. My town has less than 150k people and for the eclipse we are predicting a million visitors in the area. That will almost double the population of my state. There aren't enough automobiles in my area to support everyone having a car reservation. Looking at the surrounding areas (up to 200 miles away) and there still aren't enough cars, or ***infrastructure*** to support so many vehicles in my area of my state. While it's a dick move by car rental companies, I honestly don't know what they are are supposed to do.   Edit: I mean, obviously rental companies need a better reservation system that doesn't allow reserving an automobile in an area if there aren't enough automobiles to fill the demand. That is completely on the rental companies. However, even if the demand for all of the automobiles could be met--let's say one car for every four visitors--that's still 250k rental cars in my area of less than a 150k *residents*. It's going to be chaos.   Also: I have three rooms to rent over the week of the eclipse and if anyone is headed to SE Idaho, I'm willing to reach an arrangement.


"1 - Delete ormake private your twitter or facebook accounts (you have more than one, yes?) that are explicitly politic.  2 - Take any declas off your car. I am talking about the ""Ban ChikFilA"", the PFLAG one, the Marriage Equality, the Save the Dolphins.  3 - Avoid flirting with anyone, male and female. That can wait for later.  Story time: I was working for a very conservative institution, and in couple of occasions I was approached by a married man trying to get into my pants, and received flirtatious advances from a married woman.  Most of all, they hated my political affiliation (which they got from a blog I used to write)."


> E.U. and the US produces some of the worlds best produce in terms of quality and quantity. Russia has no problem feeding their population. If they're cool with eating nothing but wheat and corn.    From you saying this I assume you are in the US...  Having traveled all over the US and Russia I can tell you.  Ether the US is exporting all its best food items and keeping lower quality for itself, or Russia already has access to better produce than the US has to offer.


As noted above but with sources An improvement materially adds to the value   of your home, considerably prolongs its useful   life, or adapts it to new uses. You must add the   cost of any improvements to the basis of your   home. You cannot deduct these costs. Source Page 11, Adjusted Basis, Improvements Second, A repair   keeps your home in an ordinary, efficient operating   condition. It does not add to the value of   your home or prolong its life. Repairs include repainting   your home inside or outside, fixing your   gutters or floors, fixing leaks or plastering, and   replacing broken window panes. You cannot   deduct repair costs and generally cannot add   them to the basis of your home. Source Page 12, Adjusted Basis, Repairs versus improvements Generally, an expense for repairing or maintaining   your rental property may be deducted if you   are not required to capitalize the expense.  You must capitalize any expense   you pay to improve your rental property.   An expense is for an improvement if it results in   a betterment to your property, restores your   property, or adapts your property to a new or   different use. Source Page 5, Repairs and Improvements  Good Luck,


To piggy back mbhunter's answer, the broker is going to find a way to make the amount of money they want, and either the employee or the company will foot that bill. But additionally, most small businesses want to compete and the market and offer benefits in the US.  So they shop around, and maybe the boss doesn't have the best knowledge about effective investing, so they end up taking the offering from the broker who sells it the best. Give you company credit for offering something, but know they are as affected by a good salesperson as anybody else.  Being a good sales person doesn't mean you are selling a good product.


In Virginia the maximum tax rate on income is 5.75% which is the same as the capital gains rate. http://www.tax.virginia.gov/income-tax-calculator


Ironically, anyone can say anything, but it doesn't make it true. In normal times, the IRS can audit you for 3 years, or up to 6 for certain cases of fraud - From the IRS site -  How far back can the IRS go to audit my return? Generally, the IRS can   include returns filed within the last three years in an audit. If we   identify a substantial error, we may add additional years. We usually   don’t go back more than the last six years. HSA spending is reported each year, just like any Schedule A deductions. Each year, I have my charitable receipts, and they are not sent in. They are there in case of audit. I don't need to save them forever, nor does one need their medical bills forever. 3 years. 6 if you wish to be paranoid. The EOBs should be enough.  The HSA is unique in that you deposit pretax dollars (like a traditional IRA or 401(k)) yet withdrawals for qualified expenses come out tax free (like a Roth).  In my opinion, as long as your medical plan qualifies you for an HSA, I'd maximize its use. The older you get, the more bills you'll have, and at some point, you'll be grateful to your younger self that you did this.


"The forms are almost identical, just formatted slightly differently. I just compared an old copy of an R form with the current one without the R. I don't know why they removed the R. In any case, I filed my biannual this year on llc-12, no ""r"", and no issues."


"Netflix has a lot of challenges on the horizon:  https://seekingalpha.com/article/4082083-netflixs-costly-business-model-proves-unsustainable  https://seekingalpha.com/article/4084754-netflixs-appetite-risk-start-impacting-investors  https://seekingalpha.com/article/4083085-netflix-will-content-costs-eat-growth  The amusing thing about all of these ""culture"" discussions is that the majority of the companies boasting about their culture haven't been through a storm that challenges it.  Everybody is happy on the ship when it's smooth sailing but you really learn about your culture when the ship springs a leak."


Given that a lot of rental car places tend to be co-located these days, I've just started making multiple reservations. There's generally no penalty for not picking up the car and if one flakes out, you still have a reservation elsewhere.


Pay the the smallest balance first. The sooner you pay that off, the sooner you can pay more on the mortgage.


"According to what little information is available currently, this fund is most akin to an actively managed exchange traded fund rather than an investment trust. An investment trust is an actively managed, closed-end fund that is tradeable on the stock market.  ""Closed-end"" means that there are a fixed number of shares available for trading, so if you wish to buy or sell shares in a closed-end fund you need to find someone willing to sell or buy shares.  ""Actively managed"" means that the assets are selected by the fund managers in the belief that they will perform well.  This is in contrast to a ""passively managed"" fund which simply tracks an underlying index.   The closed-end nature of investment trusts means that the share price is not well correlated to the value of the underlying assets.  Indeed, almost all UK investment trusts trade at a significant discount to their net asset value.  This reflects their historic poor performance and relatively weak liquidity.  Of course there are some exceptions to this. Examples of open-end funds are unit trust (US = mutual funds) and ETFs (exchange traded funds).  They are ""open-end"" funds in the sense that the number of shares/units available will change according to demand.  Most importantly, the price of a share/unit will be strongly correlated to the net asset value of the underlying portfolio.  In general, for an open-end fund, if the net asset value of the fund is X and there are Y shares/units outstanding, then the price of a share/unit will be X/Y.  Historic data shows that passively managed funds (index trackers) ""always"" outperform actively managed funds in the long term.  One of the big issues with actively managed funds is they have relatively high management fees.  The Peoples Trust will be charging about 1% with a promise that this should come down over time.  Compare this to a fee of 0.05% on a large, major market index tracking ETF.  Further, the 1% headline fee being touted by Peoples Trust is a somewhat misleading, since they are paying their employees bonuses with shares in the fund.  This will cause dilution of the net asset value per share and can be read as addition management fees by proxy.  Since competent fund managers will demand high incomes, bonus shares could easily double the management fees, depending on the size of the fund. In summary, history has shown that the promises of active fund managers rarely (if ever) come to fruition. Personally, I would not consider this to be an attractive investment and would look more towards a passively managed major market index ETF with low management fees."


Oh my fucking god, what a stupid comment.   You mean the degree he paid for? That no one at Wharton knows anything about? No classmates? No Teachers? Wharton seems real proud of having him there, oh wait, no they don't. They even have an open letter that has 2000 fucking signatures on it from Faculty and Students.   Also, just because you have a degree in Economics doesn't make you automatically know everything about it. You have to put in the time and work and he clearly shows his understanding of it daily.   >Trump2052   I don't need to comment further for a blinded and ignorant fan-boy.


"Am I on crack, or do the perceived tax savings via S-Corp   distributions really not matter at a certain level of business income? You're not on crack. Generally, if all the income is generated by your own personal services - this is the outcome. The benefit of S-Corp is when you have employees who generate your income, and you distribute to yourself profits that come out of other's personal services. In this case your distributions are exempt from FICA since it is not in fact a self-employment income. You'd still have to pay yourself a reasonable salary for your position (as a manager/officer), but it wouldn't have to cover all of the available profits. So if the IRS takes a position against you it would be that your salary should be to include the whole profits, since it is the compensation to you for the personal services that produced the income to the corporation (you). In many cases they might agree that a salary at the SS maximum limit would be reasonable - but that's only a speculation of mine. In that case you might gain some portion of the medicare tax (with the recent law changes at the levels you're talking about you'll pay some medicare anyway). There are a lot of accountants who take more aggressive position saying that not all of the distributions are liable for SE taxes, even if you're the sole employee of the corporation. These cases often end up in the Tax Court, and whatever the outcome, your legal fees become higher than the FICA savings. What is probably missing in your picture is the SS limit of (currently $112K) above which you don't pay social security tax, so whether you get it as a salary or as a distribution - that limit is the same. That is why you don't see a significant difference. I know there are a lot of accountants who'd disagree, but I would argue that for a sole employee of your company, S-Corp doesn't provide significant benefits over the disregarded LLC taxation, but has some additional overhead that adds to your expenses. Here's a link to a lawyer's blog where he suggests (and says many accountants follow) 60/40 division between salary and distributions. I.e.: his take, similarly to mine, is that most of the earnings have to be treated as salary. In your case, when the total is about 300K - you indeed will not get any FICA savings with such a division other than some of the medicare.  Unusually low wages when compared to distributions can draw unwanted   IRS scrutiny and an audit. An unfavorable audit will likely result in   some portion of the distributions being reclassified as earned income   for federal income tax purposes, which results in a deficiency   assessment (i.e., a tax bill), interest on those unpaid taxes, and IRS   penalties. The article also talks about the Watson case (one of the Tax Court cases I referred to), which can be used as the guidelines for determining the ""reasonable"" compensation. Talk to your tax adviser. I'm neither a tax adviser nor a tax professional. For a tax advice contact a CPA/EA licensed in your state. This is not a tax advice, just my personal opinion."


A CD ladder is an ideal way to hold your emergency funds and eke out a few more percentage points of return.  Buy CDs in denominations close to one month's expenses, and ladder 1 per month with 3, 6 or 12 month CDs (depending on your total cash allocation to emergency funds). By using a frequency that matches your available funds, in a best case scenario, you can perpetually roll over (or as your savings increase, extend to a longer frequency).  If you have an emergency, you have a month's expenses in cash or cash coming in within a month.


Yeah, the federal gas tax has been 18.4 cents per gallon since I think 1920's and states add another 20 to 55 cents per gallon, but it is nowhere near enough to cover costs.  And I grew up in Illinois, nothing has changed much (I don't remember when we didn't have a former governor in jail).


I have come to the conclusion, taking into account the Mining aspect of Bitcoin, that it is the biggest coordinated brute force attempt to try and Decrpyt something.   Yes . .I know, a hash cannot be reversed, thats what they said about MD5 and in the absence of true random, anything is possible.  So they get everybody excited, woohoooo . .bitcoin is $4000 . . .get everybody to buy systems with 5/10/15 high end graphic cards. spend US $ 1500-2000 to make US $7-8 a day and all that processing power goes where?  When the Hash for a piece of data will never change and always remain the same.


Why the fuck are executives retarded enough to take political stances with their companies? Companies like Google are taking a stance against SOPA because it directly affects their business. SOPA doesn't directly affect GoDaddy's business. Just shut the fuck up and make your money. Some executives just have to actively find ways to shoot themselves in the foot.


"Looking at your numbers, I would definitively consider selling the car, and use the public transportation instead. You could easily save $450 month, plus gas and maintenance. As you mentioned, public transportation will be only a fraction of this amount, so you might end up saving around $400 monthly. If you decide to keep the car, the amount that you will spent monthly is easily a payment for a brand-new car. What if, God forbid, for any kind of reason, you get a traffic ticket that can increase your insurance premium? What if the engine stops working, and you will need to spent thousands of dollars fixing the car? With this, and all of the other expenses pilled up, you might be unable to afford all this at some point. If you decide to sell the car, the money that you will save monthly can be put in a savings account (or in any other sort of ""safe"" investment instrument). In this way, if your situation changes where you need a car again, you will be able to easily afford a new car. Regarding your need to visit your friends on the suburbs every other weekend, I think you can just talk with them, and meet on places where public transportation is available, or ask them to pick you up in the nearest station to the suburbs.  In conclusion, based on what you said, I do not think the ""little"" convenience that you get in owning the car outweighs the big savings that you get monthly, if you decide to sell the car."


I think you can also order online and pick up in store at locations that don't have food delivery to your door.   It's actually a nice service. Do the shopping at home, see how much you're about to spend before committing and pay online. Then drove to the store, everything is bagged and ready to go. No more walking up and down aisles and being shocked at your total when you get to the check out.


In addition to all these great answers, check out the Wikipedia entry on options. The most important thing to note from their definition is that an option is a derivative (and nothing about any derivative is simple).  Because it is a derivative, increases or decreases in the price of the underlying stock won't automatically result in the same amount of change in the value of the option.


Keep paying down the bills.  Attack them by balance (lowest first) or by interest rate (highest first).  Talk to a local chapter of the National Foundation for Credit Counseling to see if they have any ideas.  Perhaps you are a candidate for bankruptcy or some other drastic measure if you have a steady living situation and steady employment. (I wouldn't know, but honestly if your score can't get much worse so there isn't much to lose) You are doing the best you can and because you care enough, you will do great and adjust going forward. As a dad myself, don't worry about paying for your kids school or showering them with entertainment.  Of course they need some, but time with you and knowing you are always there and stable will mean much more than buying their books.  The best gift you can give your kid is a future where they don't have to support you, which is sadly more common than we sometimes think.


Transit FSAs have $255 limits for each of {parking, public transit} per month, considered on a monthly basis separately; and that limit applies both to funding and to claims. You may fund your transit FSA with up to $255 per month for each purpose.  You may withdraw up to $255 per month for each purpose.  The amounts each month don't have to match, but they do need to each be under the maximum.   Any amount you spend over $255 for either parking or public transit would need to be funded with post-tax money.  Most transit FSAs have a mechanism for adding a credit card to the account to allow this to be seamless and on-demand (as opposed to be declared in advance). You can change your deduction each month, up to the limit your benefits provider permits (for me for example, I can choose up to the 10th of the prior month what to do). This differs from health care FSAs, which are annual in nature, and must be entirely defined during open enrollment - but as they have annual limits, would allow you to use the full amount even when employed for only half the year.


"> Where are the pictures of Israel shooting rubber bullets at women and children? Where are the pictures of ""Palestinians"" who are dying from thirst and untreated diseases?  Yes, I don't care about clueless people like you who hate Israel/Jews and have no clue why."


That goodness here in Australia we don't annualise GDP figures rrom just on individual quarter. That is such a stupid practice. We state the quarterly figure and then add the previous three quarters to calculate the rolling 12 month figure. Makes so much more sense.


No, nothing like that. You don't get banned for bringing up valid counterpoints. Politics isnt a hard line set for one specific persons policies, being an eternal online rally. Theyre nothing alike even if it seems similar to you.


People buy less shit.  Therefore less work needs to be done to produce shit.  Therefore people spend less time working.  Of course this means less income, but that's OK because you're spending less money buying shit.  The trick is figuring out how to spread the income decrease to the entire population, instead of companies laying off some people while everyone else's income and hours worked remains unchanged.


Both of these are important points. I think that what /u/chogall is saying, and what most people miss when it comes to AI / machine learning, is that it's often nothing more than a more advanced form of logistic regression (e.g., neural networks). So, to a degree, machine learning is nothing terribly new. It just requires much more processing power and has been largely limited by that.  The part where it becomes a black box is that, with a regular logistic regression, you select your variables, interactions, polynomials, etc. You're defining the model. Whereas with machine learning approaches, you're still selecting variables, but you're not defining how they interact with each other. And, while you can technically look inside and see what it's doing, it's not something that really makes a ton of sense.  I can easily explain a coefficient on a standard logistic regression or OLS model. But what does the weight of the 6th node of the 3rd layer of a neural network mean?


Kind of damned if they do damned if they don't scenario. On the one hand you'd like to boycott you're rival, on the other their effect on one small portion of one smaller market on a company like Amazon won't even register plus they'll be losing out on a lot of money. Much, much more compared to Amazon % wise.


Supporting Fair Trade will not only produce job opportunities for the people, empowers even the poorest of the poor but will also protect the environment by promoting a sustainable lifestyle.  Fair Trade also brings light to the importance of building relationships and recognizing cultural identities in order to achieve a successful and worthwhile commerce trading.


**Watts Up With That?**  Watts Up With That? (or WUWT) is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006.  The blog predominantly discusses climate issues with a focus on anthropogenic climate change, generally accommodating beliefs that are in opposition to the scientific consensus on climate change. Contributors include Christopher Monckton and Fred Singer as guest authors.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.24


"So your goal is to sell out? If I'm understanding correctly. I say that without connotation. Since you want stock and the ability to be bought.   Your partner sounds like he wants reinvest back into the company and make it grow.   If you want ""profit"", I'd say find a different partner.   Again you personally can be profitable while still maintaining the company with a nonprofit status. Gotta pay employees."


Really, were only talking about Trumps plan? Cus I was talking about tax reform in general. As my OP mentioned, I think spending across the board needs to be reduced to make lower taxes easier to accomplish. ANYWAY, there's currently trillions in profits overseas that would be taxed at a one time low rate if repatriated. This low rate would probably be between 10-15%. Do the math, it roughly gives you the the 500b you mentioned


yes, the really good weed requires a bit of know how to grow properly... but i have known and hung out with people that grow plants, and i have been to their houses and they have shown me how they trim and clip things, and they show me how they put a light to trick the plant into thinking that it is still daylight out, etc...  but in the end, weed aint worth what is being charged for it...  no way...  i am in texas now, and the price here is similar to what i paid at the weed club in california, in cali i paid a mininum of ten dollars per gram and it was possible to spend approx forty dollars per gram, and i think that they even had some that was more than that...  but i want to promise you that your average joe can figure out how to get his plants growing just fine, especially when all he has to do is to trim and water it, as opposed to having to give some criminal ten dollars for enough to make a couple of cigarettes/joints of it.  fk paying for weed.  and, just for the record, i dont really give a fk why people pay for cigarettes.  cigarettes are just plain retarded.


To supplement existing answers: the appraised value does not necessarily represent the net amount the bank could actually recover with a foreclosure. Let's look at it from the point of view of the bank.  Suppose the property appraises at $200,000 and they do what you want: loan you $200,000 with the property as collateral.  Now suppose a short time later, you quit paying the mortgage and they have to foreclose.  Can the bank get their $200,000 back? An appraisal is only an estimate; nobody can predict perfectly how much a property will sell for.  Maybe the appraiser missed something significant, and the property will only fetch $180,000. Even if the appraisal was accurate when it was made, property values may have dropped in the meantime.  Maybe a sudden economic crisis is driving real estate prices down across the board.  Maybe interest rates have spiked.  Maybe the county has changed the zoning regulations to locate a toxic waste dump next door to the property.  In any of these cases, the property may again fetch well under $200,000. Maybe the condition of the property has changed.  Perhaps you trashed the place and it will take $30,000 to clean it up.  (People have a tendency to do things like that when they get foreclosed.) If the bank wants to get full market value for the property, they will incur the usual costs of selling a property: paying a real estate agent's commission, painting, renting furniture to stage the property, and so on.  This will eat into the net amount they actually get from the sale. It may take some time (perhaps months) for a property to sell at its full market value.  During this time, the bank is out $200,000.  That's money they would rather be loaning out at interest to someone else, so this represents lost income. Foreclosing a mortgage is a fairly complicated procedure.  The bank has to pay its staff, including lawyers, for a significant number of hours to get the foreclosure done.  There will be court filing fees and so on.  If you refuse to leave, they may have to get the sheriff to evict you; that has a fee as well.  If you fight the foreclosure, that racks up even more legal fees.  This too eats into the net proceeds from the sale. So if the bank loans you the full $200,000, they stand a pretty significant risk of not getting all of it back, after expenses.  You can understand that risk may not be worth the interest they would get from you on the extra $40,000. On the other hand, if they loan you only 80% of the property's appraised value ($160,000), they effectively shift that risk onto you.  Should you default on the loan, and they foreclose, all they have to do is sell the property for $160,000 or a little bit more.   That shouldn't be too hard, even if it is not freshly painted or a bit trashed.  They probably don't need to hire a real estate agent: just hold a quick auction, maybe first calling up a few investors who might be interested in flipping it.  If it happens to sell for more than the outstanding principal of the loan, plus the bank's costs, then they will pay you the difference; but they have no incentive to make that happen, and every incentive to just get it sold quick.  So any difference between the property's true value and the actual sale price now represents a loss to you first, not to the bank. So you can see why the bank would rather not loan you the full value of the property.  80% is a somewhat arbitrary figure but it cuts their risk by a lot.


What you propose is to convert unsecured debt into secured debt. Conversion of unsecured debt into secured debt is not generally a good idea (several reasons).  The debt you currently owe does not have assets securing the debt, so the creditor knows they are exposed to risk, and may be more willing to negotiate or relax terms on the debt, should you encounter problems.  When you provide an asset to secure debt, you lose freedom to sell that asset.  When you incur debt their is usually a spending problem that needs to be corrected, which is typically not fixed when a refinance solution is used.  You do not mention interest rate, which would be one benefit to conversion of unsecured to secured debt, so you probably are not gaining adequate benefit from the conversion strategy. This strategy is often contemplated using 'cash-out' refinancing to borrow against a home you already own, and the (claimed) benefit is often to lower the interest rate on the debt.  Your scenario is more complicated in that you have not purchased the home (yet).  Though it may be a good idea to purchase a home, that choice depends on a different set of considerations (children, job stability, rental vs. buy costs, lifestyle, expected appreciation, etc) from how to best handle a large debt (income vs. expenses, how to increase income or reduce expenses, lifestyle, priorities, etc). Another consideration is that you already have a problem with the large debt owed to one (set of) creditor(s), and you have a plan which would shift the risk/exposure to another (set of) creditor(s) who may have been less complicit in accruing the original debt.  Was the debt incurred jointly during the marriage, and something you accepted responsibility to repay? You mention that you make great income, and you specify one expense (rent), but you neither provided the amount of income, total of all your expenses, nor your free cash flow amount, nor any indication of percentages spent on rent, essential expenses, lifestyle, nor amount available to retire debt.  Since you did not provide specifics, we can take a look at three scenarios, scenario #1, $4000/month income scenario #1, $6000/month income scenario #1, $8000/month income Depending upon your income and choices, you might have < $500/month to pay towards debt, or as much as $3000/month to pay towards debt, and depending upon interest rate (which OP did not provide), this debt could take < 2 years to pay or > 5 years to pay. Have you accepted the responsibility for the debt?  It will be a tough task to repay the debt.  And you will learn that debt comes with a cost as you repay it.  One problem people often encounter when they refinance debt is they have not changed the habits which produced the debt.  So they often continue their spending habits and incur new unsecured debt, landing them back in the same problem position, but with the increased secured debt combined with additional new unsecured debt.  Challenge yourself to repay a specific portion of the debt in a specific time, and consider ways to reduce your expenses (and/or increase your income) to provide more money to repay the debt quicker. As you also did not disclose your assets, it is hard to know whether you could repay a portion of the debt from assets you already own.  It makes sense to sell assets that have a low (or zero) return to repay debt that has a high interest rate.  Perhaps you have substantial assets that you are reluctant to sell, but that you could sell to repay a large part of the debt?


Their names read like fictional characters out of a white collar crime drama. They Plodded this Gamble as they Loughed and Ran away.   But really we should grab our pitchforks and meet in Atlanta because fuck the rich elite and their special rules.


Can I give the bank the $300,000 to clear the mortgage, or must I pay off the total interest that was agreed upon for the 30 year term? This depends on the loan agreement.  I had one loan where I was on the hook regardless.  Early payment was just that, early payment.  It would have allowed me to skip months without making payments (because I had already made them).   Most loans charge interest on the remaining balance. If you pay early, it reduces your balance, decreasing the interest.  If you pay it off early, there's no more balance and no more interest.   I'm curious why the bank would let you do this, since they will lose out on a lot of profit. But they have their money back and can loan it out again.  If they maintained the loan, they aren't guaranteed of getting their money.   Interest is rent that you pay for the loan of the money.  Once you return the money, why pay more rent?  While some apartment leases require paying through the entire term, most allow for early termination with proper notice.  You give back the apartment; the landlord rents it out again.  Why should they get paid two rents?   Another issue is that if someone with a mortgage switches jobs to a new location, that person will likely prefer to sell the current house and buy one in the new location.  This is actually the typical way for a mortgage to end.  If the bank did not allow that, they would essentially force the family to rent out the mortgaged house and rent a new house.  So the bank would go from an owner-occupied house that the inhabitants want to keep maintained to a rental, where the inhabitants only care to the extent of their legal liability.   Consider the possibility that the homeowners lose one of their jobs.  They can't afford the house.  So they sell it and close out the mortgage.  Should the bank refuse to allow the sale and attempt to recover the interest from the impoverished homeowners?  That situation would almost guarantee an expensive foreclosure.   Once there is any early termination clause for any reason, it makes sense for the bank to structure the loan to include the possibility.  That way they don't have to investigate whatever excuse is involved.  Loan regulators may require this as well, particularly on mortgages.


Agreed which is why an income tax is a bad idea.  Personally I'm in favor of property taxes as a way to fund government.  It is a much more objective measure and easy for the government's to confiscate if taxes remain unpaid.


"You refer to the rise of ""immigration crimes"" which is pretty much normal considering the masses that came to our country... you know this is stuff like lying about your age or your reason for seeking refuge or getting a job before being approved. You really should focus on the violent and hard crimes (which rose significantly AGAINST minority's). It says 5 % crimes from Refugees.... which means???? ah you get it."


"Just FYI since the left is split into a million different pieces.... who specifically are you referring to when you say ""alt-left"".   I've heard people on the right describe HILLARY CLINTON and Obama as socialists and communists.  They are anything but- they are straight up neoliberal crony capitalists like thatcher.  Except perhaps they are quicker to dole out food stamps and welfare to POCs & refugees... but they support illegal immigration & ""sanctuary cities"" BC is allows them to have a huge amount of illegals working for no money and no rights... ie labor to exploit.  It's not BC they care about them as people or anything.    Food stamps and welfare checks isn't socialism.  And it's not what real socialists want.  We want [ownership.](www.democratizetheenterprise.org)   Edit: sausage fingers"


Can I transfer funds from India to USA which I have borrowed in India. Funds borrowed in India may not be transferred outside of India as per Foreign Exchange Management Act. Loans in rupees to non-residents against security of shares or   immovable property in India:-   Subject to the directions issued by   the Reserve Bank from time to time in this regard, an authorised   dealer in India may grant loan to a non-resident Indian, e) the loan amount shall not be remitted outside India;


">It's tremendously more difficult to make large percentage gains on $1 billion than it is to make gains on $1 million.  This is true. However, when you consider the 2 and 20 fee structure that is typical of hedge funds, it becomes evident why managing more money is generally better. With a fund with 1B under management, they ""earn"" 20 million dollars for turning the lights on. Even if they only have a 3% return in a given year, that's another six million dollars.   A fund managing a million in assets would have to have a return of 40% to net $100,000. So while the law of diminishing returns may be working in your favor if you are managing less money, if your goal is to make money for yourself it's pretty clear why managing more money is better."


"Smartphones? Really?  How about a lack of work and a scarcity of disposable income?  Currently the US unemployment rate is at 4.2%, below the mark for ""full employment"" and *well* below where upwards wage pressure should be forming.  At the same time, the participation rate is also moribund, dithering around the 60% mark.  At this point, there should be so much wage pressure that an argument over minimum wage should be moot, as even the corner McD's should be offering $15 an hour just to get people to notice the help wanted sign, and yet it isn't happening.  Why? Because there are no jobs.  ""But the BLS says there are 6.2 million jobs available!"" you say.  Yes, and they've said so since July.  This is called churn, and it's the same jobs being offered over and over again to people who stay for a month and move on.  The low inflation is due to one thing: Normal, everyday people have no money to spend, there is no real economic growth, there is no wage pressure.  All the money is locked up in financial markets, making more wealth, but producing nothing.  ""But look at all the smartphones that exist today"" that replaced flip phones that replaced wall phones.  Sure, everything is cheaper: It has to be, or else no one could afford it."


"My car, that you've probably never even heard of, can recognize street lines, pedestrians, other cars, rain, whether I'm paying attention and road conditions. It can apply the gas, the brakes, and steer. It can drive itself and park itself.  Having said all that it's, at times, profoundly stupid. 60% of the time it can drive itself perfectly competently; 20% of the time it struggles and 20% of the time it would happily smash into a ditch. Not great but this is on a car that isn't even advertised as having any level of autonomy.  So, my thinking on it has evolved. I do think we're a long way away from a car you can truly trust to drive you. However I think we're probably only about 2 to 3 model years away from a reasonably priced production car that can do MOST of the driving, safely, with you there just to make sure it doesn't screw up.  In fact, the autonomous features on my car are gimped on purpose. The car CAN fully steer itself in reasonably well painted lines but Ford engineers have the system turn itself off if you aren't actively ""helping"" it. if they threw caution to the wind my current car with current tech could drive without me touching anything for probably about 60% of my ride to and from work.  Further, the system itself is surprisingly sophisticated in some ways. Lane marker recognition is very good. The control that the system exhibits during assisted parking is...it's hard to even explain unless you experience it. Suffice to say that the mechanical and sensor tech is already here.  I still think we're a very long way away from getting into your back seat and telling the car to take you somewhere so if you define self-driving that way then yes, it's a long distance away. But if you define self-driving as needing to be there but not needing to do much, I think that's very close."


Try reading.   They seem to be the most underpaid salesmen per dollar of product sold in the country.   They don't get commission for selling the exact same products as their peers at Verizon or Sprint stores, whose salespeople earn much more.


"Here's an answer to a related question I once wrote. I'm reposting here.  I can, but it takes a significant amount of time.   I'll do a short version which unfortunatley might leave more holes than you like. Basically, traders don't want to barter because it is hard to find the person with precisely the goods you want who wants to trade for the goods you have. Thus the need for ""coupons"" that represent value in a marketplace. Then you need to decide who gets to create coupons. If too many can issue them, problems arise, and no one trusts the coupons will be good later. Eventually you want one large bank/nation/trader to be able to issue them so everyone has the same level of trust in them, and you don't have the economic inefficiencies of many coupon issuers.  Next, the number of coupons needs to be enough to facilitate trade. If the amount of trade increases a lot, and the number of coupons doesn't increase similarly they become worth more, and people start to hoard them. This causes deflation, which causes less investment, which causes less growth, which hurts everyone in the long run.   If there are too many coupons added, this causes inflation, which causes people to spent them quicker instead of holding them. For reasons I won't cover here slight, predictable inflation is much better than deflation, so remember inflation is slightly preferred. Note that inflation is often caused not by the number of coupons but by external price changes.  Now, for a modern economy to do well, somone has to watch the economy, measure it carefully, and add/subtract coupons into the system as needed. Coupons, like all money, have no real value (whatever that means), but only have value because the holder expects to be able to trade them *later* for goods and services. You cannot eat coupons, use them for shelter (usually!), or wear them, but you want to trade them for such needs. The same is true for paper money, gold, stones, or almost whatever money system one uses. Money in all these forms is merely an IOU tradable for future goods.  The Fed is tasked (among other things) with making sure there is precisely enough coupons in the economy to keep trade functioning as well as possible. This is very hard to do since there are external and internal shocks to an economy (think disaster, foreign govts shutting off resources, rapid changes in people's tastes, etc.).   Central banks such as the Fed need to be independent of political control, since empirical evidence has shown that politicians tend to add more money to the system than is needed, because the short term gains give them votes, but the long term consequences (rapid inflation, unemployment, lower economic growth) are bad for society. This is why the Fed is largely out of congressional control, and large amounts of empirical evidence across hundreds of years and dozens of cultures shows this to be good.  Note: another function of the Fed is to be a lender of last resort to help prevent bank panics that were widespread in the 18th and early 19th century, something that none of us now remember, but it was a real problem. I'll skip that part for now.  So now we're at the point where the Fed needs to add/subtract coupons from society. To do this part justice takes significant time to cover all the reasons why various rules are in place (banking reserve requirements, for example), and you cannot learn it from one pass of reading.  But I'll try. Instead of being like the majority of internet fools that rail against the system, try to learn the *why* of all this, and you'll be much wiser and understand that it is all a pretty good system.  One method they use is the interbank lending rate. Banks have a reserve requirement, which is the ratio of coupons they need to have on hand as a ratio compared to the total coupons depositors lent them. This is usually around 1:10. The amount deposited that they can lend goes to business loans, school loans, mortgage loans, etc., and helps economies grow. Now when a bank on a given day falls short due to too many withdrawals, other banks (or the Fed) offers an overnight loan to meet reserve requirements, and the Fed sets the interest rate, which in turn drives other interest rates in the system.  This does not change the money supply very much.  Secondly, the Fed sets the reserve requirement, which vastly can change the amount of money available to society. But they change this rate so rarely (all the historical data is on the St. Loius Fed site, among others) that it is not usually an issue. I'll explain below how this can drastically change the money supply though the money multiplier.  Thirdly, and this is the part the poster above seems upset about, they conduct open market operations. This is the primary means by which the Fed exercises control over the number of coupons in play. The government, like businesses, like individuals, often needs to borrow money, in theory to invest in wise causes like infrastructure or perhaps money making enterprises such as technology investmeny (and I know what they often use the money for causes many to complain). The government, like companies, offers the sale of various contracts such as bonds to investors, who want a place to park some accumulated coupons for safety, and they get a return plus some interest. So the government sells bonds on the open market to investors, banks, pensions, foreign governments, basically to whomever wishes to purchase them at the market rate, and the government, like many individuals and banks, uses these loans to perform day to day functioning and possible smooth out volatility in spending needs. By law the Fed cannot purchase directly from Treasury. Now, once on the market, these bonds are traded, packaged, resold, etc., since they have inherent value, and since those owning them want to buy/sell them, perhaps before maturity date. This ""liquidity"" (ability to sell your goods) is necessary - fewer would purchase an item if they could not sell it when they desire. Thus bonds are bought, sold, and traded, and their prices fluctuate based on what the market thinks they are worth, just like any good.  Now, the Fed can buy/sell these bonds on the *open market*, like anyone else. So when the Fed wishes to increase the money supply, they can buy bonds that are not ""spendable"" money and inject money into the system. Note they now hold a bond that had at the time of transaction the same value as the money they injected. Note investors freely bought these from Treasury, meaning the market thought at the time of purchase that this was a good invesement. It is *not* the government merely wishing more money into existance. It is market forces that require more money for trades and is selling goods from the marketplace of (presumably) equal value to the Fed. This increases liquidity, but takes valuable assets from circulation. When the Fed wishes to shrink the money supply, they sell these bonds back into circulation basically by offering better terms than Treasury. In fact, you can find graphs of the Fed operations and see how every December they inject money for more Christmas shpping (need more coupons for more trade) and every January they extract some.  So open market transactions, buying and selling goods at market prices in the marketplace along with other traders, is how the Fed injects and removes money from the money supply. This is the primary mechanism that the Fed uses to control the number of coupons in the economy.  Finally, a little about reserve requirements and the money multiplier, since it affects so much of the number of coupons in play. This also I must simplify drastically. Each bank needs to hold 1/10 of all deposits in cash. The rest can be lent, which lands in another bank, which again can be lent, etc... Thus each $1 deposited can result in loans totalling 9/10 + (9/10)^2 + (9/10)^3 +... = 9 more dollars. Many people claim that banks are printing money, which is nonsense, since each also has an equal debt to pay to the person they borrowed from. When all loans are paid back there is no net money gain.  However, this allows for each $1 the Fed injects by buying bonds for there to be up to $9 in the economy, *if banks all loan to the fullest extent*. Banks tend to want to loan since loaned money makes them profit. Banks used to loan too much and runs on the banks caused significant problems, which is why laws were made to require *all* banks to have the same reserve requirement.  Now, when banks get scared and stop loaning, this 9 fold multiplier dries up, and the Fed has much less inpact on being able to target the proper number of coupons to keep the economy smooth. During the recent crash when banks stopped loaning, as each dollar was paid back on debts, there was significant shrinkage of available money for transactions, and this kills the economy. This is the ""liquidity crisis"".   Hope this helps. As I said, this is vastly simplified and I cannot go into all the reasons and historical items needed to understand it fully. It is a vastly complex (and necessarily so) and takes significant study to grasp the genius of it. It's similar to not being able to understand nuances of particle physics in one go, but as you study and work at it you see *why* things go as they do, and you learn all the failed methods (the gold standard is one example) that were thrown out for many good reasons.  Cheers."


Yes same for me. But the company was complete shit, and offered debit cards for people who didn't have a bank account.   That does not mean they **can't** offer paper cheques, it means they **won't**. A very important distinction.


We value our clients’ satisfaction so much that we do not compromise on the quality of cars and services we offer them. At Peter James Motors, we will work closely with you until you find the best used 4wd car that suits your needs best.


No. Borrowing is not allowed, but if you take a withdrawal, you have 60 days to deposit into another IRA account. This effectively creates a 60 day loan. Not what you're really looking for.  If you take this withdrawal and re-deposit to new account within 60 days, no problem. If not, you owe tax on the untaxed amount as well as a 10% penalty. This comes from IRS' Publication 590, I have the document memorized by substance, not page number.


Whatever you choose for a remedy (my first impulse is to suggest bankruptcy) you should protect your retirement plans.  These are immune from most collection actions, the exception being govt debts (e.g. taxes) and student loans.  The sad part is that the student loans won't go away except by paying them off.  Miss one payment and it will hound you for 10 years.  Bankruptcy will stop you from getting a home loan for only two years.  Unless you have the discipline to live like a monk for a decade it sounds like you're headed for a train wreck.  The kids will have to cut back to junior college or some other method of reducing costs and as hard as it sounds, don't cosign for any more student loans. Kids are more resilient than you think and they'll probably come up with their own solutions like scholarships, work study and off campus jobs.  I hate to keep beating the bankruptcy horse but at least that way you could still keep your house and car.  Otherwise you risk losing either or both from missed payments.  I actually hope that you can avoid bankruptcy so I suggest first you talk to a financial adviser or bankruptcy attorney to see if this is in fact right for you. But if it's just the shame of the scarlet letter B then consider that pride doesn't keep a roof over your head or food in your belly.


"Don't do this if haven't talked about investments and don't learn quickly. Don't do this if you don't like cold calling. Don't do this if they want you to pump and dump. Don't do this if you don't think you can convince gamblers to invest with you. Don't do this if you have a better opportunity.  I checked their website. Maybe double check with FINRA and SIPC to see that they're really members if you're really skeptical and you're still interested. Just dial and keep asking until you get a better answer than ""If they say so then yes.""  Oh, and don't do this if they're giving you a shitty deal on commissions. Ask for a tour of the premises too."


Check with your bank, usually a statement is either at the same day of month (e.g.: every 15th of the month), or every 30 days (e.g: March 15th, April 14th, May 14th, so forth). From my experience, most credit cards use the same day of month strategy. Keep in mind that if the day is not a business day (e.g.: weekend), the statement is closed either the previous or the next business day.


"Take your top ten or twenty customers out to dinner (one at a time), along with your top sales people. Ask them why they do business with you and what you could be doing better. Don't make any promises, mind you, just listen.  Back at the office, sit down with the sales people who were at the dinner and come up with a plan to make your top customers super happy, and then figure out how to package that to your mid-tier customers.  Then ""fire"" all your worst customers. They probably bring more headaches than they do profits."


In general, to someone in a similar circumstance I might suggest that the lowest-risk option is to immediately convert your excess currency into the currency you will be spending. Note that 'risk' here refers only to the variance in possible outcomes. By converting to EUR now (assuming you are moving to an EU country using the EUR), you eliminate the chance that the GBP will weaken. But you also eliminate the chance that the GBP will strengthen. Thus, you have reduced the variance in possible outcomes so that you have a 'known' amount of EUR. To put money in a different currency than what you will be using is a form of investing, and it is one that can be considered high risk. Invest in a UK company while you plan on staying in the UK, and you take on the risk of stock ownership only. But invest in a German company while you plan on staying in the UK, you take on the risk of stock ownership + the risk of currency volatility. If you are prepared for this type of risk and understand it, you may want to take on this type of risk - but you really must understand what you're getting into before you do this. For most people, I think it's fair to say that fx investing is more accurately called gambling [See more comments on the risk of fx trading here: https://money.stackexchange.com/a/76482/44232]. However, this risk reduction only truly applies if you are certain that you will be moving to an EUR country. If you invest in EUR but then move to the US, you have not 'solved' your currency volatility problem, you have simply replaced your GBP risk with EUR risk. If you had your plane ticket in hand and nothing could stop you, then you know what your currency needs will be in 2 years. But if you have any doubt, then exchanging currency now may not be reducing your risk at all. What if you exchange for EUR today, and in a year you decide (for all the various reasons that circumstances in life may change) that you will stay in the UK after all. And during that time, what if the GBP strengthened again? You will have taken on risk unnecessarily.  So, if you lack full confidence in your move, you may want to avoid fully trading your GBP today. Perhaps you could put away some amount every month into EUR (if you plan on moving to an EUR country), and leave some/most in GBP. This would not fully eliminate your currency risk if you move, but it would also not fully expose yourself to risk if you end up not moving. Just remember that doing this is not a guarantee that the EUR will strengthen and the GBP will weaken.


I'm waiting to get a tesla. My reason is that I hate getting and paying for gas. I use a lot of it for my commute. Would I like to save the world? Yes. But I want an electric car for no other reason than to stop pulling into a gas station.


"From the comments, it sounds like you have a technical background. So I'm going to suggest you think of this as a technical problem: it's an optimization problem, where the variable you're trying to optimize for is total interest paid over the lifetime of the loans. Step 1 is making sure you're using the credit available to you most efficiently. If there's room in the credit limit for card #1 to move more of your debt there, then definitely move your balances from the higher-interest cards. However, be careful; some cards will have different interest rates for balance transfers or cash advances. And definitely don't move any principal from Card #3 until the 0% interest rate expires. Pursuing a bank loan as part of step 1 is valid as well. You could start with the bank you use for your checking account today. Credit unions can be a good source of lower-interest loans as well. Ensure that you fully understand the terms and interest rates, particularly if they change. Just be careful about applying for them; too many rejections can affect your credit rating negatively. You also mention in the comments that you're paying ""her"" mortgage. I don't know how the ownership is set up there, but either refinancing or taking out a home equity loan can be a way to consolidate debt. The interest rate on a home loan will almost assuredly be less than on your higher rate cards, especially taking the tax deduction into account. Step 2 is paying down the debt efficiently. The rule here is simple: Pay the minimum payment on all cards except for the one with the highest interest rate; any money you have above the minimum payments should go into paying down the principal on that one. In your case, that's Card #2.  Good luck!"


First, yes, your LLC has to file annual taxes to the US government.  All US companies do, regardless of where their owners live.  Second, you will also probably be liable to personally file a return in the US and unless the US has a tax treaty with India (which I don't believe it does) you may end up paying taxes on your same income to both countries.  Finally, opening a US bank account as a foreign citizen can be very tricky. You need to talk to a US accountant who is familiar with Indian & US laws.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.theage.com.au/business/china/chinas-bank-chief-warns-of-a-sharp-correction-20171020-gz4xs1.html) reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot) ***** > China&#039;s central bank has warned in the clearest language to date that extreme credit creation and trouble in the shadow banking system could lead to a full-blown financial crisis.  > Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of the People&#039;s Bank, spoke of &quot;Fierce market reactions&quot; and possibly a Minsky Moment, the tipping point when credit cycles break and euphoric booms collapse under their own weight.  > The problem with the assault on shadow banking is that private companies rely on this form of credit, while the state-owned behemoths or &quot;SOEs&quot; gobble up most of the available loans from the &quot;Big five&quot; state banks.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/77tfnk/chinas_bank_chief_warns_of_a_sharp_correction/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~232474 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*: **bank**^#1 **China**^#2 **credit**^#3 **financial**^#4 **per**^#5"


Bogus ranking.  Has the UK's NHS rated number one and the Canadian system two spots higher than the US.  There are [70,000 britons](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490233/Record-numbers-abroad-health-treatment-70-000-escaping-NHS.html) who chose to get medical treatment in other countries instead of the NHS.  Another article says [52,000 Canadians](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/estimated-52-000-canadians-sought-medical-care-outside-canada-fraser-institute-says-1.2997726) chose to get medical treatment in other countries, including [42,000](http://www.pnhp.org/news/2014/march/42000-canadians-come-to-the-united-states-for-care-really) coming to the US.


In China (Shanghai at least) Burger King is actually really good.  Everything is made fresh, they use high grade meat, and keep the place spotless.  Most western fast food places in China are a step above the US but Burger King is a few steps.  Carl's Jr came here a few years back and they are incredible.  They aren't as widespread as Mcdonalds and KFC but the quality is high.


You need to look at the numbers when you're ready to transact.  What your crossover is worth now, what the truck will lease for then, what financing deals may or may not be available will all change. I'm not sure why you've already decided you will lease the truck, perhaps you're planning to take advantage of some kind of business write off.  I would personally never put anything down on a lease, though I have argued with people on here about that particular decision.  The reality is you need to look at the numbers.  Some banks will adjust the interest you pay on your lease to account for your down payment, some don't.   Consider a $9,000 lease, $250 per month for 36 months.  Consider you pay $1,000 up front as a down payment.   Example 1: $1,000 lowers the amount due on the lease to $8,000 lowering your monthly payment to $222.22 from $250, the downpayment has accomplished nothing.  Over the 36 months you will have still paid the same $9,000.   Example 2: $1,000 up front changes the amount owed and other fees generally applicable to a lease (gap insurance etc) and your payment drops to $215, your total over the lease is now $8,740 ($1,000 down and $7,740 in payments).   You need to look at the numbers.  In general if you know you will be purchasing the truck at the end of the lease it's more financially advantageous to just purchase it from the start.


DFP Building Services are providing best decorating and painting services in surrey, UK. Our painters and decorators are fully qualified and time served professionals. We use top quality material to decorate or paint your home and offices. Our refurbishment service includes complete refurbishment, remodeling, plastering, flooring, carpentry whichever is required.


The 200K vehicle is likely the better deal.  Get your own mechanic to check it out.  If it doesn't have major issues, it will likely cost you less. Why?  Because you've wisely included $6000 in expected maintenance.  Yet it has the possibility of not needing more than $500 of maintenance during the 4 years you plan on owning it.  It's a gamble, but you have the chance to save $5500 of that estimated cost with that vehicle. Note that you will also need to factor in tires for either vehicle, unless that is included in your maintenance estimate.


The main problem is that everyone graduates from high-school, almost everyone gets accepted to college and almost nobody who put minimum efforts fails college classes. I know that! I was an adjunct professor and was told I can't fail my students except in extreme cases.  In the past, to graduate from high school was a hard accomplishment. Getting accepted to college was a hard accomplishment. Surviving the first year in college was an accomplishment and getting a degree was an accomplishment.  Those accomplishments in the past gave you excellent benefits! Benefits of assured respected jobs, income, security, and being the exception.  An example: in the past, to be a teller in the bank, you did not have to finish high-school, just be good in basic math. Today: a teller in the bank, one of the lowest paying jobs you can find, requires a Bachelor degree. Does the bachelor degree worth it?  **Basically, higher education became an industry, that accept as many people as possible, charge them as much as it can, give degrees to undeserving people, and those degrees are almost worthless. You can't do much with a Bachelor degree!**  The solution is to make the standards for high school and college much higher.  Everything will fall into place then.   Fewer students who are actually interested in studies and are qualified for their studies will mean better teaching, lower costs, and much better benefits for those deserve those benefits.  Chances of this happening? Big big zero. Actually, the chances of even lower standards for colleges and schools are 100%.  So, for my son, I explained to him to not invest much in an excellent and expensive college for [worthless] degrees. Instead, while he studies, work in the area he is interested in and learn from the masters he works with. My son is 13, but since being 11, he works (yes, he makes money) with some computer system he's interested in.  Personally, I worked since I was 13, study and worked all the time, got my Bachelor and Masters, and I am doing extremely well. I get paid for what I know, which Zero of it came from my studies and money I spent in those studies.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://voxeu.org/article/bail-ins-and-bailouts-incentives-connectivity-and-systemic-stability) reduced by 94%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The Financial Stability Board has since included bail-ins as one of its primary components of post-crisis resolution regimes.  > In earlier work without considering intervention, dense connections between financial institutions seemed to enhance financial stability, unless a shock was large enough to cause a systemic default.  > An endogenous network formation model that takes into account banks&#039; anticipation of credible bail-in strategies would lead to the informed design of structural policies aimed at preventing banks from reaching a network structure, in which the government&#039;s &#039;no intervention&#039; threat fails to be credible.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/77esvr/a_bailin_is_possible_when_the_losses_of_a_failing/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~231346 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*: **bank**^#1 **bail-in**^#2 **Financial**^#3 **network**^#4 **structure**^#5"


"Yes. I describe the Roth flavor as ""denser."" For those with more money they wish to save this factor should be added to the mix. Of course you can save $16500 + 5000 (in an IRA) for $21500 total pretax if you wish (and are within the limits.)"


E&P can be valid throug Net Present Value methods, on a field-by-field basis. As no field is ever-lasting, and there Are not an unlimited number of fields, perpetuity-formulaes Are shitty.  FCFF on a per-field basis with WC and Capex, with a definite lifetime.  Thank you for the compliment.


"First, the balance sheet is where assets, liabilities, & equity live. Balance Sheet Identity: Assets = Liabilities (+ Equity) The income statement is where income and expenses live. General Income Statement Identity: Income = Revenue - Expenses If you want to model yourself correctly (like a business), change your ""income"" account to ""revenue"". Recognized & Realized If you haven't yet closed the position, your gain/loss is ""recognized"".  If you have closed the position, it's ""realized"". Recognized Capital Gains(Losses) Assuming no change in margin requirements: Margin interest should increase margin liabilities thus decrease equity and can be booked as an expense on the income statement. Margin requirements for shorts should not be booked under liabilities unless if you also book a contra-asset balancing out the equity.  Ask a new question for details on this. Realized Capital Gains(Losses) Balance Sheet Identity Concepts One of the most fundamental things to remember when it comes to the balance sheet identity is that ""equity"" is derived. If your assets increase/decrease while liabilities remain constant, your equity increases/decreases. Double Entry Accounting The most fundamental concept of double entry accounting is that debits always equal credits. Here's the beauty: if things don't add up, make a new debit/credit account to account for the imbalance.  This way, the imbalance is always accounted for and can help you chase it down later, the more specific the account label the better."


Here at Personal Injury Claims Scotland, we can help you claim compensation if you have been involved in an accident while driving. We will help you in the entire process so you can secure maximum compensation. We will also assist in the inspection of your vehicle’s damages to determine its eligibility for replacement. Visit our website at personal-injury-claims-scotland.co.uk for more details.


Welcome to Money.SE. It appears there's public transportation to get you to work? And the area by your house is walkable? i.e. you and your wife can get groceries and other needs by walking. If it will take 5 years to pay the loans even without a car, how long if you get one? Will you even be able to afford the payments?  There's not enough detail here except to say that all purchases aside from true needs have a cost/reward to consider. Whatever the car's total cost is, will it add that much pleasure to your life? People in cities with great transportation save quite a bit on the expenses a car brings.  Personal anecdote - Mom lives in a city. She never drives out of the city. Ever. Between insurance, maintenance, and gas, even with low miles, she spends $3000/yr. Once per week, she drives 1500 ft (.3mi) each way to the grocery store. Once every month or 2 to a mall 6 miles away. She can walk and groceries delivered for free. In the end, she spends $250/mo for the feeling of freedom. I get that. When I am 70+, as she is, I will gladly pay car service the $20 to drive me around.  You are young, and need to sit with your partner (your wife is your partner in the business of running the family finances, or so I hope) and decide if the benefit is worth the cost. How does she take the kids to a doctor? How do you go out to dinner?


"But you are oversimplifying economics.  1) Not everyone can be a geneticist, but most people are capable of being manufacturers, carpenters, electricians, etc. with the proper technical training. America is failing on this in two fronts: (a) we are not making it worth it for companies to keep manufacturing here in the States and (b) we are not giving our workforce the technical skills necessary. So many manufacturers are asking the question ""who is going to take over our retiring workforce of skilled blue collar jobs?"".   2) Even if we can get 40% of our work force into skilled blue collar, white collar, or professional jobs that means the other 60% are easily employable in what's called the non-basic sector, basically jobs like retail, services, residential real estate, etc, etc. The more we focus on how America can generate many higher tech jobs to compete globally (green technology anyone?) the higher the standard of living, the more luxuries we can afford that generate more jobs.  Nobody has to be dead weight except: (a) people who choose not to work, in which case they have no business receiving anything but basic food and shelter from society, (b) people who have disabilities, for which we should have programs in place.   We had full employment for many years even as our population grew. The only reason unemployment is so bad today is because America is losing many jobs to technology and globalization and not finding ways to compete and our work force can't handle many of the new jobs anyways."


Sorry for your loss. I am not a lawyer and this isn;t legal advice -- which I am not licensed to give. But I've had to deal with some debt situations of my own. I think the worst case scenario is the creditor can get a judgment, but that won't be against you unless you were a co-signor. The collectors are going to prey on your decency to make you feel like you should pay it, but you are under no legal obligation to do so.  If they file in court and then win a judgment, they may be able to collect on the assets of the estate. You mention no money but you mention a house. That is an asset with value, and putting it in your name isn't going to do much. You should see a lawyer on this, because it seems logical that they could collect on the value of the house at the time of the death, and even if it was willed to you it can still be attacked to pay the debt.  Here is a good write-up on NJ death and debt and whether it can be inherited by the adult children: https://www.atrbklaw.com/bankruptcy-resources/83-articles/103-can-you-inherit-your-dead-parent-s-debts


He's from an extremely wealthy family. Shocker there. He was able to have the fortune to grow up right next to the one university doing shit with computers and gain exposure to something no one else had.   It's the same thing why so many actors come from wealthy families to support them failing for three years.


Three major advantages that I can think of (and some of these have been pointed out in comments):


This didn't answer his question. Also, while I agree with you that the Dow is meaningless (and your explanation why). In the investment industry, we don't only focus on the S&P Index.. Many have a specific benchmark they aim to outperform that matches their investment strategy (i.e. Russell Mid Cap Value, Russell 3000, etc.).


I am a real estate agent. I know you are in Canada, but will let you know that in the US, agents are not to supposed to offer this kind of advice. They can refer you to a bank or mortgage broker, but should not be giving this type of financial advice.  That said, it's a HELOC, it would be rare for your bank to be willing to just add to your mortgage at the current low rate. Still, ask the bank holding your loan.  Is the second home to rent out or a vacation/summer home for you to live in?


>On Monday he declared victory, saying he had wanted since February to get reform of Horizon.  >But the legislation was a far cry from the initial proposal, which would have allowed the state to use Horizon surplus to fund opioid treatment. Instead any surplus above a capped amount must go back to policyholders.  >Christie said it was a win because there was no cap on surplus before he stepped in to regulate the company.  And I thought Republicans were anti-regulation.


Yeah, the vehical cloud is the assumed intersection of self driving cars and the direction most businesses are heading: subscription models. No one needs to own a car, you need transportation. Cars are really expensive and for most people, they sit around idle more than 50% of the time. That's where Uber has come in (right now). But once we get self driving cars, companies are likely going to move to a subscription model, whereas you pay $xx.xx per month and you get x number of transportation miles per month....or however they set up billing. But youll request a car when you need one, and much like Uber it will arrive.   The question is, who will dominate this space. Uber has already told Tesla they'll buy self driving cars. Google has been working on self driving cars, Apple has been working on self driving cars. They're all trying to get into the space. But someone has to build all these cars. Ford's repositioned themselves as a transportation technology company. They can see this shift happening and trying to participate when it does.


I'm talking about dispersal of assets in general,  not your straw man. If you refer back to my original post workers,  executives, and  creditors are mentioned.  Executives commonly get good payouts from these things.  Yes I feel more than qualified as I have a passing familiarity with the obvious that seems to have eluded you.


Some questions: Will you need a car after 18 months?  What are you going to do then? How likely are you able to go over the mileage? Granted paying $300 per month seems somewhat attractive as a fixed cost.  However lease are notorious for forcing people into making bad decisions.  If your car is over miles, or there is some slight damage (even normal wear and tear), or you customize your car (such as window tint) the dealer can demand extra dollars or force you to purchase the car for more than it is actually worth.   The bottom line is leasing is one of the most expensive ways to own a vehicle, and while you have a great income you have a poor net worth.  So yes I would say it is somewhat irresponsible for you to own a vehicle. If I was in your shoes, I would cut my gym expenses, cut my retirement contributions to the match, and buy another used car.  I understand you may have some burnout over your last car, but it is the best mathematical choice. Having said all that you have a great income and you can absorb a lot of less than efficient decisions.  You will probably be okay leasing the car.  I would suggest going for a longer term, or cutting something to pay off the student loans earlier.  This way there is some cushion between when the lease ends and the student loan ends.   This way, when lease turn in comes, you will have some room in your budget to pay some fees as you won't have your student loan payment (assuming around 1400/month) that you can then pay to the dealer.


Mua phụ kiện tủ bếp inox ở đâu tại hà nội nó đang là một trong những vấn đề gây khá nhiều sự đau đầu cho các gia chủ, việc tìm được một nhà phân phối sản phẩm chất lượng tốt, giá thành phù hợp là vấn đề được rất nhiều người quan tâm đến.


Check the employee-friends-and-family sales contract, which your friend should be able to get quite easily. There is almost always a minimum holding period before resale clause, specifically to prevent this kind of scenario. Without that clause, the dealers tend to riot... Also, remember that a car loses a huge percentage of its value the moment it leaves the lot. Odds are that you'd be doing well to find someone willing to buy it from you at the discounted price. If you don't want this car, ask your friend not to buy it and get one you do want. Seriously.


"They're well known but not everyone prefers that style. To each their own though. My favorite it authentic Italian style out of a brick oven.   So, what about ""Empire State Pizza"", ""NY Zaa"", ""Big Apple Pizza"", ""Big City Pizza"", ""Broadway Pizzeria""? We have a Johnny's New York Pizza around here somewhere (Atlanta), never been there in the 16 years I have lived here but have heard its good. Once the name becomes familiar through advertising, marketing and word if mouth, the name will quickly become known for your style pizza. Best of luck to you!"


>The USA and China are about as close as siamese twins when it comes to preserving the dollar's value.  The dollar should float in reflection to the strength of America's economy. I am not concerned with artificially strengthening the dollar's value. China artificially increases the dollar's value by soft pegging the yuan to the dollar through purchases of currency reserves. I do like that they are inextricably linked to the US economically, so tensions can't escalate. I'd rather not have them able to use the debt as a bargaining chip though.


But that's the problem, right? You setup a store on Amazon and then they dictate terms that screw you.  Eyeballs are not cheap! WhatsApp, a company whose value is basically a user list, was sold for 17 billion. Companies are valued based on number of active users.


I would just create a single liability account to represent the loan, starting with a $0 balance. Then, create a transaction in which the amount of the loan moves from the liability account into your savings account. As you pay the loan off, you'll create new transactions that move money from whichever account you're using to pay it off into your liability account.


Most businesses operate at a loss for the first year or two, and reinvest all the profits for expansion for a few years after that. So higher income taxes won't affect them one bit.  > I don't know why everyone focuses so much on the marginal rate of the rich, you can tax the rich 99% and you still won't have enough revenues to cover our budget deficit let alone make the investment we need in infrastructure, health, and education.  Half of all incomes goes to the top 10%. They have more than enough money to fix our infrastructure and education budgets without a negative impact on their life style.  (Note: I intentionally ommitted health care because money alone won't fix that mess.)


If you need to shop coins, you could do your personal improvement, however, this may be tricky because of even easy documentation errors fee extra. For many little employer proprietors, the high-quality picks the use of a business enterprise company, which is a fee-powerful preference to make sure your documentation is accurate and filed right away with conditions. If you're concerned in Delaware LLC with as little quotes as viable, begin with the aid of considering conditions wherein you'll include. You do no longer require work within the state you select, however it may be more reasonable for pick out your home circumstance.


Funny, I can't get them to leave me the f--- alone in Electronics... there're always a half dozen guards ready to harass me if I so much as step foot in their area, and they're usually smack between me and what I'm after.