Long time Quicken user, but I have Bootcamp on my Mac, and one reason is so I can run Quicken Windows. That's one solution. You didn't mention what version of the Mac OS you're running, but Bootcamp is one alternative if you have (or can purchase) a Windows license. Be advised, Bootcamp 4, which is available with OS 10.7 (Lion) and OS 10.8 (Mountain Lion), officially supports Windows 7 only. Quicken running under Bootcamp isn't perfect, but it's better than any Mac version, and Quicken 2013 has a mobile app that allows you to view your data & enter transactions via your mobile. The Mac Version of Quicken has been panned by users. I do use Windows for work-related stuff, so I have a reason for running Windows besides using Quicken. I've read that Intuit has a market share of more than 70% in the personal finance software sector, and at this point it seems pretty clear that they are not interested in pursuing a larger share via Mac users. So if we ever see a highly functional version of Quicken for the Mac OS, it won't be any time soon. I've not used other products, but there are many reviews out there which rank them, and some consistently come to the front. Top 10 Reviews Mac Personal Finance Software 2013; WeRockYourWeb Personal Finance Software Rankings includes many Web-based alternatives; Personally, I'm not real enthusiastic about posting my personal financial data on someone's Web site. I have nothing to hide, but I just can't get comfortable with cloud-based personal finance software providers that are combing through my data, Google-like, to generate revenue. Too, it seems an unnecessary risk giving a third party a list of all my account numbers, user names, and passwords. I know that information is out there, if one has the right sort of access, but to my way of thinking, using a cloud-based personal finance software application makes it more out there.


The same could be said about the middle class person buying a brand new Toyota or whatever then neglecting the fuck out of it and talking shit about how much they hate it when the person at the bottom of the totem pole got their car for $100 and with they could buy a new car. Value is subjective man ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Because the people who own the machines aren't going to just give their product away for free to the now unemployed. Similarly for those creating food, water, etc. Yes, in the long term all will be at equilibrium as prices come down so that supply can meet demand, but in the short term, there will be a hell of a lot of unemployed unable to afford to live.  Why do people always assume technology or some change in the underpinnings of society will make unemployment a non-issue?


"It's about god damned time. I feel like American cell phone companies have been purposely keeping speeds slow so they can later get people to upgrade to ""super fast 4g service"" that the rest of the world considers average. It's like they've been keeping the bar set so low for so long to reduce consumer expectations, and then they overcharge for speeds that are normal for other parts of the world."


I understand $14k/yr $5.4M max This isn't the right way to say it.  Your dad has a $5.4 million estate tax exclusion that can be used for gift tax.  In addition to that (not instead or as part of), he and his wife each have a $14k/year gift tax exclusion.  So if you aren't paying for two years from today, you actually have three years of gift tax exclusion:  2017; 2018; 2019.  So that's 3 * 2 * $14k = $84k that he (and his wife) can give you without using any of the estate tax exclusion.  But  I give my cousin/dad $430k from the mortgage According to this, you don't want your dad to give you any money.  You want to pay the entire $430k.  In that case, don't file gift tax forms.  He's not giving you money.  He's loaning you money.   I agree with the others.  The cleanest solution is for your cousin to loan you money to buy the house from your dad.  Pay a lawyer (or have your cousin/dad do it) so that it's legally written as a mortgage and you can get your interest deduction.  You start paying off the loan in two years.  Until then, interest accrues.  So instead of a $430k debt, you'd owe something like $470k.  Maybe more if your cousin pays the property taxes as well.   Your cousin is out $430k plus possibly property taxes, but apparently he can afford that.  You have a house and a mortgage.  Your dad has money to buy his Florida house.   Note that if your dad wanted to give you money, he could.  He could collect $346k from you (borrowed from your cousin) and give you $28k equity immediately and then two more payments in 2018 and 2019.  But that assumes that $346k is enough for him to buy his Florida house.  If not, just do the mortgage.  He can give you money by check which you can send to your cousin if he wants to do that.


FHA doesn't have PMI which stands for Private Mortgage Insurance. MI for Mortgage Insurance is the generic name. FHA has MMI or Mutual Mortgage Insurance. With PMI you can apply to have it removed if the value of your home increases in value. With MMI (from FHA) that is not possible.  The current FHA rules are here 1.  For your case, 85% LTV: the rule is no longer, PMI ends when you hit the 78% mark. It is you must pay 11 years PMI for a 30 mortgage with a 78% to 90% LTV. The current rules took effect June 3rd, 2013.  1. Note that many websites, including Wikipedia, have not been updated to reflect the current rules.


Science is a methodology to understand the truth. When faced with evidence  that that go against your belief you change your belief to fit those facts. You doesn't try and ignore them. You don't look harder at studies you disagree with then those you agree with you look harder at all of them.   Cherry picking evedence and putting science in air quotes is not how you base your argument in science.   And if you don't care about the science then don't try to use science as evidence to prove your predispositions and beliefs.   There is very little evidence that a certain balanced diet is better or worse for you than any other balanced diet.  The only real evidence is that missing key nutrients is bad for you along with an over abundance of sugars and fats is bad for you. If your opinions are any stronger than that your practicing belief not science.  If you want to be anti meat then take this approach to your argument and say meat is bad for the environment. There is plenty of evidence is there for that. But there is very little to say eating meat is bad for you. If anything meat is one of the best things for humans to eat. Way over grains and sugars.


"**Chaebol**  A chaebol ( TCHAY-bol;  JEH-bəl; from Korean jaebeol [tɕɛ̝.bʌl]) is a South Korean form of business conglomerate. They are typically global multinationals and own numerous international enterprises, controlled by a chairman with power over all the operations. The term is often used in a context similar to that of the English word ""conglomerate"". The term was first used in 1984.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.27"


I think you may be confused on terminology here. Financial leverage is debt that you have taken on, in order to invest. It increases your returns, because it allows you to invest with more money than what you actually own.  Example: If a $1,000 mutual fund investment returns $60 [6%], then you could also take on $1,000 of debt at 3% interest, and earn $120 from both mutual fund investments, paying $30 in interest, leaving you with a net $90 [9% of your initial $1,000]. However, if the mutual fund 'takes a nose dive', and loses money, you still need to pay the $30 interest. In this way, using financial leverage actually increases your risk. It may provide higher returns, but you have the risk of losing more than just your initial principle amount. In the example above, imagine if the mutual fund you owned collapsed, and was worth nothing. Now, you would have lost $1,000 from the money you invested in the first place, and you would also still owe $1,000 to the bank. The key take away is that 'no risk' and 'high returns' do not go together. Safe returns right now are hovering around 0% interest rates. If you ever feel you have concocted a mix of options that leaves you with no risk and high returns, check your math again. As an addendum, if instead what you plan on doing is investing, say, 90% of your money in safe(r) money-market type funds, and 10% in the stock market, then this is a good way to reduce your risk. However, it also reduces your returns, as only a small portion of your portfolio will realize the (typically higher) gains of the stock market. Once again, being safer with your investments leads to less return. That is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact investing some part of your portfolio in interest-earning low risk investments is often advised. 99% is basically the same as 100%, however, so you almost don't benefit at all by investing that 1% in the stock market.


Assume you're asking about things like the Consumer Price Index?  Different countries have different approaches.  If they're honest, then the statistical sampling is conducted independently and consistently, with a clear publication schedule, and - as littleadv answered - by the men with clipboards. It is that publication schedule which leads to a little flurry of speculation as investors try to guess what unemployment, growth or inflation figures may be immediately prior to release. For many countries, such inflation measurement is entirely political, and so the statistical sampling is anything but honest or consistent.  Argentina's official inflation rate, for example, is 9.7% but analysts regard the real inflation rate as closer to 25%.  Places like Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Iran and even Egypt (prior to their revolution, who knows now) all manipulate statistics to portray their countries' economies in a better light. However, even in the US where the Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) has been nominally independent for over a century, the choice of what to include in the Consumer Basket (the official basket of items chosen to reflect cost-of-living, and measured by the men with clipboards) is not always honest.  For 30 years the US basket has excluded house prices, because they were too volatile.  Enter house-price credit disaster...


"Charitable donations can be deducted from your income, and in that way make your taxable income lower, hence lower taxes. That's the meaning of ""tax deductible"". As to ""if I donate it then the money will be given right to the charity instead of spread out to many other places"" - taxes are being used by the government based on its own decisions (presumably made by elected officials thus representing the will of the voters). Charities use the money based on their defined goals. Giving money to a charity will ensure it is used for the specific goal the charity declared, and that's the way for you to funnel money to the goals of your preference/choice. For example, you can donate money to your temple, orphanage around the corner, or the gay rights organization. Or anti gay, for that matters. Your money will be spent on the goals of your choosing. Re advantages - charitable donations are used by the rich folks to avoid paying taxes on their income (because they're deductible), so someone might donate money to places they use themselves (like the temple/church for example, or the school where the kids go, or politician which will ""objectively"" choose someone's business for a big government contract, etc etc). For ""ordinary"" people it's a way to reduce the taxable income and divert the money to the specific goals of their choice. For example, donating $100 to Red Cross Japan Tsunami relief fund, will reduce your taxable income by $100, and total taxes by $28 (assuming you're in the 28% bracket), thus the $28 will go to the specific goal your choose instead of the general taxes."


"Actually, the main reasons to put incomptent people in certain roles are:  1. They will never advance and be a threat to your job.  2. They will cause problems, so you will need to hire more people to ""manage"" and fix issues.  3. They will accept the job despite you underpaying them. A real skillful person will not take an underpaying job.  4. You have no choice because HR ""calculated"" how much will be the salary for the job and you know that it has to be at least 50% more to get a person who knows the job. (I know that from experience, hiring many people to work for me.)"


This is also an opinion, the iPhone makes up too much of the company's total revenue.  Last quarter results were very well received because of the somewhat dramatic increase in service revenue indicating that maybe the company can shift from relying so heavily on the iPhone.  As it stands, Apple is a single product company and that hinders long term prospects, hence the relatively low multiple. And the company has missed estimates, in fact one of those large dips was an earnings miss.  Additionally, if you're looking at the charts another one of the recent dips was likely caused by the brexit vote because everything was clobbered for a couple of days after that.


You've got two main options, in my opinion:  1. Don't take the job and hustle to get into the front office off the bat.  2. Take the job, but after a little bit work your ass off to re-brand and get into the front office (of another employer). This could mean going back to school, for example.


So the problem is with universities that grant accounting degrees to people who are incompetent at accounting, right? And the universities giving out these degrees are pretty much all universities if we can assume that most businesses with more than twenty employees contract an accountant to at least check up on their bookkeeping.


What you want is a position transfer, likely by ACATS.   This is a transfer from one IRA to another without having to liquidate positions to do so.  In effect, the brokerage firm is just transferring records from your existing IRA to your new IRA.  You will need to watch out to make sure your new IRA account can hold your positions for this to work.  For example, some brokerages allow you to hold fractional shares but others don't.  (The fractional share amounts would be sold automatically prior to transfer.)  Another example might be different fund families could be allowed between different brokerages. The general process is open your new IRA account, initiate the ACATS xfer from your new account, your old IRA account brokerage sends the positions over, and after a week or so your new IRA brokerage notifies you that everything is transferred. I've switched IRAs a couple times via this mechanism and never been charged a fee, but I've always stuck with the larger brokerages like Fidelity, TD Ameritrade, and Interactive Brokers.


Absolutely nothing, and it's not their call to make.  The shareholders will want to cut it into as many parts as they  can sell to recoup some of their lost investment. The judge will demand it even if they suddenly had a moral thought.  This will happen when this (and all those other companies) go under, refocuses priorities, or shuts down departments.


I hear the idea that TV has turned to crap a lot, but I don't really buy it.    I agree that TV is crap, but I think it's *always* been crap; we just didn't  notice, because it was all there was.   The internet gives us access to so much that the standard deviation of quality becomes larger, and the fact that the TV industry was never really that good to begin with has become more readily apparent.     It's sort of the same reason you find both the shortest & tallest people in China- the population is bigger, so the standard deviation of height is just statistically larger.


"A ""target"" school is just a school that a particular business has ""targeted"" for recruitment.  Some businesses, for example, have long histories of recruiting at certain schools, even though those schools might not be from the traditional Ivy League."


Normally if you sublet your apartment, the landlord would pay you back the security deposit and the new tenant would need to pay a new security deposit to the landlord. (In my experience)  You never want to get in a situation where something like this happens. This is not normally how sublets are structured.


Are you geometrically linking the spot rates for each spot period over of the next year? I.e. are you looking at the spot strip, or just taking today's spot rate and annualizing it?  If you are looking at the spot strip, then a YTM for a bond maturing in one year should equal the return from investing in rolling one month spot rates for the next year - more or less. If this variance is large, then there is scope for arbitrage.


The points given by DumbCoder are very valid. Diversifying portfolio is always a good idea. Including Metals is also a good idea. Investing in single metal though may not be a good idea.   •Silver is pretty cheap now, hopefully it will be for a while. •Silver is undervalued compared to gold. World reserve ratio is around 1 to 11, while price is around 1 to 60. Both the above are iffy statements. Cheap is relative term ... there are quite a few metals more cheaper than Silver [Copper for example]. Undervalued doesn't make sense. Its a quesiton of demand and supply. Today Industrial use of Silver is more widespread, and its predecting future what would happen. If you are saying Silver will appreciate more than other metals, it again depends on country and time period. There are times when even metals like Copper have given more returns than Silver and Gold. There is also Platinum to consider. In my opinion quite a bit of stuff is put in undervalued ... i.e. comparing reserve ratio to price in absolute isn't right comparing it over relative years is right. What the ratio says is for every 11 gms of silver, there is 1 gm of Gold and the price of this 1 gm is 60 times more than silver. True. And nobody tell is the demand of Silver 60 times more than Gold or 11 times more than Gold. i.e. the consumption. What is also not told is the cost to extract the 11 gms of silver is less than cost of 1 gm of Gold. So the cheapness you are thinking is  not 100% true.


There are two parts in this 1042-S form. The income/dividends go into the Canada T5 form. There will be credit if 1042-S has held money already, so use T2209 to report too.


>  My point is that we need to address the economic slowdown before the spending crisis  I agree with you.  Suppose nothing worse happens, (the Euro doesn't fail, China doesn't go into recession, we don't have all-out war in the Middle East) and we just sputter along as we've been going.   It will take another 5 years or so for the employment rate to get decent.  Meanwhile, there will have a large underclass than will have been unemployed for almost a decade and may be permanently unemployable.  We'll have another ~8 trillion in debt.    Let's (re-)build the roads that are falling apart, the railways, the bridges, the water systems.  Repair the aging school buildings.  Start an urban CCC, one that goes into decaying urban neighborhoods and tears down the worst of the houses and repair the ones that are in tax default, renting them out with the CCC workers getting first dibs.


Sorta. Though it's not every American - just the ones needing healthcare (don't know what percentage that is, but I have not seen a doctor in ten years). It IS enough to bribe the hell out of congress, though, and maintain the current system of keeping insurers between doctors and patients as parasitic gatekeepers.


If significant amounts are involved, that would be a good time to consult a tax professional (EA/CPA licensed in your state).  Generally, sale of a business is an ordinary income and you can only deduct tangible expenses, as Joe said. That would be laptops, bills, expenses per receipt, of course they must all be directly attributable to the business. You will need to be able to show that the laptops has only been used in business, recapture depreciation, etc. Same with all the rest of the expenses. If you're incorporated (i.e.: you hold this software under an S-Corp), then you're selling stocks, not business, and the tax treatment may be different, but I'm guessing this is not the case for you.


First, welcome to Money.SE. If you are interested in saving and investing, this is a great site to visit. Please take the tour and just start to read the questions you find interesting.  1 - even though this is hypothetical, it scales down to an average investor. If I own 1000 shares of the 1 billion, am I liable if the company goes under? No. Stocks don't work that way. If all I have is shares, not a short position, not options, I can only see my investment go to zero.  2 - Here, I'd ask that you edit your country in the tags. I can tell you that my newborn (who is soon turning 17) had a stock account in her name when she was a few months old. It's still a custodian account, meaning an adult has to manage it, and depending on the state within the US, the age that it's hers with no adult, is either 18 or 21. Your country may have similar regional rules.  Also - each country has accounts specifically geared toward retirement, with different favorable rules regarding taxation. In the US, we have accounts that can be funded at any age, so long as there's earned income. My daughter started one of these accounts when she started baby sitting at age 12. She will have more in her account by the time she graduates college than the average retiree does. It's good for her, and awful for the general population that this is the case.


Your wedding day is your very own fairy story, and fairy tales are frequently set in the maximum lovely of places. We concentrate on destination wedding cinematography and we realize how a great deal you have spent to ensure that your day is best. So we take pride in touring to seize the perfection in your day of love, pleasure and birthday celebration, accented by way of the perspectives and elaborate information of the wedding preparation and wedding videos. Whether it's an intimate seaside wedding ceremony with your entourage barefoot on the warm sand, or a chic affair under the celebs in a garden wedding ceremony.


I'm glad that you feel like being fair and equitable to your party. Other answerers are, of course, correct that being fair and equitable to your girlfriend is not in your best interests but that's not what you're trying to do here and I commend you for it. There is nothing that stops you drawing up a simple legal contract giving your girlfriend a share of the value of your house in return for her payments. Just get it signed and witnessed and checked over by a legal representative. You can include reasonable terms for the money to be paid back if you separate - perhaps when you sell the property or within two years of the breakup - that don't put you in immediate danger of losing the property. Just make clear that this contract is between you and her for a sum of money linked to the value of your house; it does not establish any legal claim on your house itself. A reasonable level for her to claim the property would be one half of the change in equity between when you start joint paying and when you separate - should that happen.


Depending on where you live I would go to meet ups in your industry. I live in New York and we have meet ups every night for digital businesses/agencies. Online works great but you can do both by meeting and networking in person and getting their digital information. Best of luck to you!


"Having just gone through selling a car, I can tell you that CarMax will most likely not be the best solution. I recently sold my '09 Pontiac Vibe which had a KBB and Edmonds value (private party sale) of around $6k. Trade-in value was around $4,800. I took it to the local CarMax for a quote, and they came back with $3,500.  Refinancing is tricky. Banks have a set limit on how old a car they will finance. Many won't even offer financing if the vehicle has over 100k miles. We looked at refinancing our other car, and even getting the APR down over a point we would only have saved $15/mo or so. Banks typically offer much higher interest rates for used non-dealership cars and refinancing than they do for new cars, or even used cars purchased from a dealership. Assuming you have 2-3 years left on your loan, I don't think that refinancing would save you enough to be worth considering. CarMax sells cars in 1 of 2 ways. They are also up front with you about the process. They do not reference KBB or Edmonds or any other valuation tool other than their own internal system. They either take the car, spruce it up a bit, then resell it on their lot, or they sell it at auction. If they determine your car will be sold at auction, then they will offer you a rock bottom price. The determining factors that come into play include age of the car, mileage, and of course overall condition. If you Mini is still in good shape and doesn't have a lot of miles, then they may try to resell it on their lot, for which they could offer you closer to personal-sale price than trade-in. How many 2007's are for sale in your area? How much are they selling for? I did sell them a truck back in 2005 and received $200 more than KBB valued it for, but it was in great shape, only a couple of years old, relatively low mileage, and it was in high demand. God bless the South and their love for trucks! I ended up selling my Pontiac to another local car dealership. They offered me $5,300 (after negotiating, leaving the dealership, then negotiating more over the phone). It took me a day and a half and really very little effort. I have several friends that have gone through the same thing with selling cars, and all have had similar luck going to other dealerships, where prices can be negotiated, rather than CarMax.  CarMax has no incentive to ""settle"" or forgive your loan. If you really want to pay it off, save up what you believe the difference will be, then shop your car around the local dealerships and get prices for your Mini. Remember that dealers have to turn a profit, so be reasonable with your negotiation. If you can find comparable vehicles in your area listed for $X,000 then knock $1,500 off that price and tell the dealerships that's what you want."


Applebees went to crap in the recession.  Raised prices but didn't improve quality to match the restaurants that were charging those prices.  Now local bars tend to be cheaper than Applebees for better food, with better drink specials.  Nobody is going to Applebee's at 11pm to socialize at a tiny bar in a restaurant that is dead empty.


Buy one and use it but never spend more than you can pay off at the end of the month.  Also, remember that the length of credit affects your rating too, so don't go canceling cards and/or getting new ones every time a new gimmick comes along.


I read this story last night and it made me laugh. I don't drink their beer. The best beer is locally produced by small private breweries who have no intention of going public. They aren't going anywhere. In fact, they are growing bigger. A lot of people love bland beer. If you like flavor, turn to a local brewpub! Given the choice of Budweiser and American made Spaten, I choose red wine! I would rather drink a bad red wine then a bad beer.


Here at Rowanbank Financial Consultants Limited, we can help you deal with various financial matters. We are professionals when it comes to retirement, business protection, investments, and much more. To make sure that we can address all your needs, we will work closely with you and even perform annual client reviews. Visit our website today at https://rowanbank-ltd.co.uk/ for more information.


You should do both: Contact the bank abroad and tell them the payment may have been misdirected and ask what they can do to trace or recall the payment. Contact HSBC, show them the sheet with the incorrect details, and ask them to help you fix the problem. International payments are generally hard to trace and fix so it's important to get things going from both ends as soon as possible. Make sure you keep the sheet or a copy of it so you have evidence you can use later if it comes to a dispute with HSBC. Keep any other documentation or letters you get from them. Also, if you're not already doing it, start keeping notes of what's happening as it happens so you have a contemporaneous record of events - those are generally much more convincing to other people than anything that was constructed from memory a long time after the event.


To give you an idea, HBS will often do interviews at McKinsey offices. Accounting has nothing to do with what we're talking about and the pay grades are completely different. A partner at KPMG or PWC is going to make as much as some 5 years out in a good investment bank.


http://www.bills.com/private-student-loan-settlement/ Here is a page that seems to have specific advice on the matter.  This site speculates that even though the private loan industry does not have to settle (and the private student loans, like federal loans cannot be discharged with a bankruptcy) they sometimes will anyway. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/private-student-loans-bankruptcy-law_n_1753462.html ...   If she could file bankruptcy to erase the private student loan debt   she owes to Sallie Mae, she would. But because of a 2005 reform law,   private student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, except in   extremely rare cases.  ... The advice that works for you is the same advice with negotiating any debt.  Get it in writing that the amount will constitute payment in full.  Be sure that the written agreement makes some mention of how they will report it on your credit.  (You are going to take a credit hit if you settle, but time will heal that.) The best plan is to pay, but if you can't, and you can honestly prove you can't, the debt collection company would be foolish to not take a settlement.  They can wait around forever and sue you, add penalties and fees, but if you cannot pay, you cannot pay.   I am going to guess because you are dealing with a debt collector, they are less vested in collecting the full amount.  So get that settlement offer in writing.  And don't be too much of a hard core negotiator.  The power is all on their side.  You will likely have to appeal to the greed of the collection company to succeed.  Hope they would rather have $.50 today than $1.25 tomorrow.


Oh, geez, well-regarded arguments against investing, hmm? Well, I have a couple. They're not against investing per se. They're asking about your priorities and whether you might have something better to do than inevesting: And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain   rich man brought forth plentifully: and he thought within himself,   saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my   fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and   build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And   I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many   years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be   required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast   provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not   rich toward God. -- Luke 12:16-21 Christian or otherwise, there may be better things for you to do with your excess cash - indeed, with your life - than simply invest it to bring yourself more money. Many people find charitable contributions more important than spending a little more money on themselves (immediately or in the future). Of course, you will need to decide what these things are that matter to you. Perhaps you would like to contribute to traditional charities. Perhaps you would like to fund education, or a religious organization, or the Democratic Party, or the Republican Party, or the Libertarian Party, or the Green Party, or the Tea Party, or Occupy Wall Street. Perhaps you'd like to fund research into something. Perhaps you simply have friends and family that you want to make happy. Perhaps a small vacation to spend time with family is worth more to you now than the investment returns will be worth later. Moreover, note that economic decisions like this are made on the margin - it's not so much a question of whether you invest at all, but whether you should invest more or less, and spend/donate more or less. I made me great works; I builded me houses; I planted me vineyards:      I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted trees in them of all   kind of fruits:    I made me pools of water, to water therewith the   wood that bringeth forth trees:    I got me servants and maidens, and   had servants born in my house; also I had great possessions of great   and small cattle above all that were in Jerusalem before me:       I   gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings   and of the provinces: I got me men singers and women singers, and the   delights of the sons of men, as musical instruments, and that of all   sorts. So I was great, and increased more than all that were before me in Jerusalem: also my wisdom remained with me.     And whatsoever mine   eyes desired I kept not from them, I withheld not my heart from any   joy; for my heart rejoiced in all my labor: and this was my portion of   all my labor.      Then I looked on all the works that my hands had   wrought, and on the labor that I had labored to do: and, behold, all   was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the   sun. -- Ecclesiastes 2:4-11 Because in the long run, we're all dead. Anywho! It's all a matter of returns and risk analysis. Even spending on yourself and charitable giving can be thought in these terms (the returns are not 'more money', so they may be harder to analyze, but they're important too).


Jamie Dimon, calling bitcoin a fraud for price bubbling is hilarious considering JP Morgan literally got bailed out by US tax dollars for investing in trash mortgage loans. Ok.  Knocks aside, I'm just buying low. The problem with financial analysis on bitcoin is that inevitably, financiers don't know anything about computer science, and they aren't in the business of making applications. Bitcoin is an application of an interesting concept: the distributed ledger, and the ability to have a distributed ledger verify and lock the ledger. The problem with this analysis is that he doesn't have application knowledge to infer the positive externalities of having a distributed ledger, and most of those use cases for the applications are in their infancy, or haven't been though of yet. Blockchain is an idea that can later power other tools. It's like when the Microsoft CEO said Apps aren't useful on phones. He didn't see the big picture, because the use cases weren't defined yet, and the same thing is going on here. We haven't really fleshed out all the possible use cases of a distributed ledger with a decentralized oracle.  Does it work for payments? Yes, bitcoin is proof of that, and the fact that it's been bailed out a total of zero times by American taxpayers is so far a strong indicator that it works. Are there other applications that are being developed? Yes. Are there some applications out there that are absolute shit? Yes. Are there some applications out there that are absolute gold? Yes.


"Honestly, i've jokingly characterized myself in the past as ""anti-death"" but it is, to an extent, true. I am, in a moral sense, a Utilitarian: Most good for the msot people, and all that. I consider death to be the last form of suffering we must eliminate."


In general, the goal of an S&P 500 index fund is to replicate the performance of the S&P 500 Index.  To do this, the fund will buy the same stocks in the same proportions as the weighting of the Index. The S&P 500 Index is free-float capitalization weighted.  This means that the higher capitalization stocks (based on publicly traded shares only) are more heavily weighted and factor into the Index value more heavily than the smaller capitalization stocks, or the stocks that have a smaller publicly traded value.  For example, companies like Apple, ExxonMobil, and Microsoft have a much larger weight in the index value than smaller companies. Alternatively, there are some S&P index funds that are equal-weighted.  In these funds, the managers have chosen to purchase all 500 of the stocks in the index, but in equal proportions instead of the weighted proportions of the index.  These equal-weighted funds will not as closely match the index price as the traditionally weighted index funds.  Instead, they might do better or worse than the index, depending on how the individual stocks do. You'll need to look at the prospectus of the index funds you are interested in to see which approach the fund is taking.


In addition to having separate income for federal and state tax purposes, things can get really complicated if you ever have capital gains and losses. Suppose you sell taxable stocks for a loss of $5000, and meanwhile, have capital gains of $1000 in your HSA. From the federal perspective, the gains in the HSA don't exist, so you deduct $3000 of the loss, and then carry over the remaining $2000. However, from the state perspective, $1000 of the capital loss went to canceling out the gains in the HSA. Therefore, you only carry over $1000. Assuming you continue to have losses and gains, this will carry on forever. You'll have to track completely independent sets of gains and losses and carryover losses for federal and state purposes forever, even if you no longer use the HSA. Therefore, I'd recommend not investing HSA proceeds at all if you live in a state that doesn't recognize HSAs. It's just too complicated to be worth it, especially since your provider won't track any of this for you.


Just because it requires a degree doesn't mean it takes a skill. She has a degree in molecular biology. She doesn't use this knowledge to cut leaves in 1 inch squares and put them in a tube. Driving and using a boom to clean 3rd story windows takes a skill. You're just ignorant as fuck. They both work hard and both deserve a good paycheck.


I wouldn't be surprised if manufacturers respond well when they're promised Amazon can increase ~~drug addiction~~ ~~drug dependency/reliance~~ demographic expansion.  Downward pressure on prices can make people a little crazy, especially when consumption-based economies, economies of scale, next-day delivery slam into each-other at 88 miles/hour.


Funds from NRO account can be moved to NRE account subject to conditions that the overall limit is less than 1 million USD. There are additional documentation required, refer a sample here. Please consult a CA or your bank for more details.


"I am guessing that when you say ""FRENCH40"" and ""GERMAN30"" you are referring to the main French and German stock market indices.  The main French index is the CAC-40 with its 40 constituent companies. The main German index is the DAX, which has 30 constituents.  The US30 is presumably the Dow Jones Index which also has 30 constituents. These are stock market indices that are used to measure the value of a basket of shares (the index constituents).  As the value of the constituents change, so does the value of the index. There are various financial instruments that allow investors to profit from movements in these indices.  It is those people who invest in these instruments that profit from price movements.  The constituent companies receive no direct benefit or profit from investor trading in these instruments, nor does the government."


The 'appropriate' amount of cash/bonds to hold will be largely a matter of opinion, but here are the general reasons why having at least some is a good idea: Cash is very liquid, and bonds are often mostly liquid. This means you can access them very quickly, without taking on losses. To get the most liquidity out of your bonds, you can do what is called 'laddering'. This means that you take out different bond amounts with different maturity dates, and periodically renew them on a schedule, so that you always have some bonds maturing, which you can access without paying an interest penalty. You can look this term up online for more details. Cash and bonds are low risk. If you have absolutely no low-risk assets, then in the event of, say, a market crash, you may have no savings to fall back on. By owning some bonds, and some equities, you are able to earn a modest return, without being too risky. However, note that some bonds are just as risky as equities - any bond which pays an abnormally high interest rate does so because the entity backing the repayment (government, company, whomever) is thought to not be guaranteed to be able to do so. The 25% figure given by your author is his opinion on the appropriate mix of cash/bonds to equities, but there are many views on the matter. Consider that any 'rule of thumb' in personal finance should be for general consideration only.


The big one is to keep you from refinancing it with someone else to get a better rate. There may also be some funny-money reasons having to do with being able to count this as a new sale.


While on the surface it may seem that the warrant you described is trading below intrinsic value, there are many reasons why that might not be the case. It's more likely that you are lacking information, than having identified a derivative instrument that the market has failed to reasonably price. For instance, might there be a conversion ratio on the warrants other than the 1:1 ratio that you seem to be assuming? Sometimes, warrant terms are such that multiple warrants are required to buy one share of stock. Consider: The conversion ratio is the number of warrants needed in order to buy   (or sell) one investment unit. Therefore, if the conversion ratio to   buy stock XYZ is 3:1, this means that the holder needs three warrants   in order to purchase one share. Usually, if the conversion ratio is   high, the price of the share will be low, and vice versa. (source) Conversion ratios are sometimes used so that warrants can be issued on a 1:1 basis to existing stockholders, but where the potential number of new shares to be issued is much less. Conversion ratio is just one such example that could lead to perceived mispricing, and there may be other restrictions on exercise. Warrants are not issued by an options exchange using standardized option contract terms, and so warrant terms vary considerably from issuer to issuer. Even series of warrants from the same issuer may have differing terms. Always look beyond any warrant quote to find a definitive source of the warrant's precise terms — and read those terms carefully before taking any position.


I've given up on trying to understand how the allowances correspond to my number of dependents.   What I do instead to achieve the same end goal of having the right amount of money withheld is using a paycheck calculator. If I get paid 24 times a year (twice a month) and I figure I'm going to owe about $6,000 of taxes, then every paycheck needs to have $250 of federal tax withheld from it to make sure I am covered. Go to the paycheck calculator and play with the allowance numbers until you get $250 as the federal tax withheld and then submit a new W4 to your employer. This is the only reliable way I've found to figure this out on my own.  Because my calculations are done in dollars instead of exemptions, etc. and my taxes do not wildly fluctuate year-to-year this works well for me.


People with skills can still find good jobs. I live in one of the shittiest economic states in the country right now. The people that I know that went to college **AND** busted their ass to find a good job when they got out all had one within a couple months. The people that fucked around, sent out their resume to a few online job applications and didn't make it priority #1 to get a high quality job didn't.  Good jobs aren't easy to come by right now, but they are available.


Market price simply depends on your order side.  If you are placing a buy order the market price is the lowest ask, if you are placing a sell order the market price is the highest bid.  If your order is larger than the volume then you'd need to also consider the next lowest ask or next highest bid until you've fulfilled your order volume.


> And did you find my previous post alarming?  Now you don't even understand simple definitions.  I'm sure your commentary on our national economic system is top notch.         >Sometimes I post something, only to realize a day later, I said something very ignorant. The flip side of it is, if I had kept silent, I may still hold some of my wrong beliefs.         Those aren't the only two options.  At least you understand how little you understand.  The key is to ask questions about things that don't make sense to you.  At least then you might learn something instead of misleading others who don't realize how ignorant you are.


">  Lol ok buddy. You googled some hysterical left wing editorials and I'm suppose to buy it as Trump being ""anti-science?"" They did that same shit with Bush and Reagan, and they'll do it to the next Republican president.   I am a scientist and *every scientist I know* recognizes it:  Republicans, Dems, and even the few Trump supporters.  It's not left wing editorials, it's not just MSM,  ... it's literally every science oriented magazine.  I gave links to ""Science"" ... which *is the magazine for general scientists.*  >>   ""inversely proportional""  >  Wow pedantic, boy if nothing is evidence of having won an argument it's when dudes start griping over definitions. Inversely proportional works just fine here.  Not pedantic, accurate.  As scientists tend to be when there is an underlying equation/relationship.  There's a world of difference between y = -C x + k and y = C 1/x + k for positive C.  If you can't distinguish these ... then I'm glad you're not a scientist.  If you can recognize that these are considerably different, then I would suggest you have a problem admitting that you screwed up.  >>  ""won on income"" is just poor phraseology.  >  Nah, it was fine. You got it.   No.  I don't think anyone is asserting causality ... and ""won on income"" asserts causality.  For example, the same exit polls show race was significant.  Would you call it good phraseology to say ""won due to racism""???  Also, you'll note that I also didn't assert causality with regard to the ""amount of education"" statistic.  I *do* have some hypotheses in this regard, but I don't have the appropriate data to test it.  [Aside:  And before you jump to conclusions, my number one hypothesis doesn't have to do with ""intelligence"" ... it has to do with ""critical thinking skills"" as well as not viewing problems as simple ""black and white propositions."" ]  >  Aww now you are just trying to hurt my feelings. It's almost as if ad hominem attack is the last recourse of a defeated liberal. I believe it's acceptable to take whatever grammatical liberties necessarily when writing mocking prose.  I'm glad to see you can use good grammar when you try.  But, seriously, I couldn't make heads or tails of your last ""paragraph"" and was more than disheartened to note that each of your previous paragraphs in that post included sentence fragments, missing articles, and such.  If you're trying to *communicate* ... be clear about it.  If you don't I just won't take it seriously."


"> “This 7.85-inch iPad Mini fit our hands like a glove and we were easily able to tuck the device in our sport coat, offering consumers a more mobile iPad experience for certain use cases.”   So a 4.8"" phone screen is too big, but a 7.85"" tablet fits in their hands like a glove. Yeah, that makes perfect sense."


Los Angeles Piano Lessons--Looking to learn piano in LA? Music teachers provides some of the piano lessons for learning how to play piano no matter what level you are. With a 5 point screening process and talented and experienced teachers you can make the most out of your time with these lessons.


BHP Billiton has room to answer doubters as commodities rout batters debt notes in part: There has been speculation that the company could cut its shareholder   dividend, while Liberum Capital analyst Richard Knights has suggested   BHP might look to raise as much as $US10 billion ($14.3 billion) in   new equity capital. If the dividend is cut, you won't see 11% and the share price may well decline further. There is a possibility of big losses here given the change in the prices of the products the company sells. To add from another source The only reason BHP trades on a yield of more than 8% is because the   market is pricing in a cut to the dividend. According to consensus   earnings estimates for 2016 and 2017, earnings per share will be $0.86   and $1.27 respectively. Dividends per share forecasts are $1.83 and   $1.81 respectively.


No, but insider information would have tipped them off on the timings of when to time some of their actions... possibly planning shorting it ahead, all kinds of who-diggery that those financial wizards can do to make shit tons of money off stocks / companies losing money.


If I is the initial deposit, P the periodic deposit, r the rent per period, n the number of periods, and F the final value, than we can combine two formulas into one to get the following answer: F = I*(1+r)n + P*[(1+r)n-1]/r In this case, you get V = 1000*(1.05)20 + 100*[(1.05)20-1]/0.05 = 5959.89 USD. Note that the actual final value may be lower because of rounding errors.


If you believe the stock market will be down 20-30% in the next few months, sell your stock holdings, buy a protective put option for the value of the holdings that you want to keep. That would be hedging against it. Anything more is speculating that the market will fall.


"You are correct. If you paid your bill and then received a refund, now the credit card (bank) owes you $400. You can spend $400 without owing anything. Or, if you do nothing and don't use the card anymore, after a while they'll probably send you a check for $400. Or, if you don't plan on using the card anymore, you could call them and ask them to send you a check. If it's your regular card, just spend like you normally would and the first $400 will be ""pre-paid""."


There is none, whatever sector you invest in will be subject to cyclical market difficulties, however alpha can be generated from two sources: Timing and selection.  Its much easier to get the timing done over a long period of time.


it was when I had my nexus s and I was giving my htc dream to a friend that something clicked, I love the nexus s too maybe I like my phones to have curves like a bar of soap rather than flat and square'd off like a Graham cracker


Propworld Realty offers luxurious Office Space for Rent in Noida at very economical rentals. As we all know good office space influence your business.  In today scenario office space is now being seen as a significant factor in recruiting, maintaining and maximising talent. Hence,if you are looking  supreme quality Office Space for Rent in Noida then call us 09810000375.


There are hundreds of entities which offer mutual funds - too many to adequately address here. If you need to pick one, just go with Vanguard for the low low low fees. Yes, this is important. A typical expense ratio of 1% may not sound like much until you realize that the annualized real rate of return on the stock market - after inflation - is about 4%... so the fund eats a quarter of your earnings. (Vanguard's typical expense ratios are closer to 0.1-0.2%). If your company offers a tax-deferred retirement account such as a 401(k), you'll probably find it advantageous to use whatever funds that plan offers just to get the tax advantage, and roll over the account to a cheaper provider when you change employers. You can also buy mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) through most brokerages. E*Trade has a nice mutual fund screener, with over 6700 mutual funds and 1180 ETFs. Charles Schwab has one you can browse without even having an account.


There is no strict need to do that, you can consider yourself to be consulting, a 10% of your payment will be withheld and paid as tax by the company, you can deduct up to 60% of your income as expenses and pay tax on the rest (factoring the tax deducted at source). In another approach, you could register for service tax and charge service tax on your invoice and pay to the service tax department, the tax calculations are similar to above. It will be good if you speak to a chartered accountant and get more clarity. As for business card, you could print it with your name and qualification, there are no restrictions on that.


The factors to consider:


I had that discussion with my girlfriend yesterday. She is working in bespoke tailoring. There are already machines that scan your body, the work is way more precise than an experienced tailor. You have digital CAD software that could make up the pattern. If someone would take some time and do some more programming, you could literally make a bespoke suit without a tailor. So here is the problem, the question was, how to do you apply certain styles to certain body types so it looks good. Not every style looks good on you, so it's the tailor's job to do it. Styles used to be something subjective to me, till I started getting more involved with design and then I realised style can be objectified. I truly believe that style is even quantifiable. If found yesterday at least 7-10 data points that correlate to each other and could be used to adjust style to a certain body type.  Creativity is not a uniquely human feature anymore. Emily Howel is an AI, listen to the music she writes --> https://soundcloud.com/ai-emily_howell/from-darkness-light-iii-prelude


"I think it's easiest to illustrate it with an example... if you've already read any of the definitions out there, then you know what it means, but just don't understand what it means.  So, we have an ice cream shop. We started it as partners, and now you and I each own 50% of the company. It's doing so well that we decide to take it public.  That means that we will be giving up some of our ownership in return for a chance to own a smaller portion of a bigger thing. With the money that we raise from selling stocks, we're going to open up two more stores.  So, without getting into too much of the nitty gritty accounting that would turn this into a valuation question, let's say we are going to put 30% of the company up for sale with these stocks, leaving you and me with 35% each. We file with the SEC saying we're splitting up the company ownership with 100,000 shares, and so you and I each have 35,000 shares and we sell 30,000 to investors.  Then, and this depends on the state in the US where you're registering your publicly traded corporation, those shares must be assigned a par value that a shareholder can redeem the shares at. Many corporations will use $1 or 10 cents or something nominal.  And we go and find investors who will actually pay us $5 per share for our ice cream shop business. We receive $150,000 in new capital. But when we record that in our accounting, $5 in total capital per share was contributed by investors to the business and is recorded as shareholder's equity. $1 per share (totalling $30,000) goes towards actual shares outstanding, and $4 per share (totalling $120,000) goes towards capital surplus.  These amounts will not change unless we issue new stocks. The share prices on the open market can fluctuate, but we rarely would adjust these. Edit: I couldn't see the table before. DumbCoder has already pointed out the equation Capital Surplus = [(Stock Par Value) + (Premium Per Share)] * (Number of Shares) Based on my example, it's easy to deduce what happened in the case you've given in the table. In 2009 your company XYZ had outstanding Common Stock issued for $4,652. That's probably (a) in thousands, and (b) at a par value of $1 per share. On those assumptions we can say that the company has 4,652,000 shares outstanding for Year End 2009.  Then, if we guess that's the outstanding shares, we can also calculate the implicit average premium per share: 90,946,000 ÷ 4,652,000 == $19.52. Note that this is the average premium per share, because we don't know when the different stocks were issued at, and it may be that the premiums that investors paid were different. Frankly, we don't care.  So clearly since ""Common Stock"" in 2010 is up to $9,303 it means that the company released more stock. Someone else can chime in on whether that means it was specifically a stock split or some other mechanism... it doesn't matter. For understanding this you just need to know that the company put more stock into the marketplace... 9,303 - 4,652 == 4,651(,000) more shares to be exact. With the mechanics of rounding to the thousands, I would guess this was a stock split.  Now. What you can also see is that the Capital Surplus also increased. 232,801 - 90,946 == 141,855. The 4,651,000 shares were issued into the market at an average premium of 141,855 ÷ 4,651 == $30.50. So investors probably paid (or were given by the company) an average of $31.50 at this split.  Then, in 2011 the company had another small adjustment to its shares outstanding. (The Common Stock went up). And there was a corresponding increase in its Capital Surplus.  Without details around the actual stock volumes, it's hard to get more exact. You're also only giving us a portion of the Balance Sheet for your company, so it's hard to go into too much more detail. Hopefully this answers your question though."


People are just spoiled by shitty burgers off the Dollar menu at McDs that taste like cardboard and are only beef in the strictest academic sense of the word that they complain about constantly but when given the option for a superior burger from Five Guys or Culver's that might cost a few bucks more, they say it's too expensive.   People don't know what they want. That's why the advertising industry exists.


Leasing is not exactly a scam, but it doesn't seem to be the right product for you.  The point of leasing over buying is that it turns the capital purchase of a car which needs to be depreciated for tax purposes into what is effectively a rental expense.  Rent is an expense that can be deducted directly without depreciation.   If you are not operating a business where you can take advantage of leasing's tax advantages, leasing is probably not for you.  Because of the tax advantages, a lease can be more profitable for the car dealer.  They can get a commission or finder's fee on the lease as well as the commission on the car sale.  That extra profit comes from somewhere, presumably from you.  If a business, you can then pass part of that to the government.  As an individual, you lose that advantage.   At this point, the best financial decision that you could make would be to buy out the lease on your current car.  Lease prices are set based on the assumption that the car will have been abused during the course of the lease.  If you are driving the car less than expected, its value is probably higher than the cost of buying out the lease.  If you buy that car, you can drive it for years.  Save up some money and buy your next car for cash rather than using financing.   Of course, if you really want a new car and can afford it, you may not want to buy out the lease.  That is of course your decision.  You don't have to maximize your current financial position if buying a new car would return more satisfaction for the money in the long run.  I would try to avoid financing for what is essentially a pleasure purchase though.


"The difficulty with investing in mining and gold company stocks is that they are subject to the same market forces as any other stocks, although they may whether those forces better in a crisis than other stocks do because they are related to gold, which has always been a ""flight to safety"" move for investors. Some investors buy physical gold, although you don't have to take actual delivery of the metal itself.  You can leave it with the broker-dealer you buy it from, much the way you don't have your broker send you stock certificates.  That way, if you leave the gold with the broker-dealer (someone reputable, of course, like APMEX or Monex) then you can sell it quickly if you choose, just like when you want to sell a stock. If you take delivery of a security (share certificate) or commodity (gold, oil, etc.) then before you can sell it, you have to return it to broker, which takes time.  The decision has much to do with your investing objectives and willingness to absorb risk.  The reason people choose mutual funds is because their money gets spread around a basket of stocks, so if one company in the fund takes a hit it doesn't wipe out their entire investment.  If you buy gold, you run the risk (low, in my opinion) of seeing big losses if, for some reason, gold prices plummet.  You're ""all in"" on one thing, which can be risky. It's a judgment call on your part, but that's my two cents' worth."


You can buy and sell stocks, if you like. You'll have to pay taxes on any profits. And short-term is speculating, not investing, and has high risk


Our healthline also providing spine treatment with yoga and meditation practices. We have fabulous technique for Spinal pain treatment and knee pain treatment. We have successfully operated several patients in our clinic. If you are suffering from spine problem and you need an expert advice then you should visit Dr. Vyom bolia (Spine specialist) in Udaipur.https://www.slideshare.net/HealthlineUdaipur/spine-specialist-in-udaipur-76548005


>Well, at least you're honest about the fact that you're advocating robbery.  Unfortunately, morals can't pay medical bills.  >How long do you think that'll work before people just say fuck it, and start pointing guns of their own?   Soon, I think.  >That is how we became a country after all.  It's also how the welfare system emerged in the first place.


"Bookkeeping and double-entry accounting is really designed for tracking the finances of a single entity. It sounds like you're trying to use it to keep multiple entities' information, which may somewhat work but isn't really going to be the easiest to understand. Here's a few approaches: In this approach, the books are entirely from your perspective. So, if you're holding onto money that ""really"" belongs to your kids, then what you've done is you're taking a loan from them. This means that you should record it as a liability on your books. If you received $300, of which $100 was actually yours, $100 belongs to Kid #1 (and thus is a loan from him), and $100 belongs to Kid #2 (and thus is a loan from her), you'd record it just that way. Note that you only received $100 of income, since that's the only money that's ""yours"", and the other $200 you're only holding on behalf of your kids. When you give the money to your kids or spend it on their behalf, then you debit the liability accordingly and credit the Petty Cash or other account you spent it from. If you wanted to do this in excruciating detail, then your kids could each have their own set of books, in which they would see a transfer from their own Income:Garage Sale account into their Assets:Held by Parents account. For this, you just apportion each of your asset accounts into subaccounts tracking how much money each of you has in it. This lets you treat the whole family as one single entity, sharing in the income, expenses, etc. It lets you see the whole pool of money as being the family's, but also lets you track internally some value of assets for each person. Whenever you spend money you need to record which subaccount it came from, and it could be more challenging if you actually need to record income or expenses separately per person (for some sort of tax reasons, say) unless you also break up each Income and Expense account per person as well. (In which case, it may be easier just to have each person keep their entirely separate set of books.) I don't see a whole lot of advantages, but I'll mention it because you suggested using equity accounts. Equity is designed for tracking how much ""capital"" each ""investor"" contributes to the entity, and for tracking a household it can be hard for that to make a lot of sense, though I suppose it can be done. From a math perspective, Equity is treated exactly like Liabilities in the accounting equation, so you could end up using it a lot like in my Approach #1, where Equity represents how much you owe each of the kids. But in that case, I'd find it simpler to just go ahead and treat them as Liabilities. But if it makes you feel better to just use the word Equity rather than Liability, to represent that the kids are ""investing"" in the household or the like, go right ahead. If you're going to look at the books from your perspective and the kids as investing in it, the transaction would look like this: And it's really all handled in the same way an Approach #1. If on the other hand, you really want the books to represent ""the family"", then you'd need to have the family's books really look more like a partnership. This is getting a bit out of my league, but I'd imagine it'd be something like this: That is to say, the family make the sale, and has the money, and the ""shareholders"" could see it as such, but don't have any obvious direct claim to the money since there hasn't been a distribution to them yet. Any assets would just be assumed to be split three ways, if it's an equal partnership. Then, when being spent, the entity would have an Expense transaction of ""Dividend"" or the like, where it distributes the money to the shareholders so that they could do something with it. Alternatively, you'd just have the capital be contributed, And then any ""income"" would have to be handled on the individual books of the ""investors"" involved, as it would represent that they make the money, and then contributed it to the ""family books"". This approach seems much more complicated than I'd want to do myself, though."


Pretty garbage policy, especially since the niche we're in results in customers using the product, then deciding its our fault (the reseller of another manufacturer), and returns used items to us that we cant resell. So on Amazon's end, it shows the buyer received the part, returns it a week later, and they are entitled to a refund, while we're stuck with $500 of useless inventory. - Fuck that


If anything LEGO is as much as the good guy in toy business as Reddit perceived Valve the good guy (customer oriented) in games.   Asking for pieces through their customer support surprised me they actually recommends a third party (Bricklink) as an alternative should they failed to replace my pieces. They actually replaced your missing Lego bricks for free! I simply couldn't recommend them enough.  This might be questionable, but the there was a Lego representative who did an AMA on 4chan's /toy/ board a few years ago.


It's called correlation. I found this: http://www.forexrazor.com/en-us/school/tabid/426/ID/437424/currency-pair-correlations it looks a good place to start Similar types of political economies will correlate together, opposite types won't. Also there are geographic correlations (climate, language etc)


"typically, your employer will automatically stop making contributions once you hit the 18k$ limit. it is worth noting that employer contributions (e.g. ""matching"") do not count towards the 18k$ employee pre-tax contribution limit. however, if you have 2 employers during the year their combined payroll deductions might exceed the limit if you do not inform your later employer of the contributions you made at your former employer (or they ignore the info). in which case, you must request a refund of ""excess contributions"" from one of the plans (your choice). you must report the refund as taxable income on your taxes. if you do not make this request by the time you file your taxes, the tax man will reject your filing and ""adjust"" your return with more taxes and penalties. sometimes requesting a refund of excess contributions might cause your employer to remove ""matching"" funds, but i am not clear on the rules behind that. there are some 401k plans that allow ""supplemental after-tax contributions"" up to the combined employee/employer limit (53k$ in 2015 and 2016). it is a rare feature, and if your company offers it, you probably already know.  however, generally it is governed by a separate contribution election that only take effect once you hit the employee pre-tax contribution limit (18k$ in 2015 and 2016). you could ask your hr department to be sure. 401k plans can be changed if there is enough employee demand for a rule change.  especially in a small company, simply asking for them to allow dollar based contributions instead of percent based contributions can cause them to change the plan to allow it. similarly, you could request they allow ""supplemental after-tax contributions"", but that might be a harder change to get."


"I think the first misconception to clear up is that you are implying the price of a stock is set by a specific person. It is not. The price of a stock is equal to the value that someone most recently traded at. If Apple last traded at $100/share, then Apple shares are worth $100. If good news about Apple hits the market and people holding the shares ask for more money, and the most recent trade becomes $105, then that is now what Apple shares are worth. Remember that generally speaking, the company itself does not sell you its shares - instead, some other investor sells you shares they already own. When a company sells you shares, it is called a 'public offering'. To get to your actual question, saying something is 'priced in' implies that the 'market' (that is, investors who are buying and selling shares in the company) has already considered the impacts of that something. For example, if you open up your newspaper and read an article about IBM inventing a new type of computer chip, you might want to invest in IBM. But, the rest of the market has also heard the news. So everyone else has already traded IBM assuming that this new chip would be made. That means when you buy, even if sales later go up because of the new chip, those sales were already considered by the person who chose the price to sell you the shares at. One principle of the stock market (not agreed to by all) is called market efficiency. Generally, if there were perfect market efficiency, then every piece of public information about a company would be perfectly integrated into its stock price. In such a scenario, the only way to get real value when buying a company would be to have secret information of some sort. It would mean that everyone's collective best-guess about what will happen to the company has been ""priced-in"" to the most recent share trade."


No, the stock market and investing in general is not a zero sum game.  Some types of trades are zero sum because of the nature of the trade.   But someone isn't necessarily losing when you gain in the sale of a stock or other security. I'm not going to type out a technical thesis for your question.  But the main failure of the idea that investing is zero sum is the fact the a company does not participate in the transacting of its stock in the secondary market nor does it set the price. This is materially different from the trading of options contracts.  Options contracts are the trading of risk, one side of the contract wins and one side of the contract loses. If you want to run down the economic theory that if Jenny bought her shares from Bob someone else is missing out on Jenny's money you're free to do that.  But that would mean that literally every transaction in the entire economy is part of a zero sum game (and really misses the definition of zero sum game). Poker is a zero sum game.  All players bet in to the game in equal amounts, one player takes all the money.  And hell, I've played poker and lost but still sometimes feel that received value in the form of entertainment.


Lots of companies are behind the times because their management is usually older people who don't know about this tech or how to lock it down. Our company is in the same boat and our security guys put out some new tough policy yet they have not enforced it or put any teeth to it and we keep seeing violations all over the place and one person is being sued because he spent years selling off our info.


I believe it was for 99 years if I remember. But you are correct with everything else. If I remember it was only for one billion as well. Not much at all when you consider Chicago is the third largest city and it's for a century. Who the he'll thought it was a good idea to sell those rights I have no idea but they made out like a bandit


I'm sorry, but who pressured the appraiser to overstate the value of the house by threatening him with a loss of future business? I'm pretty sure I hired him but the lender threatened him. After I only had one house for him to do. You're missing the bigger picture


"No he wont. He is a very good business man and has been since  he split from top rank circa 2006.  Like most fighters, before 2006, he fought under a promo company, Top Rank.  He would get his guaranteed purse for fights and that was that. Instead of taking an $8M payday, he decided to cut out the middle man (Bob Arum) and bought out his contract for ~$750K and decided to promote the fights himself (Mayweather promotions).  Instead of just getting his purse, he now got a cut of every revenue stream involved in a fight (PPV, Tickets, broadcasting rights, etc.).    After this, he ""Co-promoted"" fights with Golden Boy since they had a license.  He would still retain control and get his cut, but then he got his promoters license and stopped co-promoting entirely leaving himself with an even bigger cut.   He has a stable of fighters who fight regularly and he gets revenue from that, he has a strip club, a clothing line, music stuff, marketing/brand firm, and of course a crap ton of real estate.  I heard he will be opening up a marijuana dispensary soon.  He will have more than enough money to last a life time even at the rate he spends it.   Edit - Now Pacquiao is a guy who will be broke very soon, or already is. He fought a no-named boxer with like 17 fights under his belt this past June in Australia (and he lost) to little fan fare."


Their motivation should be the same as yours, just moderated for the fact that they don't have ownership.  The fairest thing is likely a percentage of revenue (.5 moving up to 1 or higher depending on competency, off of gross, not net) plus getting some of the expense account for lunches and whatnot when something big gets done.    This will also make them less likely to leave when other offers or opportunities come around.  Retaining the best staff you can possibly get will almost certainly pay for itself ten times over with happy clients who don't have to deal with bureaucratic bullshit, and when they do, they know the person who is responsible for it is likable and competent, and don't complain as much.


Hah.  So, public employees get less rights as employees than private ones?  What about private employees of companies with public contracts?  I'm guessing that you don't think private employees should have the right to bargain either.   How is having collective bargaining rights holding the public hostage? Hyperbole much? We're bound by the same arbitrators.  Cops and Firefighters can't strike.


So let’s rewrite it this way: “The rich are paid by the government to allocate the resources necessary for you to travel, live your life, and contribute to society.”    That would be more honest, and would show that big business is not the benefactor creating our utilities.  Big money is the current avenue we use to get the work done.    They neither create the job, nor pay for the work in the end.  They are a middle man that is convenient.  And they are using convenience and money to leech what they can from We the People, and the government.


Your very first link says that there's an average fifteen point difference between IQ scores for blacks and whites. A full standard deviation and they have no explanation as to why that is.  It backs up my original point directly. Of course you didn't actually read that.


Ah, I see. You are coming at this from a political standpoint rather than a business one. One can not like Trump and think Zuckerberg is wrong for not going. Your bias is you won't do anything that appears to be supporting Trump, same as Zuckerberg. I have not now nor have I ever voiced support for Trump.   The government has some serious issues with technology and application of technology throughout the various agencies. Most are some sinkhole of bureaucracy that have different standards and systems in place. Not to mention the widespread tech illiteracy. There have been several attempts to change this, though this is the first time those who actually do it for a living have been brought together this way. Zuckerberg's understanding of integration and scalability could be of use in this capacity.   And then you have the tech illiterate making laws about our technology.


Having the receipt at least for a little while does make it easier to correct a mistake, if and when it does happen.  I had an error happen to me some years ago trying to withdraw money from an ATM in a 7-11 somewhere while on vacation (receipt came out, money didn't). Having the receipt made it easier to correct the mistake when I got back from vacation.


You could evaluate the risk exposure of your UK bank reading this post and this other old one. They basically say that UK bank exposure to Greece is less than 6 billions pounds (BOE data), so there is no reason to be worried now. The main issue of this crisis is not the Greek exit from the Euro on its own (it seems to be considered almost a fact by CITI, and by MS at 35% probability, Profumo ex CEO of UNICREDIT, says the possibility are more than 50%) – the main issue is that other countries like Italy and Spain might follow the same fate. If they do, the exposure of many foreign banks (including the UK ones) to their debts is not negligible (191,80 billions pounds for UK banks) moreover other EU banks (even the German ones) exposed to Italy and to Spain will suffer too, and this suffering will be translated into more suffering for UK banks exposed also to Germany and to France. That's why you read Euro doom articles like this one from Paul Krugman (who won a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics.)


"You seem to prefer to trade like I do: ""Buy low, sell high."" But there are some people that prefer a different way: ""Buy high, sell higher."" A stock that has ""just appreciated"" is ""in motion."" That is a ""promise"" (not always kept) that it will continue to go higher. Some people want stocks that not only go higher, but also SOON. The disadvantage of ""buy low, sell high"" is that the stock can stay low for some time. So that's a strategy for patient investors like you and me."


"Yes. [Velocity of money](http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/velocity.asp) and savings rates are two important things economists look at. Note, though, that very little money is enturely taken out of the economy -- cash stuffed under mattresses. When most people ""save"" money (e.g. in a bank account), they're actually loaning it out for someone else to use, in exchange for interest. When your money is in the bank, it's just a number in a ledger."


https://www.google.com/search?q=quarterly+and+annual+financial+report+calendar&oq=quarterly+and+annual+financial+report+calendar&aqs=chrome..69i57.9351j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 The third result on Google is: https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/earnings-calendar/us The fourth result on Google is: https://finance.yahoo.com/calendar/earnings


Slightly better attempt this time around.   However, the linked studies are essentially irrelevant to your bombastic claims; they still fail to backup your idea that literally everybody who consumes cannabis is a degenerate who lives with his/her parents and works a minimum wage job and is a danger to society. That remains an unproven (and unprovable) assertion  And you misunderstood all of previous posts. At no point did I attempt to argue that marijuana is good, bad or indifferent. My point was simply that your generalizations of marijuana consumers are spurious, close-minded and not based on any *real* research. You've yet to provide any counterfactual to that.


You don't really have a lot of money, and that isn't a criticism as much as that you are limited to diversification.  For example, I would estimate you can only have one or two stocks for a buy-write scheme.  Secondly you may be only to buy one fund with a high minimum investment, and a second fund with a smaller minimum investment.  Thirdly there is not a whole lot of money to make a large difference. One options might be to look at iShares since your are with Fidelity.  Trading those are commission free and the minimum investment is one share.  They offer many sector funds. Since you were in a CD ladder you might be looking for stability of principle.  If so you can look at USMV and PFF.  If you can tolerate a little more volatility DGRO. Having said that you seem interested in doing some buy-writes.  Why not mix and match?  Pick a stock, like INTC (for example not a recommendation), and buy-write with half the money and some combination of iShares for the rest.


"Think of yourself as a business with two accounts, ""cash"" and ""net worth"". Your goal is to make money. ""Cash"" is what you need to meet your obligations. You need to pay your rent/mortgage, utilities, buy food, pay for transportation, service debt, etc. If you make $100 a month, and your obligations are $90, you're clearing $10. ""Net worth"" are assets that you own, including cash, retirement savings, investments, or even tangible goods like real property or items you collect with value. The ""pay off debt"" versus ""save money"" debate, in my opinion, is driven by two things, in this order: If you start saving too soon, you'll have a hard time getting by when your car suddenly needs a $500 repair or you need a new furnace. You need to improve your cash flow so that you actually have discretionary income. Pay off those credit cards, then start directing those old payments into savings and investments."


"Economist joke: Bill Gates walks into a bar. Suddenly an owlish looking guy with thick glasses starts cheering and orders drinks for everyone.  The guy at his right says ""What are you so happy about?""  The owlish guy says ""That's Bill Gates! He's the richest man in the world""  ""So?""  ""The average income in this bar just went up several tens of millions of dollars. We're rich!"""


If your main area of ventilation is the kitchen or the bathroom, then roof exhaust fan is one of the best option one can avail. They are designed for forcibly removing odor and steam from these areas. They operate through sucking air from any localized area in your home into an air vent and then transporting that warm and humid air outdoors via a duct.


First, make sure you understand the objective of an ETF.  In some cases, they may use leverage to get a multiple of the index's return that is different than 1.  Some may be ultra funds that go for double the return or double the inverse of the return and thus will try to apply the appropriate leverage to achieve that return. Those that use physical replication can still have a small portion be used to try to minimize the tracking error as there is something to be said for what kind of tracking error do you accept as the fund's returns may differ from the index by some measure. Yes.  For example, if you were to have a fund that had a 50% and -50% return in back to back periods, what would your final return be?  Answer: -25%, which if you need to visualize this, take $1 that then becomes $1.50 by going up 50% and then becomes $.75 by going down 50% in a compounded fashion.  This is where you have to be careful of the risks of leverage as those returns will compound in a possibly negative way.


Let me guess... The ultimate point of the article being about how this time it really is different and how individuals are more incapable now than ever to make wise investment decisions in the market? Might as well just give up and let the pros do it right? Or just buy an index and forget about it?  Sure, okay.   /throws unread paywall'd garbage article in the trash


Since you have a limited time frame i think you can either:


">economists like to just ignore it for the benefits that it offers...  that's what i tend to think- my dad has a phd in economics, he's given me quite a few lectures over the years, and that's the feeling i get from him- he of course refuses to acknowledge it most of the time.  i think the most i've gotten him to concede is, ""yes, it's a game, but if you don't play it, you'll be pushed around by people who do."""


This isn't a very persuasive argument.  Their revenue and profit is based on advertisers paying them for exposure.  If the advertisers don't see actual business value from their Twitter ad buys, they won't buy more in the future.  Twitter's been around for over a decade now, if advertisers are still spending $575M/quarter buying ads, they must be seeing some sort of return on that investment.


"There's a hellova lot to be said for investing in real estate (simple residential real estate), even though it's grandma's advice. The two critical elements are 1) it's the only realistic way for a civilian to get leverage. this is why it almost always blows away ""tinkering in the stock markets"" in the 10-year frame. 2) but perhaps more importantly - it's a really ""enforced"" saving plan. you just have to pay it off every month. There are other huge advantages like, it's the best possible equity for a civilian, so you can get loans in the future to start your dotcom, etc. Try to buy yourself a very modest little flat (perhaps to rent out?) or even something like a garage or storeroom.  Real estate can crash, but it's very unlikely; it only happens in end of the world situations where it won't matter anyway.  When real estate drops say 30% everyone yells about that being a ""crash"" - I've never, ever owned a stock that hasn't had 30% down times. Food for thought!"


"Your money in the bank is yours. If you lose your bank card and forget the account number, it's still yours. It's just harder to prove. If your name is Joe Smith, it might be harder to find your bank account and to prove it's yours.  If ""go to the bank"" means walking into a branch of the bank and walking out with your money fifteen minutes later, that's unlikely to happen. More likely they will give you forms to fill in to maximise chances of finding your account, and tell you what evidence to bring to prove that you are the owner of the account."


"People always tell me, ""If you don't like it, why don't you leave???""   Now Burger King takes their advice, and the same people completely lose their shit.  So which is it, people? If you don't like it, leave; or stay here no matter what? You can't have it both ways."


People with credit cards tend to have better credit than those who only have debit cards. People with better credit tend to not abuse such things as car rentals. It costs money for any company to run your credit. It doesn't cost a rental company any outflow of money to reject debit cards. So the possession of a credit card becomes a stand-in for running your credit before you rent a car.


Right! He actually plans on selling it and getting a car to save on fuel and cut down the payment a few hundred a month. The problem is, he bought it last June and we still like nearly a year before we are allowed to trade it in. But we are more than ready for that day to come! Lol


Many economists think that in a free market there would be more insider trading as they're able to more efficiently transmit pricing signals to the rest of the market.  Can you come up with an argument how insider trading makes markets less free? What exactly is your definition of a free market?


Ive driven more than enough loads up there. Its ridiculous how influential walmart is up there.  But Tyson has plenty of other contracts, and theyre moving away from relying on walmart. I dont know about JB because i never worked for them directly.


"When processing credit/debit cards there is a choice made by the company on how they want to go about doing it.  The options are Authorization/Capture and Sale. For online transactions that require the delivery of goods, companies are supposed to start by initially Authorizing the transaction.  This signals your bank to mark the funds but it does not actually transfer them.  Once the company is actually shipping the goods, they will send a Capture command that tells the bank to go ahead and transfer the funds.  There can be a time delay between the two actions.  3 days is fairly common, but longer can certainly be seen.  It normally takes a week for a gas station local to me to clear their transactions. The second one, a Sale is normally used for online transactions in which a service is immediately delivered or a Point of Sale transaction (buying something in person at a store).  This action wraps up both an Authorization and Capture into a single step. Now, not all systems have the same requirements.  It is actually fairly common for people who play online games to ""accidentally"" authorize funds to be transferred from their bank.  Processing those refunds can be fairly expensive.  However, if the company simply performs an Authorization and never issues a capture then it's as if the transaction never occurred and the costs involved to the company are much smaller (close to zero) I'd suspect they have a high degree of parents claiming their kids were never authorized to perform transactions or that fraud was involved.  If this is the case then it would be in the company's interest to authorize the transaction, apply the credits to your account then wait a few days before actually capturing the funds from the bank.   Depending upon the amount of time for the wait your bank might have silently rolled back the authorization.  When it came time for the company to capture, then they'd just reissue it as a sale. I hope that makes sense.  The point is, this is actually fairly common.  Not just for games but for a whole host of areas in which fraud might exist (like getting gas)."


">""Governments should be more honest about the size of their debts and young voters would be wise to get politicians to pay them off as soon as possible""  ""Wise""?  That would mean that they'd have to pay for the perks they get as *well* as for the perks that their parents financed with debt.  Easier to just unload the debt on their kids."


Hart's answer regarding the difference between an index and a stock aside, remember that dividend yield is a passive measure.  It takes the announced dividend (which is a $/share amount) and divides it by the current market price.   So you can't assume that if you buy a stock that had a dividend yield of 4% for $100 that you're guaranteed 4% of the stock price in dividends.  If the price of the stock doubles, you'd still get $4, but the yield would drop to 2%.  Or the company could reduce (or even suspend) its dividends, which would reduce the yield if the stock price stayed flat. For an index like the S&P, it's easier to measure dividends on % yield terms rather then $/share terms since you'd have to own shares in every single company to get that amount, but on average the stocks in the S&P 500 pay X% in dividends (which are typically quarterly) - some pay more than that, some less, and some none at all.


Interesting.  How would they account for it? Monthly? And if so do they modify the cost basis for each lot for the month and then restate?   It's hard to imagine they do that.   I have a million questions regarding this topic do you know where in the regs it is covered?


I hear you there.  Say the wax seal on your toilet exploded; are you going to wait 3-5 business days to get a replacement?   Same with a water heater, an appliance...heck I was in the garden poking around last month and on a whim decided I needed a different setup for my tomato cages; 15 minutes later I'm back from HD and my tomatoes have never felt more supported lol...


"Also, do not trust anyone who phones you up. If someone phones up, claiming to be your bank, and trying to ""sort out this situation""; how do you know it's your bank? You've given the scammer your phone number - it could be the scammer calling. Only discuss this with someone at the bank when you have phoned them."


"As I understand your scenario, you paid the contractor twice for cabinets - Once by paying the $20k in cash on the original contract and once ""in-kind"" by providing the cabinets yourself.  The $20k that you got from the contractor is not income to you, it's just a refund of your overpayment. I don't think you need to report that at all.  Just make sure that you can document that the check that you got back from the contractor matches what you paid for the cabinets and keep that record."


I once worked on creating a payroll system that essentially automated the process for a company of 40k employees. There were 2 coders working for 18 months and we put 12 payroll people out of a job when we were finished. Needless to say once they realized what we were doing the work environment became quite uncomfortable.


I find it somewhat doubtful that the US economy will grow by less than 16 billion in the next 33 years. 33 years ago the US had a GDP of just 4 Trillion. Yes i know that growth has slowed down considerably but I just don't see how the US economy will fail to double in such a long period of time.   Hell from 2015 to 2016 the US economy grew 530 billion dollars to 18.57 Trillion dollars. Assuming Growth stopped and we simply increased our GDP by that much every year we'd increase by that much in 33 years. But that's unlikely to happen over the long period and since growth is compounding I see us easily staying ahead of India. China only gets past us on PPP seeing as their nominal economy was practically flat last year due to a slump in the renimbi.


An option gives you the option rather than the obligation to buy (or sell) the underlying so you don't have to exercise you can just let the option expire (so long it doesn't have an automatic expiry). After expiration the option is worthless if it is out of the money but other than that has no hangover. Option prices normally drop as the time value of the option decays. An option has two values associated with it; time value and exercise value. Far out of the money (when the price of the underlying is far from the strike price on the losing side) options only have time value whereas deep in the money options (as yours seems to be) has some time value as well as the intrinsic value of the right to buy (sell) at a low (high) price and then sell (buy) the underlying.  The time value of the option comes from the possibility that the price of the underlying will move (further) in your favour and make you more money at expiry. As expiry closes it is less likely that there will be a favourable mood so this value declines which can cause prices to move sharply after a period of little to no revaluing. Up to now what I have said applies to both OTC and traded options but exchange traded options have another level of complexity in their trading; because there are fewer traders in the options market the size of trade at which you can move the market is much lower. On the equities markets you may need to trade millions of shares to have be substantial enough to significantly move a price, on the options markets it could be thousands or even hundreds. If these are European style options (which sounds likely) and a single trading entity was holding a large number of the exchange traded options and now thinks that the price will move significantly against them before expiry their sell trade will move the market lower in spite of the options being in the money. Their trade is based on their supposition that by the time they can exercise the option the price will be below the strike and they will lose money. They have cashed out at a price that suited them and limited what they will lose if they are right about the underlying. If I am not correct in my excise style assumption (European) I may need more details on the trade as it seems like you should just exercise now and take the profit if it is that far into the money.


"That's true, but that is what that means. That seems like fair usage.   If I have meatballs labeled ""made with 100% chicken"" then obviously they include non-chicken ingredients. Besides, there are ingredient listings, and while there are things that can be left off, they must be in extremely low concentrations. If it's got soy in it, then that's stated in the ingredients (and in this example, called out yet again because it's a common allergen)."


The steel buildings are quite advantageous and gaining a sheer popularity in the construction industry. The options offered by it is enticing people to equip them in their regular life. Along with stability and strength, affordability also becomes a point and the best part


"I make great money (especially for being a new college grad), have a great work life balance (if you spend much more than 8 or 9 hours at work you get some weird looks and maybe a sit down  to discuss why you're working so much), but I don't have a nap room or a coffee bar or a dry cleaner at work.   You can keep your ""culture"". I'll take my free time."


......seriously? There is no need for me to continue to argue with a brick wall. Go kill yourself you intolerant shit head (note I didn't say racist, but you are that too). It's the only way to get away from all the evil Muslims out to get you. Make sure you tell the rest of /r/the_Donald to join you.


What about barriers to entry due to the complexity of business coupled with the market size of existing players?  Try starting a company that manufactures airliners. Let me know how far you get. You should be able to compete with the 2 existing companies worldwide - surely they have grown fat off their oligopolistic positions?


“Was it luck? I don’t know, maybe, I’m not sure it really matters,” said Mike Rosen, chief investment officer at Angeles Investment Advisors, who has put money into Och-Ziff’s credit-opportunities fund. “I do want to invest in lucky people -- that’s better than investing with unlucky people.”  OK.