You want to sell for 61.15, but the most the best buyer will pay is 61.10? The HFT trader forces you both to trade over a gap of a nickel AND makes a nickel in profit??      How does he do that, with magic?


First, what free market? What does that mean? Last I checked a lot of major banks, car manufacturers, oil, and food companies are subsidized. Second there's basically two options. Let people starve which will lead to riots. Or something like a basic income. However the problem with basic income is that it doesn't change the infinite growth paradigm which will be confronted by the finite planet.


"You mean ""I don't understand why someone would sign a contract expecting the employer to observe it""?   Pensions are contractual obligations. It's only the massive mismanagement, lack of fiscal responsibility, and evisceration of employee bargaining power that puts us in a position to think that employers wouldn't observe their contractual obligations.   I mean, if this were the mortgage market, you would be arguing to banks ""What the hell made you think this homeowner would keep paying you 6% interest on this money when you're not providing any kind of value twenty years later?"""


"No you should not borrow money at 44.9%.  I would recommend not borrowing money except for a home with a healthy deposit (called down payment outside UK). in December 2016, i had financial crisis So that was like 12 days ago.  You make it sound like the crisis was a total random event, that you did nothing to cause it. Financial crises are rarely without fault.  Common causes are failure to understand risk, borrowing too much, insuring too little, improper maintenance, improper reserves, improper planning, etc...  Taking a good step or two back and really understanding the cause of your financial crisis and how it could be avoided in the future is very useful.  Talk to someone who is actually wealthy about how you could have behaved differently to avoid the ""crisis"". There are some small set of crises that are no fault of your own.  However in those cases the recipe to recovery is patience.  Attempting to recover in 12 days is a recipe for further disaster. Your willingness to consider borrowing at 44% suggests this crisis was self-inflicted.  It also indicates you need a whole lot more education in personal finance.  This is reinforced by your insatiable desire for a high credit score.  Credit score is no indication of wealth, and is meaningless until you desire to borrow money.  From what I read, you should not be borrowing money. When the time comes for you to buy a home with a mortgage, its fairly easy to have a high enough credit score to borrow at a good rate.  You get there by paying your bills on time and having a sufficient deposit.    Don't chase a high credit score at the expense of building real wealth."


">Taxes make money disappear from the economy.  But those taxes are used to pay for labor, in most cases.  The state workers that fix the roads are paid with tax money. As are all the supplies and equipment, for example.  I think I understand the debt bit - If I buy a house and default on it, that money is ""gone"", but the house remains to be sold by the bank later.  Only the interest is really missing, right?"


The US still has plenty of apparel manufacturing capacity.  A lot of it is used by smaller brands, but some is also used for overflow and quick turnaround orders.  Dealing with the Navy and government procurement regulations may be more at fault than capability or capacity.


It could be the counter point to Amazon.  They have the real estate and infrastructure in place to sell like the Original Sears Catalogue.  Create a web platform similar to Amazon.  And inventory the best selling products in the store.  For immediate pickup or delivery.  In essence allow entrepreneurs to build a business with the platform.


"A Credit Default Swap (CDS) is a contract between two parties. A useful analogy is insurance (but by no means exact).  I pay a quarterly premium in order to insure myself against another event.  In this case, it might be that I own some IBM Bonds.  I am happy to own those bonds, and like the ""coupon"" that they pay me.  But I am a little worried about IBM going bankrupt.  So I can find someone willing to sell me a CDS.  So long as I keep up my ""premium"" payments, if IBM goes into default on their bonds, I get a payout. This analogy does break down at a couple of levels.  Firstly there is no requirement that I have to own the IBM bond in the first place.  I can in effect then ""take a view"" on IBM going into default by purchasing a CDS without owning the underlying asset. Also in the real insurance world, there are various capital requirements that the companies have to adhere to, while CDS market, being essentially unregulated has none. So to summarize, and while The Pedia has a pretty good article, they are good both to hedge your bet (i.e. protect your actual owned asset) or as a speculative tool to take a ""view"" on the likelihood of a company to go bankrupt."


Sure you can fight trends.  Investors are looking to management to show that they have enough introspection to understand their challenges and enough boldness to address them.  If you can't inspire confidence in the future of your company to the investor community, then prepare to have your board and management replaced by people who can.


There are several ways to protect against (or even profit from) a market correction. Hedge funds do this by hedging, that is, buying a stock that they think is strong and selling short a paired stock that is weak. If you hold, say, a strong retail company in your portfolio, you might sell short an equal weight of a weak retail company.  These are like buying insurance on your portfolio. If you own 300 shares of XYZ, currently trading at $68, you buy puts at a level at a strike price that lets you sleep at night. For example, you might buy 3 XYZ 6-month puts with a strike price of $60. A disadvantage is that the puts are wasting assets, that is, their time premium (which you paid for at the outset) becomes zero at expiration. (This is why it is like insurance. You wouldn't complain that your insurance premium was lost when you purchase insurance on your house and the house doesn't burn down, would you? Of course not. The purpose of the insurance is to protect your investment.) Note that as these puts are married, they only protect your portfolio. Instead of profiting from a correction, you would merely protect your portfolio during a correction. (No small feat!) If your portfolio is similar to the market, you can buy S&P index puts. If your market reflects a lot of technology, you can buy technology sector puts.  Say you have a portfolio of $80K that reflects the market. You could buy out-of-the-market puts (again reflecting your tolerance for loss). Any losses in your portfolio after the puts go in-the-money would be (more or less) offset by gains in the puts.  An advantage is that the bid/ask spread is smaller for the S&P. You would pay less for the protection. Also, the S&P puts are cash settled (meaning you get money put in your account on the business day after expiration day). A disadvantage is that the puts do not linearly go up as the market drops. (Delta hedging is a big deal in and of itself.) Another disadvantage is that they are wasting assets (see the Married puts section, previous). While the S&P puts can be used to maintain your market portfolio in the midst of a correction, you could purchase more puts than needed. If you had correctly timed the market, then your portfolio with puts would increase. (Your mileage may vary; some have predicted an imminent market crash way too often.) Collars involve selling out-of-the-money calls and using the premiums to buy out-of-the-money puts. There are many varieties of collars, but the most straightforward is to sell 1 call and buy 1 put for every 100 shares. (This can also be done for index puts and calls.) This has the effect of simultaneously: You get your insurance for almost free. But again, it is protecting your portfolio.  As the name implies, you make money when the market goes bearish.  Bear put spreads involve buying puts at a close strike price and selling an equal number of puts at a lower strike price than the first. You have a defined maximum loss (the premium you paid for the higher put minus the premium you received for the lower put). You have a defined maximum gain (the difference between strikes minus the defined maximum loss).  Buy S&P 500 index puts. If you buy deep out-of-the-money puts, it won't cost much, but you have little probability of it paying off. But if they go in-the-money, there could be a sizable payoff. This is similar to putting one chip on red 18 on the roulette wheel. But rather than paying off 35:1, it is a variable payoff. If you're $1 in the money, you just get $100. If you're $12 in the money, you have a $1200 payoff.  If you buy at-the-money puts, it will cost a lot, and your probability will be about 1 in 2 that you will pay off. In our roulette analogy, this is like putting 30 chips on the Even bet of the roulette wheel. The variable payoff is as in the previous paragraph. But you're more likely to get a payoff. And you will lose it all of the roulette ball lands on an Odd number, 0, or 00. (That is, the underlying of your put goes up or stays the same.) If your research shows you what good stocks to buy, it may also tell you which stocks are ripe for a fall. You could short-sell these stocks or buy puts on them.  Similar to short-selling stocks or buying puts, you could sell short overpriced sectors or buy puts on them. There are ETFs that will allow you benefit from falling prices without needing to have a margin agreement or options agreement in place.  Sorry to have a lengthy answer. Many other answers emphasize that one shouldn't try to time the market. But that is not the OP's question. Provided here are both:


> I've done the math - I had to, as I received a bay area offer.  [Oh really?](https://smartasset.com/mortgage/what-is-the-cost-of-living-in-san-francisco). In san fran,  * Housing prices are 3-3.5x  * Rent prices lead the nation, 30% more expensive than the closest city (New York!). [This is across the board, and roughly 2-3x the national average](https://www.apartmentlist.com/rentonomics/national-rent-data/).  In fact, the average rent for a 2 bedroom in san fran exceeds the median salary, nation wide.   * Downtown parking is [2-3x the national average](http://cityobservatory.org/the-price-of-parking/), and second only to places like New York.   * Gas is 38% higher in san fran over the national average.   * Basic food staples, like eggs and cheese and meats are 30-70% more expensive.   * It has the highest patient costs for routine doctor visits compared to anywhere else in the country.   You're spreading uninformed propaganda.  If anything, it's worse than I mentioned above.  Since costs range between 30 and 300% of the national average, the higher % for the large chunks of a family's pay check.   > It's only housing, which is not a big enough of a expense to come even close to your outlandish claim.  HAHAHA.  That's a good one.  It's almost like housing [isn't the largest expense for most of this country](http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/22/real_estate/rent-affordability-housing-harvard/index.html).  What? Are you sharing a one bedroom with 5 other people?   Rent alone will cost you 30-50% of a 120k salary, after taxes.   > I'm tired of people who have no cold hard facts  I see 0 cold, hard facts in your parroting post. Maybe you should try taking your own advice, and redoing that math before you start bitching about other people not doing what you yourself haven't done.


Sure they did.  You could install whatever software you wanted.  The main crux back then was bundling Internet Explorer.... its hysterical.  Now a days everybody wants a web browser bundled in and nobody bats an eye at it.


I am a financial analyst now for a fortune 500 company, about to graduate a rotational program. Every company has financial analysts, and finance is a great field to be in right now. Think about what you would want in an analyst. Math, stats, strong writing and analytical skills, proven experience (internships) and desire to learn are great. I interned at a bank and defense contractor and attempted to start a small business in college, speaking to what I learned was what helped me during interviews


Probably the most accurate way is to just fill out your tax forms using numbers extrapolated from your current paycheck. If you don't typically itemize your deductions, you should be able to get pretty close.


"Classic investing guru Benjamin Graham defines ""An investment operation is one which, upon thorough analysis, promises safety of principal and an adequate return."" He contrasts this with speculation which is anything else (no thorough analysis, no safety of principal, or no adequate return). The word ""adequate"" is important, since it contrasts adequate returns with those that are either lower than needed or higher than necessary to reach your goals."


Krijg verschillende soorten Openhaardhout onder één dak , zijn er verschillende brandende personages zoals berken verbrandt snel en gemakkelijk , die het uitstekend voor speksteenkachel maakt . Andere open brandhout zoals eik brandt langzaam maar maakt goed open haard hout. Al het hout is kunstmatig gedroogd om u perfect verwarming ervaring in de late winter 's avonds evenals het behoud van milieu veilig en gezond . Krijg gedroogd brandhout in grootte blokken om gemakkelijk een voorraad op uw haard .


"Why do you keep going on about postive test results? You do realise that the drug doesn't last very long in the system, and as explained by the testimonies there were techniques to delay blood testing until it was clear from the system such as cyclists ringing each other up telling them that testers are here and to say out on the track for longer, or to dope more often at night when testers weren't around, or to simply not answer your door when testers came around.  And yes there were was a test result, I don't remember which year exactly that when tested at the time was found to have no drugs, but thats because the drug he used wasn't detectable by any method. The blood was retested later on when they did have a method to test for it and they did find it in his system.  Let's say I have a gun which disappears into thin air after firing. I use it to kill a person in a room full of people. Nobody sees me directly firing the gun but I do manage to use it to kill someone, and the gun disappears. Police search everyone including me for a gun but find no gun. They find that I had motive but again, no gun. Now a week later 26 of my accomplices, one of them who was the person who manufactured this magical gun, own up to the police and confess how I was able to do what I did. Wouldn't it be stupid of me to argue ""You never found a gun on me after the murder, therefore I'm innocent!""  The gun is like the drug. It disappears after use. With the drug it's not so instant but still disappears fairly quickly with regards to the blood testing frequency. Therefore do you not see how it is stupid to say ""No positive test results, therefore it's evidence he never used drugs!"" Again I'll reiterate it incase you still don't understand it. TRACES OF THE DRUG DISAPPEARS QUICKLY FROM THE BLOOD."


In this kind of search setup, the firm offloads the executive employment work to the executive search firm. They charge a set percentile of the chosen candidate's yearly wage. Usually, it pays in three instalments. This is one of the most popular in one bulk types of choosing such employment firms. Many people find paying in instalments more preferable than paying amount.


My boss, he is the archetypal school loner type who found his way to a bit of authority and enjoys tormenting anyone who he sees as a threat. Generally he leaves me alone but his constant wining and the drama he creates for others really annoys me.


No one is to blame other than these antiquated ceos that are so out of touch with the public. If half of your failed aplicants are failing due to mj maybe its time reevaluate your requirements perhaps ? The excuse of saftey concerns is completely misleading bs. I wonder how many current employees most likely use mj regularly. Fact is the general public view mj as more innocuous than alcohol yet these companies use its illegality as a reason to dodge isurance claims when thier employees are injured. Most frustrating part of this article is when he complains about being unable to compete with germany ...you know why ? Because most of Europe doesnt have completely invasive drug testing procedures and instead recruits based on qualification and performance like any good company should.


"I would just buy one ETF (index-fund) on the market you think will perform better. It will take care to buy the 5 most solid stock in this market and many other more to reduce the risk to the bear minimum. You will also spend only few bucks in comissions, definitely less than what you would spend buying multiple stocks (even just 5). It's hard enough to forecast which market will perform better, it's even harder to do stock picking unless you have the time and the knowledge to read into companies' balance sheets/economic incomes/budgets/market visions etc. And even if you are great in reading into companies balance sheets/economic incomes/budgets, the stock market usually behaves like a cows' drove, therefor even if you choosed the most valuable solid stocks, be prepared to see them run down even a 50% when all the market runs down a 50%. During the 2008 crisis the Europe market has lost a 70%, and even the most solid sectors/stocks like ""Healthcare"" and ""Food & Beverage"" lost a painful 40% to 50% (true that now these sectors recovered greatly compared to the rest of the market, but they still run down like cows during the crisis, and if you holded them you would have suffered a huge pain/stress). But obviously there's always some profet/wizard which will later tell you he was able to select the only 5 stocks among thousands that performed well."


"the ""consumer relief"" only affects people who have mortgages.  so people who lost everything don't have mortgages any more and are unaffected by this ""consumer relief""  the ""relief"" is not limited to individuals directly harmed by the bank.  recipients are chosen by the bank, for the bank's maximum profit extraction."


"This is where Black parents have everyone beat. $20K? fuck outta here. We send our kids to a project track club or AAU basketball team for the summer. He will ""rough it"" and come back running a sub 5 40 or with a sick crossover."


"> ""There is no such thing as a 'good' counterfeit medicine,"" Deats explains. ""The bottom line is that they don't work.  This insertion brought to you by the big pharma industry. Yep, only our stuff works. Nope, doesn't matter if there is a sound bio chemical investigation behind it. Yep, taking generics will kill you."


Foodex Trade Ltd is the United Kingdom based Exporter and wholesaler provider. We are bordering with a portion of the unmistakable providers and merchants in the food and beverage industry. We convey a wide collection of caffeinated beverages, including Monster energy drink and some more. Our organization has been this business since 2006, we have a large distribute network and we believe committed to delivering all the goods at a perfect time.


Losings tens of millions of dollars but winning a bunch of awards - I'll leave it to others here to decide if that would make them feel that they are running a company that could really be called successful. I'd rather make even a few *thousand* dollars in profit, from scratch, while losing every possible award category my product could be eligible for.


Your right they’re brand focuses on on that specifically like no one else. Its in their name. Here in LA its either IHOP, Denny’s, or NORMS. but no one does breakfast like IHOP. I went to Applebee’s years ago, and all i remember is that its nothing special. kind of a mix of everything.


The problem with this plan is that in order for your children to put money in their own IRA, they need earned income of their own.  If your child doesn't have $3000 in earned income for the year, you won't be able to put the $3000 into their Roth IRA.


Self-insure a $250K+ house that's deemed to be in a flood zone? Wake up, have coffee. If you don't change your mind, have another cup.


"I remember once using a buzzword on an interviewer and he said something like ""great what do you mean by that"".  And I strung together a meaningless line of words and that was the end of that.  There is a lot of risk in pretending to know more than you do--particularly if you are not already in the top of the management structure.  You had also better know how to deal with someone who doesn't give a fuck and challenges you on every meaningless buzzphrase."


"Guess the military doesn't get those sweet, sweet OT bucks.  Seriously, though. This is what happens when departments are stupid and don't hire the people they need.  Having said that, I'm pretty okay that some SWAT guy gets more than an executive manager. When an executive ""takes a hit"", it's because their pet project overran the budget. When a SWAT officer ""takes a hit"" they end up in the ICU. Plus, as is the case with firefighters, it's not exactly a job that you can do for a long time. There's a period of physical fitness that you can only stretch for so long, and the nature of the job tends to mean that injuries are very likely to suddenly terminate your ability to perform your job. Got to get your retirement covered while you can."


There are few main reasons I can think of that the salesperson would do this: A lot of people assume it's the 3rd option always.  But if the person is reputable, it's most likely 1 or 2. You can't run a business doing option 3 for long without getting a reputation.


> Many of these companies use public easements or have had public funds invested in them.  The railroads were publicly funded (bond issuance) in the 19th and 20th century, yet we recognize that those are now privately owned.  >there would just be some regulations placed on how they can operate it.  I'm confident that well-considered regulations would allow owners of that infrastructure to charge higher rates for those who use the services disproportionately.


If the best they can do is 1/8th of a percent for a 15 year term, you are best served by taking the 30 year term. Pay it down sooner if you can, but it's nice to have the flexibility if you have a month where things are tight.


It passes itself off as the provider of all things that it touches. Obviously that's bullshit, but the state believes it comes before the chicken or the egg. If it claims to own everything then it gives everything you have as a loan. At least the statists I have argued with seem to think the state provides first and you receive. Like some religious arrangement since the state is often passed off as benevolent.


Linking the card is primarily to give you (and Paypal) a fall-back option for funding your spending if your bank account doesn't have sufficient funds to process the charge.  If the bank account has sufficient funds, it will work fine in many cases without a credit card. If you have both linked (bank and a credit card), Paypal will transfer funds immediately, as Paypal knows it has an option for getting the funds if the bank has insufficient funds.  However, if you have no credit card linked or remove your only card: If you remove your only card and have a confirmed bank account, you’ll no longer be able to make instant bank payments. Instead they’ll be sent as eChecks, which take 3 to 4 working days to process. This may not matter in many cases, but it may delay things some.  There may also be services who require immediate payment (and won't support PayPal if it's not immediate). There may also be some functional limitations.  The one I see is primarily that some services that are geo-location-specific, Spotify for one example, use the credit card to verify that you are in a particular location (in Spotify's case, for licensing purposes).  They don't seem to accept Paypal unless it's linked to a credit or debit card (even if it's verified via a bank account).  I'm not sure if this is common with other services, but it's something to consider.


Generally, I would say that you should pay it off if you have the money available. Why pay interest if you have the money? That is, of course, if your money can earn you more than the interest you pay (which can happen if you got a very low APR for your car loan, but then you probably have excellent credit already and shouldn't care about the history of the loan on your report). Re the 7 years vs 2 years - to the best of my knowledge its not true, it will stay 7 years even if its closed during the first year.


According to the Credit Union National Association (NCUA), in recent years there has been a noticeable trend of credit unions lending money to credit union members for business. Some of these credit unions have already lent billions in business loans. The size of an average loan of this type is approximately $200,000. It appears that this trend will continue since credit unions seem willing to lend more. In some cases credit unions have even gone as far as creating new divisions specifically to work with small business owners.


Keep in mind that this only really affects a few European nations, and we currently have a surplus.  We’ve seen a rise of popularity of wine from other countries such as Australia and New Zealand, so it might only be region-specific wines that’ll be noticeably affected (such as Champagne for example).


"Back in the olden days, if you wanted to buy the S&P, you had to have a lot of money so you can buy the shares. Then somebody had the bright idea of making a fund that just buys the S&P, and then sells small pieces of it to investor without huge mountains of capital. Enter the ETFs. The guy running the ETF, of course, doesn't do it for free. He skims a little bit of money off the top. This is the ""fee"". The major S&P ETFs all have tiny fees, in the percents of a percent. If you're buying the index, you're probably looking at gains (or losses) to the tune of 5, 10, 20% - unless you're doing something really silly, you wouldn't even notice the fee. As often happens, when one guy starts doing something and making money, there will immediately be copycats. So now we have competing ETFs all providing the same service. You are technically a competitor as well, since you could compete with all these funds by just buying a basket of shares yourself, thereby running your own private fund for yourself. The reason this stuff even started was that people said, ""well why bother with mutual funds when they charge such huge fees and still don't beat the index anyway"", so the index ETFs are supposed to be a low cost alternative to mutual funds. Thus one thing ETFs compete on is fees: You can see how VOO has lower fees than SPY and IVV, in keeping with Vanguard's philosophy of minimal management (and management fees). Incidentally, if you buy the shares directly, you wouldn't charge yourself fees, but you would have to pay commissions on each stock and it would destroy you - another benefit of the ETFs. Moreover, these ETFs claim they track the index, but of course there is no real way to peg an asset to another. So they ensure tracking by keeping a carefully curated portfolio. Of course nobody is perfect, and there's tracking error. You can in theory compare the ETFs in this respect and buy the one with the least tracking error. However they all basically track very closely, again the error is fractions of the percent, if it is a legitimate concern in your books then you're not doing index investing right. The actual prices of each fund may vary, but the price hardly matters - the key metric is does it go up 20% when the index goes up 20%? And they all do. So what do you compare them on? Well, typically companies offer people perks to attract them to their own product. If you are a Fidelity customer, and you buy IVV, they will waive your commission if you hold it for a month. I believe Vanguard will also sell VOO for free. But for instance Fidelity will take commission from VOO trades and vice versa. So, this would be your main factor. Though, then again, you can just make an account on Robinhood and they're all commission free. A second factor is reliability of the operator. Frankly, I doubt any of these operators are at all untrustworthy, and you'd be buying your own broker's ETF anyway, and presumably you already went with the most trustworthy broker. Besides that, like I said, there's trivial matters like fees and tracking error, but you might as well just flip a coin. It doesn't really matter."


I'd hazard that Jim is mostly worried that people are getting ripped off by high employer 401(k) fund fees. A lot of employers offer funds with fees over 1% a year. This sounds low-ish if you don't realize that the real (inflation-adjusted) return for the fund will probably average out to about 4%, so it's really something like a quarter of your earnings gone. With an IRA, you don't have to do that. You can get an IRA provider which offers good, cheap index funds and the like (cough Vanguard cough). Fund fees will probably be closer to 0.1%-ish. HOWEVER. The maximum IRA contribution in 2013 will be $5,500. The maximum for a 401(k) contribution will be $17,500. That extra capacity is enough to recommend a 401(k) over an IRA for many people. These people may be best served by putting money into the 401(k) and then rolling it over into a rollover IRA when they change jobs. Also, certain people have retirement plans which offer them good cheap index funds. These people probably don't need to worry quite as much. Finally, having two accounts is more complicated. Please contact someone who knows more about taxes than I am to figure out what limitations apply for contributing to both IRAs and 401(k)s in the same year.


"This is a good explanation of what you meant.  ""fair inequality"" is extremely vague.    Ideally, one would want as little inequality as possible, but we both know that this is un-achievable and also undesirable from a motivational aspect.  Thus, you want just enough inequality to encourage people to work harder and/or get advanced degrees so they go into other fields."


"I always hear people pronounce it to rhyme with ""bagger""."


I think there's no single one size fits all way to do hierarchies and flat structures.  One can have very insular divisions where everything goes in and out of the division via the supervisor in charge of them, but all of the divisional supervisors having a very flat structure working among each other, for example.  I think this resolves a lot of the noise issue from low-ranking employees talking to people that they really shouldn't be while still maintaining the efficiency benefits for low level management which presumably has enough seniority to understand how things work (or are new people in those positions who are important enough to handhold them through learning that quickly).


"Sony made two giant mistakes  They got into the ""content"" business when they bought a movie studio and record company. The worries over copy prevention crippled their innovation  They put too much emphasis on ""stye"" and lost the edge in technology"


There is 2tn overseas so that gives half. Lowering taxes doesn't do anything. These companies are HOARDING. What exactly do you think they will do if they pay *less*? Absolutely nothing. Larger paychecks to exects.. automatically going to start doing what that they didn't do with billions after tax profit?


"Yeah, but they like it like that.  If you really want to see how badly we have been lied to watch:  13th.  The title of Ava DuVernay's extraordinary and galvanizing documentary refers to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which reads ""Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States."" The progression from that second qualifying clause to the horrors of mass criminalization and the sprawling American prison industry is laid out by DuVernay with bracing lucidity. With a potent mixture of archival footage and testimony from a dazzling array of activists, politicians, historians, and formerly incarcerated women and men, DuVernay creates a work of grand historical synthesis.  Watch [13th](https://www.netflix.com/watch/80091741?trackId=13752289&tctx=0%2C0%2C1870540d3b211ad4e4609c81764d151ef14a23f0%3A0904e12b52de6ca627db4df50a14ce04ce2d354c) on Netflix to see where this all has led."


* In the 70's, 80's and early 90's there were pinstriped brokers who took orders over the phone from people who wanted to buy and sell. They had a huge competitive advantage over the rest of the market due to the lack of transparency in the market's order book. Therefore you got screwed every time you wanted to trade, ie the markets were less efficient because transaction cost was high. Transaction cost is = bid-ask spread + how much you get screwed by the market insiders.  * In the 90's and early 00's there were automated trading systems that allowed people to conduct trades directly with computers, aka Algorithmic Trading. The markets were more efficient, because spreads became tighter as more people were able to enter the market on this platform (e.g. [Lightspeed](http://lightspeed.com)). The ability for market insiders to screw the general market was lessened because the exclusive access to the market's order book was eroded. Of course some Algorithmic Trading operations had a huge competitive advantage because they had great systems and great people. However it wasn't talked about because those who new about it were making a killing and keeping their mouths shut.   * Then in the mid to late 00's there was co-located algorithmic trading on very fast systems, aka HFT, a natural evolution of Algorithmic Trading. Now market insiders (= people with enough resources to field co-located machines and the the engineer/traders to manage them) expanded their  competitive advantage by discovering the market's order book (as they are able to see orders in a fraction of a second and then act on those orders). However to retract this natural efficiency in the markets you would need to create some kind of set of rules to even out the playing field. How can that be done?   ** Option 1) Transaction tax would just make the markets less efficient by increasing the cost of buying and selling. A generally bad thing because it discourages traders (to put money into stocks), which is of course how the capital markets are supported.   ** Option 2) Create rules to ensure everyone sees the same information at the same time and then permit anyone to use whatever technology they want to act on that information, so that the most efficient trading operations win.    ** Option 3) Create some artificial environment where no-one is allowed to have an advantage:  ensure everyone sees the same information at the same time, ensure everyone has the same technology, and ensure that the people who manage the systems have the exact same experience and intelligence etc...      Of course #2 is how it works, and it is the meritocratic basis which underpins Capitalism. I don't see why people have a problem with it.


"They wouldn't have a low price liquidation. ""Liquidator companies"" buy them, re-tag everything to make them appear to be deals, then put up signs like ""fire sale!"" all over. This happened with Circuit City most notably and with the internet, it was exposed and even mocked how fake and misleading the sell-off was. It was their swan song of rip-offs and they executed it perfectly...at first.     There is no liquidation sale. It was all just another campaign of behavioral economics to prime you into buying decisions."


You should check the details of those balance transfers - they typically have a 3 to 5 % 'one-time fee', which means you pay nearly a year's interest right away. And then every time you transfer the total on again. Also, this fee gets added to the credit card total, and it is possibly considered paid last (after you paid off the completed transferred balance), so it cost interest for the whole time (and that interest is different, maybe 19.99 % or worse). It is probably a better idea to refinance for 5 years at <3%, and they pay off as fast as possible.


He gets a lot of praise, but I'm unsure if it's more due to his own skill or Ballmer's incompetence. Seriously weird decisions happened during his time as a CEO. Even at the time, the Nokia thing didn't make much sense and was very controversial.  Nadella is also directly responsible for breaking new ground as forming the first [ad supported operating system](http://www.google.se/search?q=windows+10+ads), a move not going into the history books for the right reasons.  But yeah, besides this, he seems to be the right person for the company. During his time, we've also got things like the high quality Microsoft Surface lineup, and the Ubuntu subsystem on Windows. Hell, maybe ads is even what Windows 10 needs, I have no idea. I guess it depends on how the general public takes it, how much people care, versus how much they give Microsoft. Personally it's helped me realize how little I actually depend on Windows nowadays. It's new times now, with so much and so many services web based. The strings that have tied me are getting weaker and some have already broken. Photo post-processing and library management via Adobe Lightroom has been a strong one, but Raw Therapee is becoming very good indeed.


I would honestly find it difficult to believe that the high rate of failure are due to opioids (they break down way too fast and many have some kind of scrip even if the legitimacy is questionable). Admittedly we have an epidemic in our country however I would suspect that the author is looking at general failure rates and then mentioning opioids in the same breath as I don't think I have ever seen public data on what drugs people are being failed for.   Also while the article mentions opioids it also mentions an upcoming medicinal law in Ohio that is expected to be a problem for employers heavily drug testing. This leads me to further believe that any testing stats mentioned are aggregates.   EDIT: And lets be honest, opioids are eyeball grabbers in discussion these days. When you have ghost white parents passed out in public places, children overheating in the back of a minivan that is going to grab your attention. I don't think anyone has been horrified like that watching someone stoned eating an entire large pizza on their own.


Because there's no classes or even full on majors in English anywhere in Europe...  Edit: Thanks for the downvotes. Seems like Americans like to fuck their lives up financially until they're 60 than to look for alternatives that don't handicap them.


You are not asking for insurance purposes. So I'll go with this - I have two asset numbers I track. All investments, retirement accounts, etc, the kind that are valued at day's end by the market, etc. From that number I subtract the mortgage. This produces the number that I can say is my net worth with a paid in full house. The second number simply adds back the house's value, give or take.  Unless I owned art that was valued in the six figures, it seems pointless to me to add it up, except for insurance. If my wife and I died tomorrow, the kid can certainly auction our stuff off, but knowing that number holds no interest for us. When most people talk 'net worth', I don't see them adding these things up. Cars, maybe, but not even that.


I haven't followed the stock in about 6  years. Back when I followed it, because of the concentration in Ohio, at least back then, Ohio sports teams performance drove the profitablity of the chains. I remember the implied vol of the options spiking, along with MSG, for The Decision because LeBron would drive people to bdubs.


">Boss: Amazon is threatening to shut us down because we ship too many orders late. How do we fix this?  >Me:   Ship every order on time.  >Boss: No, I meant, ""How do we fix this with software?""  I've noticed they have fixed this with software. They pretend they have shipped it way before they do.   Also amazon has fixed the problem they had with amazon prime customers ordering too many things with free shipping. They have made more and more things ""amazon marketplace"" so you have to pay $4 or $5 shipping. Sometimes even things ""fullfilled by amazon"" will be in the used page for books and won't be free shippings.   More and more things don't have free shipping for Amazon prime members."


"I don't know whether you'd consider buying a single bond instead of a fund. Strips are Treasuries where the coupons have been ""stripped"" to produce debt instruments with a fixed maturity date. They pay zero interest. Their value comes from the fact that you buy them at a price less than 100 and they are worth exactly 100 at some point in the future. You can buy them with any year/month that you wish. They are backed by the federal government and are considered to have no default risk. Like most bonds the price is actually a percentage and they mature at a 100. The one that expires 9/30/2018 costs 91.60 and returns 100 on the expiration date. The price list is here There's more information about them here First of all, they are still T-bonds (in all but the most legalistic   sense) which means they are the safest, most risk-free investment   possible. The U.S. federal government has stellar credit and a record   of never defaulting. These bonds have no call features, so the timing and distribution of   bond payments cannot be altered by any foreseeable occurrence. They are sold at a known - and generally deep - discount off a known   face value that can be redeemed at a known date, so buyers know   exactly how much they will earn from an investment in STRIPS."


Lots of president also had business operations.  None that I know of were ever forced to stop running their businesses.  Washington and Jefferson both ran large farms and sold to oversea customers.  Either way, this bill would never pass.  Every congressperson runs side businesses and have investments.  The last thing they want is a law to cripple their income opportunities.


The government and local police is probably doing the same with all the cameras on highways and in city streets. I trust the IT security of a local civic government less than one of the largest e-commerce conglomerate.   Besides, your Amazon profile is already pretty telling, if you're a prime member taking advantage of its benefits. You tell it your years of purchase preferences, your ebooks, music and audio tastes with prime video and music, your groceries can tell how big a family you have, they also have your home and very likely work addresses.


Most people when asked what would they do with $X dollars say:  Pay debt (their own / loved ones)  Buy a nice house  Buy a nice car  Travel   460 million is plenty to do all those things. With the rest I'd start a bond ladder and try to live off the interest


I am not interested in watching stock exchange rates all day long. I just want to place it somewhere and let it grow Your intuition is spot on! To buy & hold is the sensible thing to do.  There is no need to constantly monitor the stock market. To invest successfully you only need some basic pointers. People make it look like it's more complicated than it actually is for individual investors. You might find useful some wisdom pearls I wish I had learned even earlier.  Stocks & Bonds are the best passive investment available. Stocks offer the best return, while bonds are reduce risk. The stock/bond allocation depends of your risk tolerance. Since you're as young as it gets, I would forget about bonds until later and go with a full stock portfolio. Banks are glorified money mausoleums; the interest you can get from them is rarely noticeable. Index investing is the best alternative. How so? Because 'you can't beat the market'. Nobody can; but people like to try and fail.  So instead of trying, some fund managers simply track a market index (always successfully) while others try to beat it (consistently failing). Actively managed mutual funds have higher costs for the extra work involved. Avoid them like the plague.  Look for a diversified index fund with low TER (Total Expense Ratio). These are the most important factors. Diversification will increase safety, while low costs guarantee that you get the most out of your money. Vanguard has truly good index funds, as well as Blackrock (iShares).  Since you can't simply buy equity by yourself, you need a broker to buy and sell. Luckily, there are many good online brokers in Europe. What we're looking for in a broker is safety (run background checks, ask other  wise individual investors that have taken time out of their schedules to read the small print) and that charges us with low fees. You probably can do this through the bank, but... well, it defeats its own purpose.  US citizens have their 401(k) accounts. Very neat stuff. Check your country's law to see if you can make use of something similar to reduce the tax cost of investing. Your government will want a slice of those juicy dividends. An alternative is to buy an index fund on which dividends are not distributed, but are automatically reinvested instead.  Some links for further reference:  Investment 101, and why index investment rocks: However the author is based in the US, so you might find the next link useful.  Investment for Europeans: Very useful to check specific information regarding European investing. Portfolio Ideas: You'll realise you don't actually need many equities, since the diversification is built-in the index funds.  I hope this helps! There's not much more, but it's all condensed in a handful of blogs.


"Others have pointed out that many benefits offered by employers ""for free"" are actually taxed; the employee must pay taxes on the value of what they're receiving (usually services of some kind). This is called imputed income. Also pointed out was that healthcare is an exception; a specifically protected class of benefits that aren't taxed. But sometimes they are. Many companies now offer domestic partner health coverage as well, regardless of whether the couple is in any kind of civil union or other arrangement. The costs to the employee vary, but it's often that they simply pay double of what their individual coverage contribution would be. Independent of the employee's direct contribution for their domestic partner, they must also pay taxes on the value of the employer's cost of the coverage. This can be significant, as typically the employer is paying the lion's share of the healthcare cost."


People pay for CDs and DVDs before ripping and uploading them too.  Also, books have been free online for 15+ years, yet I still buy almost 1000 dollars of books per year.  I prefer the paper.  I like being able to scribble notes, and then loan the book to a friend, or give them away to people who can use them, or to my local hackerspace.


Targets prices are terrible for what they offer. A vast majority of their merchandise is Chinese garbage that falls apart or breaks very easily.    I have a target 2 blocks from my house and I probably go once/year if even that. The place is very overpriced and the lines are always long.


In the U.S. it is typical that a stock brokerage account can be set up to buy stock with up to half the cost being borrowed from the broker.  This is called a margin account.  The stock purchased must remain in the account until sold (or the loan is paid off), as it serves as built-in collateral for the loan.  If the market price for the stock goes down too much, you will be required to add money, or the stock will be sold to cover the loan. See this question for some more information.


"*And now, a century and a half after the Crimean War, the conflict that arose there this year serves as a reminder of the durability of American and European derision for Russia, seen as ""a gas station masquerading as a country,"" in the words of Senator John McCain. ""Russia is an anti-Western power with a different, darker vision of global politics,"" Anne Applebaum, an author and journalist who is married to Poland's foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, wrote in Slate. (The headline: ""Russia Will Never Be Like Us."") The seemingly everlasting British tradition of Russophobia is nowadays embodied by an editor at the Economist, Edward Lucas, a former Moscow bureau chief for that magazine who, in a Daily Mail column back in May, labored to draw scary parallels between Hitler and Putin in their respective ""expansionist"" ambitions. While Putin's actions no doubt fall far short of Hitler's atrocities, ""the Austrian corporal and the German-speaking ex-spy do share troubling similarities,"" Lucas said. ""History may not repeat itself. But, as Mark Twain once said, it often rhymes."" And in an imagined letter sent by Machiavelli to Putin, crafted by Josef Joffe, publisher-editor of the German weekly Die Zeit, Russia's leader is scolded, ""You have just reaffirmed a historic Russian habit: You would rather be the great spoiler and outsider."" Surely Europe, though, as Joffe must be keenly aware, has seen a great many spoilers in its periodic lettings of blood and gore. The history of Europe, it sometimes seems, is a prolonged case of pots calling kettles black.*  [The Eternal Collapse of Russia](http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-eternal-collapse-russia-11126?page=show)  By Paul Starobin...  Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief of Business Week and the author of After America: Narratives for the Next Global Age (Viking, 2009)."


The most important thing is to keep in mind the deadline. If you want to have it count for 2016, you need to open the account and transfer the funds by tax day. Don't wait until the last day to do it, or you could run out of time. Setting up the initial account, and them verifying your information and transferring the money could take a few days. First decide how much of a lump sum you want to invest  initially. This will determine some of your options because the mutual fund will have a minimum initial investment. Many of the funds will allow subsequent investments to be smaller.  The beauty of a IRA or Roth IRA is that if the fund you want is out of reach for this initial investment in a few years you can transfer the money into another fund or even another fund family without having to worry about tax issues. Now decide on your risk level and you time horizon. Because you said you are student and you want a Roth IRA, it is assumed that you will not need this money for 4+ decades; so you can and should be willing to be a little more risky. As NathanL said an index fund is a great idea. Many also advise an aged based fund. My kids found that when they made their initial investments the age based funds were the only one with a low enough initial investment for their first few years.  Then pick a fund family based on the general low fees, and a large mix of options. The best thing is that in a few years as you have more money and more options, you can adjust your choices.


"> The economic term for this concept is ""velocity of money"", and it gets into stuff that I didn't really cover above.  I noticed that it wasn't covered, and it seems to me that this actually has something to do with the original question, about where all the money has gone.   It's my understanding that the velocity of money has slowed, with corporations, being uncertain of future prospects (both due to the economy itself as well as to an uncertain regulatory environment) and thus hesitant to make new investments.  However, this doesn't make complete sense to me. It's not that they're hiding the money under a mattress; they must have it invested into something, and presumably the holders of those investments are themselves doing something with it."


If I were you, I would save 200 euros for retirement each month and another 800 I would stash away with the hope to start investing soon. I think you have to invest a bigger lump sum, then 1000 euros. It makes sense to invest at least 30K to see any tangible results. My acquaintances started from 50K and now see pretty handsome returns. Investing is profitable, as long as you approach it smartly. Also, do not ever hire an overly expensive financial consultant - this expenses will never pay off. Of course, check their credentials and reputation... But never pay much to these guys. Not worth it.


"This is an answer grounded in reality, not advice. Most states have no means of enforcing their foreign business entity registration statutes. Some states never even codified consequences. (California is a notable exception.). Some states have 'business licenses' that you need in order to defend your entity in court, but will retroactively apply the corporate veil when you get the license. The ""do I have to register"" question is analogous to asking a barber if you need a haircut. But this doesn't absolve you of looking in the mirror (doing your research). Registration and INCOME taxes are different stories. If a state calls their fee a franchise tax and it is applicable and there are real consequences for not, then you will have to pay that tax. Anyway, this isn't advocating breaking the law, but since it describes ignoring toothless state-chartered agencies, then there are people that will disagree with this post, despite being in line with business climate in the United States. Hope that helps"


Obviously, there's some due diligence and quantitative analysis. However, it's mostly just what they can secure, for how much and how quickly. For instance, if you had a bakery that was netting 200,000/yr and needed 750,000 to open a new location. The bank will give you the loan over 10 years at 1.1%. Well, it's probably a good idea to take on debt. That's 6938 a month (I think).  Edit: Or issue debt yourself.  However, let's say you're merging with someone in the same industry. They have a market cap of 10 billion. Your company has a market cap of 62 billion and revenue of 11.8 billion a year. It's probably a good idea to secure with equity. Especially because you believe the merger will help you expand.


> I must have missed that part   Frankly I'm shocked. You seem to be the kind of person that doesn't miss very much.  Edit: Ps. That was sarcasm. I just wanted to point it out incase it was too nuanced for you.


Companies do not support their stock. Once the security is out on the wild (market), its price fluctuates according to what investors think they are worth. Support is a whole different concept, financially speaking: Support or support level refers to the price level below which, historically, a stock has had difficulty falling. It is the level at which buyers tend to enter the stock. So it is the lowest assumed price for that stock. Once it reaches its price, buyers will rush to the stock, raising its price. The company wants to keep the stock price at acceptable levels, as it can be seen as the general view of the company's health. Also several employees/executives in the company have stock or stock options, so it is in their interest to keep their stock price up. A bond that goes down in value may indicate a believe the bond issuer (government in this case) won't honor the bond when it matures. As for bonds, there is a wealth of reading in this site: Can someone explain how government bonds work? Who sets the prices on government bonds?  Basic understanding of bonds, values, rates and yields


All of this assumes that this relationship isn't as employer-employee relationship, which would require you to withhold taxes. If you send them a small token of appreciation, and you are unable to record it as a business expense, or some other deductible expense, you don't have to be concerned about how they claim it. They decide if they want to risk claiming it was a gift, or if they want to record it as an expense. Even if you say some magic phrase that you think will impress the IRS, the recipient can still decide declare it as income. To have any hope of being able to treat it as a gift they would have to be able to demonstrate that there is a non-business relationship.  If you can claim it as a business expense, or a deductible expense,  they will have to also claim it as income; because your documentation could point the IRS to their lack of documentation.  Giving them a check or sending the payment electronically will require them to claim it as an income, since an audit could require them to explain every line on their bank statements.


"The short answer to all of this is that it depends on the loan and on the collections agency. It's an ""interesting"" time to be a collections agency right now. On the one hand, people are defaulting on debts, and those creditors want to be paid and are beating down the agencies' doors. On the other hand, if you can't pay you can't pay, and the threat of collections action is not much of a motivation when you're already 90 days out, and so collections agencies are having to consult crystal balls and tea leaves to try to determine which debts they're likely to collect if they buy. Many collections agencies have begun subscribing to the ""you catch more flies with honey than vinegar"" philosophy; ""we know it may be very difficult for you right now, so we'll make you a deal to settle the debt for 80% of face value, and you'll never hear from us again"". Other agencies continue to live by the threat model; ""we're heartless and cruel and we don't care that it's tough; we own you and you will pay us everything we ask for or we will make your life hell every way we can"".  There are advantages, and a certain synergy, to both approaches. You really do get more success by making a deal, so the agency that is willing to work with the debtor and offer them a good deal is going to be more likely to collect. However, that quickly becomes an incentive to not pay; ""Yeah, they sent me this outrageous bill for my sprained ankle, so I just ignored it and let 'em sweat, and ended up paying half what they billed me"". Sprinkle in just a few cases of ""Yeah, I couldn't pay my cell phone bill so I just let them cut it off, but the collections agency started calling and mailing me every day and I had to pay twice what I owed in the first place to make it stop"", which filters through the collective psyche of the masses, and all of a sudden if and when they do offer a deal on a debt you fell behind on, you jump on it. Now, to the question at the end of your post. It's always better for your credit to pay than to not pay. An open collections account on your credit score will always be a bigger ding than a closed one. But, open or closed, that collections activity remains part of your history unless the collections agency agrees to retract it. Even then, you may have to go around to the big three credit bureaus and get the account removed, using documentation which the agency must provide stating something to the effect of ""we agree that this never happened"". If the agency refuses to remove this black mark, how black it will be depends on the terms by which the account was settled. The reporting agencies will be told the face value of the debt that was sent to collections, and they will be told the amount paid to settle it. If the debt was settled for face value, that tells people reading your report that, well, you were very late and only paid under duress, but at least you did make good on the debt in full. If you settle for less than the face value, that says something different entirely; not only could you not pay the original creditor, you had to negotiate to reduce the amount to pay the debt collector. That makes extending you credit very risky; not only are you a proven risk for being late to pay, not only are you a proven risk for them having to write off the debt, but if and when they sell it to a collections agency, the agency will see that a past debt was settled for less than face value and assume they'll get the same treatment, and so will offer less to buy the debt. Both of those cases are still better than an open collection; that says to someone considering loaning you money that not only will you default, not only will they have to write it off, not only will the collections agency make less profit... the collections agency is unlikely to see ANYTHING from this bad debt and may not even agree to buy it."


Student loan is a class of unsecured loan.  The characteristics that define a student loan are, primarily, that it is a loan that is intended to be used by someone who is currently a student.  Beyond that, though, there are many variations. The different kinds of requirements usually have to do with who is eligible for the loan, and with what the loan is allowed to be used to pay.  Some loans have other limitations, such as only being allowed to be directly paid to the institution. Some student loans are federally guaranteed (meaning the Federal Government will repay the bank if you default).  Those have a lower interest rate, typically, and often have more stringent requirements, such as only full-time students being eligible, being need-based, and limitations on what the loan's funds can be used for.  See studentaid.ed.gov for more information. Many private student loans have quite lax limitations. Some for example have nearly no limitation as to what they can fund; many are allowed to be taken out by part-time students and even non-degree-seeking students in some cases.  Private loans usually have somewhat higher rates (as they're entirely unsecured) to go along with the lower restrictions and higher borrowing limits.  You'd have to see the specific details of any particular loan to know what it's allowed to pay for, so if you choose this route, know what you plan to use it to pay for before you go looking.


The stock tends to drop by the amount of the dividend -- or if you prefer to think of it this way, the stock price has been pushed up by the amount of the dividend before it was paid out. Really, all this shift does is factor out the impending dividend's effect on the real purchase cost of the stock. As such it's pretty much irrelevant except that, of course, the dividend is short-term gain that you have to pay taxes on almost immediately. Which also tends to get figured into the price folks are willing to pay for the stock. Conclusion: no, there's no real opportunity here. There's a slight tax reason to avoid buying right before dividends are paid, but that's about it. Basic principle: If it's simple and obvious,the market has already accounted for it.


Fiscal Year 2011 was a record-setting year for the SBA in total small business loan volume. While the economy may still be in recovery from the Great Recession, you can read about some Good News in my article from the December issue of Scotsman Guide. Don’t forget that unless an extension is granted, the refinance provision of the SBA 504 loan will expire in September 2012.


What are those maximums, and do all countries have them? Usury, lending money for any interest at all, used to be anti-biblical: it wasn't a Christian thing to do, and so in Christian countries it was Jews who did it (Jews who were money-lenders). Asking for interest on loans is still anti-Koranic: so Islamic banks don't lend money for interest. Instead of your getting a mortgage from the bank to buy a house, the bank will buy the house, which you then buy from bank on a rent-to-own basis. Further details:


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://bankunderground.co.uk/2017/08/08/your-country-needs-funds-the-extraordinary-story-of-britains-early-efforts-to-finance-the-first-world-war/) reduced by 95%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Financing World War I required the UK government to borrow the equivalent of a full year&#039;s GDP. But its first effort to raise capital in the bond market was a spectacular failure.  > As part of a project looking at the financing of World War I, the ledgers of investors who purchased the 3&frac12;% War Loan have been analysed for the first time.  > These reveal the startling truth about the failure of the first bond issue of the Great War and the extraordinary role of the Bank of England in covering and then concealing the shortfall in funds.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6tfsn0/hacker_news_the_extraordinary_story_of_britains/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~189875 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*: **War**^#1 **Bank**^#2 **Loan**^#3 **investors**^#4 **bond**^#5"


"I see you have posted other questions regarding household budgets.  This is a huge first step.  Once you see what is coming in, then list everything that goes out regularly...and then try to break down what is leftover into spending, household maintenance, gifts, haircuts, whatever...it becomes very obvious if you have x to spend and you spend 3x. I budget a certain amount of discretionary money for both my husband and myself to spend each month.  All of our basic expenses are covered under other categories, but I found out long ago that we each need some money to blow on Starbucks, DVD's, books, etc without having to defend or explain it.  If we spend too much, it digs into the next month's amount, or if we are careful, we get to carry it over. I can impulse shop guilt free because it's budgeted in. Long story short, if you set up a budget and have an amount budgeted for most reasonable expenses, and see what is left over...it becomes harder to ""unwittingly"" overspend.  When you are paying attention to your money, and start looking carefully at how you are spending it, you'll notice."


A really important part of the event is the entertainment and speeches. This means that you have to invest in a reliable Audio Visual service that will not let you down in the middle of important speeches. The quality of the sound is also very important, especially when entertaining guests.


"The simplest answer would be: Because they can. Why charge less for something if people will pay more? One example are Apple products. While there the price number is not exactly the same in EUR and USD, they are so close that, effectively, the EUR product is more expensive. Many things go into a price. There might be reasons for products in the EU being more expensive to produce or distribute. Or people in the EU might be in general more willing to pay more for a certain product. In that case, a company would forgo profits when they offered it cheaper. Also, prices are relative. Is the USD price the ""correct"" one and the exchange rate should dictate what the EUR price is? Or vice versa?"


I would like to know what others think, but for now it looks like the market thinks they'll be able to compete in online content distribution, not solely hardware. The stock was priced at the upper end of its valuation range and it still went way up today. I myself am skeptical about their long-term profit potential given how much disruption is going to hit the streaming market over the next five years. Tough to know with high probability who the winners will be at this point other than probably Netflix and Amazon.


The company would make so much money off of our team's new synergies that they'd pay us a huge bonus out of shear guilt, allowing us to retire immediately and so a) they'd have to find our replacements, a nigh impossible task, and 2) we'd all be bored doing nothing but drinking Coronas on the beach, possibly injuring our health needlessly and incurring unnecessary retirement health expenses.


"Its really, really good of you to admit your short comings with a desire to improve them.  It takes courage.  Keep in mind that most of us that answer questions here are really ""good at money"" so we have a hard time relating.  Would you want people that are bad with money answering questions on a personal finance site?   While it is intimidating you will need a budget.  A budget is simply a plan for how to spend your money.  Your budget, based on your new pay frequency, will likely also need some cash flow planning as a single paycheck is unlikely to cover your largest expenses.  For example your rent/mortgage might be less than a single paycheck so you will have to save money from the previous paycheck to have enough money to pay it.   Your best bet is to have a friend or relative that is good with money help you setup a budget.  Do you have one?  If not you might inquire about a church or organization that offers Financial Peace University.  The teachers of the class often help people setup a budget and might be willing to do so for you.  You could also take the class which will improve your money management skills.  For $100 you'll have a lifetime pass to the class.  If it helps you avoid three late charges/bounce checks then the class is well worth it. Now as far as spending too much money.  I would recommend cash, but you have to do it the right way.  Here is the process that you have to follow to be successful with cash: Doing cash will give you a more concrete example of what spending means.  It won't work if you continue to hit the ATM ""for just $20 more"".  It will take you a bit to get used to it, but you will be surprised how quickly you improve at managing money."


This has a straightforward answer. It's likely that your doctor and the hospital have no responsibility to ensure that your insurance claim is filed in a timely manner. They bill you whether you or they get reimbursed by insurance, or not. The insurance company is more than happy not to pay you any way they can. Sorry if this is harsh, but it's up to you to follow through. See also here.


Maybe employers and corporations should pay a living fucking wage? And here comes all the cunts shitting on workers and defending corporate prosperity. We're all fucked and those people are fucking us even more by defending this 1% First and Fuck The Rest Mentality.


Your assertions simply are not true. The vast majority of minimum wage workers are older people working full time, and supporting a family. Minimum wage jobs are not just summer jobs for teenagers anymore, it hasn't been that way for a long time.  Source: http://www.epi.org/publication/bp357-federal-minimum-wage-increase/ http://www.epi.org/publication/wage-workers-older-88-percent-workers-benefit/


Doesn't matter what the product is, whether it's a tangible good or a service, a business is still a business and must be run as thus. If you don't run a hospital properly, as a business that provides a service, then that hospital is soon to be threatened with closure or state take-over.


Maybe center-left or neoliberal would be a more appropriate term I just couldn't think of any left wing media atm. Anyway, Calling CNN left-wing wasn't irrelevant to my argument and it can be disregarded without interfering with what I'm trying to say.  Do you have any actual criticisms of my argument or did you just comment to discredit me?


Total income - mandatory spending (ie bills) = discretionary income.  Make a budget and calculate how much discretionary income you have each pay period. Save some fraction of your discretionary income towards this purchase. Pull the trigger when you have enough saved.  By thinking this way, you ensure that the PS is robbing from movies, dining out, booze, etc instead of taking from rent money or the electric bill. Do not use debt to make this purchase. It would be wise to put off this purchase until you have a solid emergency cash reserve that can sustain you if life throws you a curve ball. You should also make sure to eliminate any bad debt, like credit card debt, before splurging on a new gaming console.


What I think Warren means is that people like him are really good at making money and setting things up to continue being rich. In Warren's case he's very good at evaluating businesses and if they would be good investments. In the micro this isn't really a problem. Instead the problem is on the macro-level. When enough potential market participants (i.e. people / businesses) aren't enabled to participate in the economy in the same way. This feeds into a growing wealth inequality. The people who have the resources to continue playing the game can also continue with more chances. It's a Pareto Principle situation. No opportunity to play, little to improve, and a continually disadvantaged population. Add time into the soup. Rich get richer, the poor poorer, the gap widens more. Add inflationary mechanics, and the fact that being poor is more expensive. Add debt and an inability to purchase for long term solutions. You get a situation where 99% of the money is cycling around in the top 1% of players.  The other 99% of potential market participants are poorly utilized up to the point where their wealth is something they have trouble spending for things like...healthcare.  The idea of poorly utilized market participants is key. A growing economy wants more bandwidth. It wants more agents or market participants contributing to the flow. Get rich enough and you'll find you can't spend more than the interest on investments. On the contrary if you don't have very much money, it's easy as hell to spend it quickly! It's straightforward to say that if more of the global population weren't in debt, if they weren't in a state where they can't participate in economic growth, then maybe the economic growth of human society wouldn't be so bottle-necked.


It's the gifter who is liable for gift tax, not the recipient. The recipient just needs to file a certain form for reporting purposes if the gift exceeds a certain amount.


That's why you select defective or not as described when returning unless you don't mind paying return shipping or don't want to lie. I just pay the shipping - I can afford $3 or $4 and I figure the return shipping cost is passed back to the vendor.  I figured this out one day by accidentally selecting 'Ordered by Accident'. The item was actually not as described so I cancelled the return and did it correctly and no shipping.


My 0,02€ - I probably live in the same country as you. Stop worrying. The Euro zone has a 100.000€ guaranty deposit. So if any bank should fail, that's the amount you'll receive back. This applies to all bank accounts and deposits. Not to any investments. You should not have more than 100.000€ in any bank. So, lucky you, if you have more than that money, divide between a number of banks. As for the Euro, there might be an inflation, but at this moment the USA and China are in a currency battle that 'benefits' the Euro. Meaning you should not invest in dollars or yuan at this time. Look for undervalued currency to invest in as they should rise against the Euro.


"> Consumers don't want a conversation with minimum wage employees who don't give a damn  Correct. However, consumers *do* want to have a conversation with employees who do give a damn.   Some of the happiest customers I've had are the ones that I get to talk to one-on-one about the shoes they are interested in. Whether the customer knows what they are looking for, or if they need help finding the right product, they always appreciate talking to an employee who can confidently explain which features make a shoe the right fit for them.   If we don't have the right fit for the customer, we can actually try to find it online and purchase it right then and there for them. 99% of the responses to that are along the lines of ""Well I'd rather try it on first..."""


I don't know of any books, but there are a lot of good white papers on the subject if you take the time to look for them. For example, Moody's has a white paper on their LGD model (LossCalc) that explains their calibration methodology.   Searching for academic papers on the subject is really the only way to go, because credit risk is a field that really is just being explored. Really only since 2006 have banks started to actively try to use a risk rating model that incorporates PD and LGD. This is because of data insufficiency - banks just didn't keep active and centralized loan level data that is required to calibrate the models.  tl;dr: Use the internet - it is your friend.


My guess would be in the short term, local small businesses around these big-boxers get squeezed from rising wages, but in the long-run, they're still playing Amazon's game. And yet, it's the small retailers that don't have to get caught up in the Amazon race.


For every document that the IRS posts, there will be a correlating instructions page. This would be the instructions for the 1099-B, here. Furthermore, as you will be reporting this on Form 8949, as a substitute for previously used Schedule D; instructions are here.This article explains that the best course of action is to donate the shares as the cost basis would switch to FMV (fair market value) of the assets today. But as this did not happen, I would recommend contacting the purchasing company directly. Being a share holder, and by purchasing the shares from the source, the accounting department should still have recorded the date of purchase along with the price sold. It may take effort to prove who you are, but if their accounting records are well documented, this will not be an issue.  If nothing else, claim a 100% capital gain on the entirety of the sale, and pay the tax. That is stated here.


I have now filed my taxes and am able to report back with precisely what took place. To summarize, my situation was the following (before filing taxes): As it turns out, if I have $4x of NRTC's, it is not $4x that I can redeem. It is 15% of $4x that I can redeem to be able to get a tax refund. For the sake of simplicity, let's say I have $10x NRTC's instead of $4x NRTC's. That gives me $1.5x as the actual redeemable amount. I will get $x back on my refund since I have $1.5x available. Have I understood the system correctly? Since $x is a substantial amount, I want to know if I can factor this in as money that will be coming in. In summary, the only thing I didn't know before filing my taxes was the 15% rule!


Unless it's an international flight, first class flights are remotely better than economy. Yes wider seats, food's better, and you are attended to - but all the psychological side-effects are still the same. Travel across timezones, or in the same zone on a 3+ hour flight (add and extra 60mins-120 in airport wait times), it takes the same toll. Business and First Class just make you hate Economy more when it's your only option.... But it's shitty either way.


"Credit unions require you to open an account because of their history. A credit union is just that: a union. Only instead of a union of workers collectively bargaining for better pay or worker's comp, they are lending each other money. They are chartered to offer their services to members of the union, rather than the public at large.  For that reason, credit unions historically had targeted niche memberships (ie, employees at a specific company, or property with a specific hobby such as fishing). Most credit unions these days attempt to skirt the issue, by claiming to serve members of a specific geographic area. Anyway, membership is defined a owning a stake in the union, which is usually termed a share. By opening the account and ""purchasing a share,"" you are becoming both an owner and member of the union, and are eligible for their services. That's why the account is required before you can have a loan."


"Yeah I understand how much power a downgrade can have on a nations access to the capital markets and can thus cripple and slow down economic growth but the call to micromanage the rating agencies more is a bit much. The last thing the financial system needs is another 3 letter acronym agency sending in some official to watch every move of the analysts at these firms.   The point of there being more than one rating agency is that you have multiple opinions and they average out to give you a realistic opinion, Standard and Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch don't have a conference call every time a deal comes through the door ""Hey guys what are we rating this at today"" they all do their own thing.  I would be interested to see situations in which all the CRAs gave a lower credit rating then a debt issuer actually deserved."


"Edit: I discovered Bitcoin a few months after I posted this answer. I would strongly recommend anyone interested in this question to review it, particularly the myths page that dispels much of the FUD. Original answer: Although it is not online, as a concept the Totnes Pound may be of interest to you. I live quite close to this village (in the UK) and the system it promotes does work well.  According to the   Transition Town Totnes website this   means that it is ""a community in a   process of imagining and creating a   future that addresses the twin   challenges of diminishing oil and gas   supplies and climate change , and   creates the kind of community that we   would all want to be part of."" If you are looking for a starting place to introduce a new type of currency, perhaps in response to over-dependence on oil and global trade, then reading about the Transition Towns initiative could provide you with the answers you're looking for."


As the option approaches expiry, the delta will approach zero or one, depending on whether you're in or out of the money. This might be easiest to conceptualise if you look at the option value as a function of the stock price, and then realise that the delta is the slope of that curve. Now, as we get closer to expiry, time value fades away, and we get closer and closer to the intrinsic value, which looks like this hockey stick: __/ As you see, close to expiry, if you're out of the money, you have nothing (with delta zero), while if you're in the money, you have a forward (with delta one).


Are you a senior? Do you have any internship experience? Move past alum. It doesn't have to be just them. You don't necessarily need a connection like that to them. Find a name and try to find a deal their group worked on. Or find a deal then figure out who worked on it. Shoot them an email saying you're working on a project and would like to know more about X and deal Y. After a few back and forths then you can ask. Keep it pushing my man. You'll get something. And it doesn't have to be some top firm. Fuck that mentality.


Retail gas prices are a pretty poor anecdote for the argument that the minimum wage is too high. Very little labor goes into the production and distribution of gasoline. Even less of it is local. Local minimum wage has almost no effect on the price at the pump.


Zero ice breakers. When I go to these things, and there's an ice breaker, I internally roll my eyes and start playing with my phone or get up and leave if I can. If you have one hour, get to the point. That's not a lot of time, and don't waste their time. Being a CFO is next to impossible from a time management perspective, so don't wreck their day.


Whether or not they are worth it depends entirely on your situation. For my family, they are worth it, but I know a number of people who it would not be worthwhile for.  The big things that we find are cheaper to get at bulk stores are toiletries, detergents (laundry, dishwasher), meats (only if you have a big freezer), bread, and certain types of prepackaged foods. Right now, it's just my wife and me, but once we have kids it will become even more worthwhile with things like diapers, wipes, and various other items. If you have a large family, or a large freezer odds are they are worth it. One thing to be careful of however is that they usually don't accept coupons. So if you're a big time deal shopper the gain may be minimal.  They only cost $40 a year, so worst case scenario if you don't get back your full investment you're not out too much.


You're perfectly describing snapchat. And see how Facebook are fucking them up. And snapchat still has 180 million mau. Fb is just so big, and with their insta and WhatsApp purchases they are branching out nicely. Also fb is not just a social network anymore, it's becoming an ecosystem that's hard to break out of. Payments are coming too.


"Before anything, I see that no one mentioned the one thing about 401(k) accounts that's just shy of magic - The matching deposit. In 2015, 42% of companies offered a dollar for dollar match on deposits. Can't beat that.  (Note - to respond to Xalorous' comment, the $18K OP deposits can be nearly any percent of his income. The typical match is 'up to' 6% of gross income. If that's the case, the 401(k) deposits are doubled. But say he makes $100K. The $18K deposit will see a $6K match. This adds a layer of complexity to the answer that I preferred to avoid, as I show with no match at all, and no change in tax brackets, the deferral alone shows value to the investor.) On to the main answer - Let's pull out a spreadsheet -  We start with $10,000, and assume the 25% bracket. This gives a choice of $10,000 in the 401(k) or $7500 in the taxable account. Next, let 20 years pass, with 10% return each year. The 401(k) sees the full 10% and after 20 years, $67K. The taxable account owner waits to get the 15% cap gain rate and adjusts portfolio, thus seeing an 8.5% return each year and carrying no ongoing gains. After 20 years of 8.5% returns, he has $38K net. The 401(k) owner on withdrawal pays the 25% tax and has $50K, still more than 25% more money that the taxable account. Because transactions within the account were all tax deferred.  EDIT - With respect to davmp's comment, I'll offer the other extreme -  In his comment, he (rightly) objected that I chose to trade every year, although I did assign the long term 15% cap gain rate, he felt the annual trade was my attempt to game the analysis. Above, I offer his extreme case, a 10% return each year, no trade, no dividend. Just a cap gain at the end. The 401(k) still wins. I also left the tax (on the 401(k)) at withdrawal at 25%, when in fact, much, if not all will be taxed at 15% or lower, which would put the net at $57K or 30% above the taxable account final withdrawal.  The next issue I'd bring up is that the 401(k) is taken out at the top (marginal) tax rate, e.g. a single filer with taxable income over $37,650 (in 2016) would save 25% on that 401(k) deduction. Of course if the deduction pulls you under that line, I'd go Roth or taxable. But, withdrawals start at zero. Today, a single retiree has a standard deduction ($4050) and exemption ($6300) for a total $10,350 ""zero bracket"" with the next $9275 taxed at 10%. This points to needing $500K in pre tax accounts before withdrawals each year would get you past the 10% bracket. (This comes from the suggestion of using 4% as an annual withdrawal rate).  Last - the tax discussion has 2 major points in time, deposit and withdrawal, of course. But, the answers here all ignore all the time in between.  In between, you see that for any number of reasons, you'll drop from the 25% bracket to 15% that year. That's the time to convert a bit of money to Roth and 'top off' the 15% bracket. It can happen due to job loss, marriage with new spouse either not working or having lower income, new baby, house purchase, etc.  Or in-between, a disability put you out of work. That permits you to take money out with no penalty, and little chance of paying even the 25% that you paid going in. This, from personal experience with a family member, funded a 401(k) with 28% money. Then divorced and disabled, able to take the $10K/yr to supplement worker's comp (non taxed) income."


Keyword research is a crucial detail of search engine marketing. It is a delicate science related to research into seeking patterns, keyword relevancy, marketplace evaluation, or even consumer conduct. Do matters, proper and also you’ll have a firm foundation for your whole search engine optimization marketing campaign, do matters wrong and your search engine marketing campaign becomes a money pit. Being a best seo in dubai organization, we apprehend regional search patterns and the way these variables can boost up your website’s search engine marketing. For further more details about the seo and smo services in the Dubai, feel free to get in touch with us.


"The only thing that makes a stock worthless is when the company goes out of business. Note that bankruptcy, by itself, does not mean the company is closing. It could successfully restructure its affairs and come out of bankruptcy with a better outlook. Being a small or unprofitable business may cause a company's to trade in the ""penny stock"" range, but there is still some value there. Since most dying companies will pass through the penny stock phase, you may be able to track down what you're looking for by finding companies who have been (or are about to be) delisted. Delisting is not death, it's just the point at which the company's shares no longer meet the qualifications to be traded on a particular exchange. If you find old stock certificates in your grandmother's sock drawer, they may be a treasure, or they may be worthless pieces of paper if the company changed its ownership and Grandma didn't know about it."


Summarized article: On Thursday, stocks posted the worst decline in 3 weeks on weak worldwide manufacturing data.   A manufacturing survey for the Euro zone showed a contraction, Chinese manufacturing declined and the Philadelphia branch of the Federal Reserve also reported a manufacturing slowdown.   Additionally, previously owned home sales dropped 1.5% in May and the 4-week average of new unemployment claims jumped to the highest level since December.  Goldman Sachs made a bearish call on the S&P 500 index and recommended its clients to build short positions in the index.  The news came one day after the Federal Reserve cut its estimates for economic growth and said it would extend a bond-buying program. Disappointed investors had hoped for more aggressive action from the central bank to stimulate the economy.  The Dow was down 1.96%, the S&P 500 index was down 2.23% and the NASDAQ was down 2.44%.  * For more summarized news, subscribe to the [/r/SkimThat](http://www.reddit.com/r/SkimThat) subreddit


> Operations includes dividends and interest from investing  The graph included dividends as operations income.  I hope there is a written story that justifies this nonsense, because Buffet has long praised the dividend paying stock.  It is an investment strategy.


With bad credit but good income, I would simply save a large down payment. You're much more likely to get a mortgage with 25% down and a history of recently saving that 25% to show.


Phil's answer is correct. Just to add to his response: Distributions are not taxable events -- you already paid your taxes, so you can take out $50k or $52k and the IRS is not concerned. You can simply write yourself a check for any amount you choose! To answer your specific question: to match your K1 losses and profit exactly, you could take out $50k. But that might leave the business strapped for cash. One way to decide how much to take out is to use your balance sheet. Look at your retained earnings (or just look at the business bank account balance), subtract however much cash you think you need to keep on hand for operations, and write yourself a check for the rest.


It is great that you came up with a plan to own a rental home, free and clear, and also move up in home.  It is also really good of you to recognize that curtailing spending has a profound effect on your net worth, many people fail to acknowledge that factoid and prefer to instead blame things outside their control.  Good work there.  Here are some items of your plan that I have comments on. 11mo by aggressively curtailing elective spending How does your spouse feel about this?  They have to be on board, but it is such a short time frame this is very doable. cashing out all corporate stock, This will probably trigger capital gains.  You have to be prepared to pay the tax man, but this is a good source of cash for your plan.  You also have to have an additional amount that will likely be due next April 15th. redirecting all contributions to my current non-matched R401(k) This is fine as well because of the short time frame. withdrawing the principal from a Roth IRA This I kind of hate.  We are so limited in money that we can put into tax favored plans, that taking money out bothers me.  Also it is that much more difficult to save in a ROTH because of the sting of taxes.  I would not do this, but would favor instead to take a few extra months to make your plan happen. buy home #2 How are you going to have a down payment for home #2?  Is your intention to pay off home and save a while, then purchase home #2?  I would do anything to avoid PMI.   Besides I would take some time to live in a paid for house. Overall I would grade your plan a B.  If take a bit longer, and remove the withdrawing from the ROTH, it then becomes an A-.  With a good explanation of how you come up with the down payment for house 2, you could easily move to an A+.


I know someone around there, who might be able to collect it for   me.Would I still be able to cash it out in the other country? Or can   he/she cash it out for me? Unlikely. Unless they deposit it into a US bank account in your name. You can cash US checks in almost any decent bank anywhere in the world, but it may cost you some and will probably take 2-3 weeks. Since the amount is won in the US, how would I pay the taxes? , since   its earned over there. You would file a tax return with the IRS and send them a payment. You can buy drafts in US dollars almost anywhere in the world.


>The casino was due to be sold at a bankruptcy court auction last week, but that was postponed until Thursday to allow casino officials to study bids that were received. But after Revel's board met on Monday, the decision was made to shutter the iconic glass-covered casino at the north end of the Boardwalk. Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/business/Atlantic_Citys_Revel_Casino_to_close_in_September.html#4qmHbqfhREVrEkzy.99


Questions:   When you say feds inject money into the system, what do you mean?  What system?  the commercial banks?  Or Government so they can pay govt salaries?     And can commercial banks such as chase, bofa  create money out of thin air regardless of FED(and i dont mean by frac reserve either)??  Meaning giving out credit cards, or lending money they don't have.  Coz it seems banks don't need to have savings in the bank to lend/create debt money.   M2 increase regardless to M1 or Mbase money proves that.    there needs to be a federal govt nationalized franchise of utilty banks to compete with commercial banks.  let com banks speculate, and average conservative savers go bank with the nationalized utility banks.


The cleanest way to accomplish this is to make the purchase of your new house contingent on the sale of your old one.  Your offer should include that contingency and a date by which your house needs to sell to settle the contract.   There will also likely be a clause that lets the seller cancel the contract within a period of time (like 24-48 hours) if another offer is received.  This gives you (the buyer) at least an opportunity to either sell the house or come up with financing to complete the deal. For example, suppose you make an offer to buy a house for $300,000 contingent on the sale of your house, which the seller accepts.  In the meantime, the seller gets an offer of $275,000 in cash (no contingency).  The seller has to notify you of the offer and give you some time to make good on your offer, either by selling your house or obtaining $300,000 in financing.  If you cannot, the seller can accept the cash offer. This is just a hypothetical example; the offer can have whatever clauses you agree to, but since sale contingencies benefit the buyer, the seller will generally want some compensation for that benefit, e.g. a larger offer or some other clause that benefits them. Or do I find a house to buy first, set a closing date far out and then use that time to sell my current one? Most sellers will not want to set a closing date very far out.  Contingency clauses are far more common. In short, yes it's possible, and any competent realtor should be able to handle it.  It also may mean that you have to either make a higher offer to compensate for the contingency and to dissuade the seller from entertaining other offers, or sell your home for less than you'd like to get the cash sooner.  You can weigh those costs against the cost of financing the new house until yours sells.


My mom has MS and was taking one of the other drugs that was a cancer treatmeant. She got taken off of it because the Side effects were worse then the MS itself.  I hope This drug is not the same.