vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Thanks /u/LupusSuperius . Great information. Do you have any terms  or articles(perhaps on investopedia or similar)you can recommend I search for how much debt is ideal to take on for a start up?  I'd like to learn more instead of getting you to do my homework if that makes sense.  My simulation is similar to Capsim. We've made two strategic decisions: 1. We went capital intensive in the first year to build up factory capacity. Year 1 we have very little R&amp;D, but year 2 we plan to increase R&amp;D budget.   Since it is a capital intensive year, should that capital expenditure be funded by debt entirely and I leave equity alone? I noticed this drives down my WACC, but I see a decrease in NPV because of increased interest payments. Also does it make sense to increase the debt to pay for R&amp;D as well? The way I see it paying for the manufacturing plant on debt isn't bad because you get an asset out of it at the end, but paying for a R&amp;D program seems foolish because in this simulation there's a chance your R&amp;D program fails and does not provide results, so we would  see no return on the debt in that case.   Thanks again.
"Environmental disaster, *intentional* environmental disaster and conspiracy to defeat regulatory compliance measures, overtly helping Iran and Mexican cartels circumvent sanctions...  vs...  Overly-aggressive marketing tactics.   I dunno man, I'm just having trouble putting these in the same category.  That last one looks an *awfully* lot like being guilt of ""succeeding while American""."
Yes, Lending Club is the biggest of the bunch, which to date have helped originate $1B of loans. LC just raised more money (bringing total to $100M) and Mary Meeker joined the board. There's a novelty aspect to it b/c it's new but it's just the beginning of parts of the banking industry/process/institutions being disintermediated.   Low vol is an easy sell, actually. If investors aren't being paid for risk, why assume it?
"From https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Banc: Banq (also Banc, banc-corp, bancorp, or bancorporation) is an intentionally erroneous spelling of the word bank, but pronounced the same way. It has been adopted by companies which are not banks but wish to appear as such, and satisfy legal restrictions on the usage of the word bank. ... For instance, if the original company is known as Bank of America, then the new investment banking entity may be known as Banc of America Securities LLC. If the original company is known as Bank of Manhattan, then its insurance business might be known as ""Banc of Manhattan Insurance"" and its holding company might be called ""Manhattan Bancorp"". This practice originates from legal necessity: Under the laws of most states, a corporation may only use the word ""bank"" in its name if it has obtained a banking charter under state or federal banking laws. So, ""Banc of America"" is the subsidiary of BoA that doesn't have appropriate licenses to be called ""bank"". Wonders of complex regulation :)"
In 2011 fraudulent certificates were obtained from Comodo and DigiNotar[4][5], allegedly by Iranian hackers. There is evidence that the fraudulent DigiNotar certificates were used in a man-in-the-middle attack in Iran.[6]   In 2012, it became known that Trustwave issued a subordinate root certificate that was used for transparent traffic management (man-in-the-middle) which effectively permitted an enterprise to sniff SSL internal network traffic using the subordinate certificate.[7]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority#Subversion_of_CA
The title is a tool to open opportunities and educate you in a specialized manner (with the CFA being even more specialized than MBA's). Once again... You have fully deviated from your original point of trying to say CFA charterholders are more common and less valuable than MBA's. The bottom line is there are 100,000 total charterholders in the world (according to the CFAI). Fewer than half of which are located in the US. That is 10-20 years worth of MBA target school grads and doesn't take into consideration the number of MBA's that pursued CFA's nor the number of CFA Charter holders that have gone on into academia (a much larger number of CFA's move into academia than target school MBA's)... not to mention the total number of MBA's that have worked their way into roles over the years. I can guarantee there are more MBA's than that in this industry. The BB's alone employ upwards of 1.1 million. To say that less than 5% of those employed at BB's hold a MBA is absurd... even for back office standards."
"&gt;Unyielding Realism in the Climate Debate! CO2 is a Product of Human Breath, Not A Pollutant! CO2 is A Plant Food!  Climate Change Has Been Going On Forever!   &gt;Any actions having the intent to aid the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to inflict harm on the US, including alleging that IPCC texts have any authority on the territory of the United States or in respect to the United States, committed by a person owing his or her loyalty to the United States, might constitute **treason**, as defined in 18 U.S. Code § 2381.  great source OP.  ""samizdat"" eh?"
"Certain phrases are blacklisted, I am not 100% about tithing but it might be they don't want any flak about people claiming that Wells Fargo is the one tithing (with a religious connotation) Either that or a super conservative ban on ""tit"", but I would guess the former more likely."
"Why isn't the above the business model of a loan? It is the model of some types of loans. It's called a ""Line of credit"" (LOC). I have two them, one for my business, and one for me personally. (Why does this question exist:) Is it an 30-year loan or a 10-year loan? As you mentioned, the concept of term doesn't exist for these types of loans. As long as I pay the interest and don't go over the max of my credit limit, I could keep the money indefinitely. Due to this, lines of credit almost always have a variable interest rate. (In the US they are tied to the Prime rate.) (Why does this question exist:) If you pay extra, do you want the extra to go toward the interest or toward the principal? Again, this concept also doesn't exist with a LOC. There is a minimum payment that you must make each month, but there is nothing that prevents you from making the minimum payment and then immediately taking the exact payment you made back out again. Of course this increases the total you owe, and eventually you would hit your maximum credit limit and would no longer be able to take the full payment back out. Years ago I maxed out my business line and didn't have enough money to make the payment so my bank was nice enough to raise my limit for me (so I could take enough out to make the payment), but if I did that multiple times I'm sure they would have eventually said no. Fortunately my clients finally paid me and I paid off the line, but I still keep the LOC today even though I rarely use it. By the way, beyond traditional LOCs, they also exist in other forms, both secured and unsecured. A common secured product in the US is a 2nd lien holder to a home (the first being the mortgage), called a HELOC (Home Equity Line Of Credit). Many banks also offer unsecured LOCs on a checking account which they sometimes call ""overdraft protection"".
Fortunately my clients finally paid me and I paid off the line, but I still keep the LOC today even though I rarely use it. By the way, beyond traditional LOCs, they also exist in other forms, both secured and unsecured. A common secured product in the US is a 2nd lien holder to a home (the first being the mortgage), called a HELOC (Home Equity Line Of Credit). Many banks also offer unsecured LOCs on a checking account which they sometimes call ""overdraft protection"". Update: based on a comment to this answer, I now realize that the full question now becomes something similar to: Given that the Line of Credit loan model exists, why aren't all loans like this? or, refining it further: What advantages do other loan types have over the Line of Credit model, specifically finite term loans? A main advantage of a term loan over a line of credit is that the bank knows when they will get the money back. If every loan a bank made was a LOC product, and no one ever paid it back, then they'd eventually run out of money. That's obviously an oversimplification but the principle (pun intended) holds. To prevent this the bank would have to call due the loan, and doing this usually leaves customers angry. Years ago I had a business LOC with a bank that discontinued their business LOC product, and called every customer's loan due. I had a balance and they offered to convert it to a 5 year term loan, which I did, but I was so mad at them that I switched banks and paid off the term loan shortly after. Another advantage of a term loan is it forces the customer to be a little more responsible. Lines of credit can be dangerous for those that misuse it because if the amount owed is driven up due to bad behavior, there is nothing to force the bad behavior to stop. A perfect example of this can be found with governments. Some governments borrow money until their line of credit is used up, and then they just keep increasing their credit limit. There is no incentive for the officials in charge of the government to stop doing this because it isn't even their money.
I am a trader for a large financial services firm.  Years ago, I got my CFA charter because I didn't have a finance background (I studied computer science).  I learned a bit about all aspects of finance and my trading profits definitely improved.  I also like principles and ethics associated with being a charter holder.  However, I already had a very good job and didn't *need* the credential.  I would recommend you stick with it!  It is a testament to yourself when you successfully complete tough tasks.
Btw, BE CAREFUL, you dont get suckered into some Northwestern Mutual job where they sell your family and drop you a day later.  Like I said in my earlier posts, a series 7 is a SELL SIDE cert dude.  This means selling something, investments, insurance, trading, etc.  Know what you are going to get into before you do it.
"A 'indexed guaranteed income certificate' (Market Growth GIC) fits the criteria defined in the OP. The ""guaranteed"" part of the name means that, if the market falls, your capital is guaranteed (they cover the loss and return all your capital to you); and the ""index linked"" or ""market growth"" means that instead of the ROI being fixed/determined when you buy the GIC, the ROI depends on (is linked to) the market growth, e.g. an index (so you get a fraction of profit, which you share with the fund manager). The upside is that you can't 'lose' (lose capital). The fund manager doesn't just share the losses with you, they take/cover all the losses. The downside is that you only make a fraction of whatever profit you might make by investing directly in the market (e.g. in an index fund). Another caveat is that you buy a GIC over some fixed term, e.g. you have to give them you money for a year or more, two years."
Not clear what you're asking.  Are you trying to figure out their SIC/NAISC classification?  That tells you the business category they fall into, but there's no simple, instant way to find that out.  Much also depends on how the credit card issuer has classified them and how they arrived at that information. They may have a different means of classifying merchants, so you might try to call your bank and ask them, if they're able/willing to tell you.  That'll give you a starting point to figure it out, anyway.
"Careful with the ""stock stolen from your account"" thing.  SIPC protects investors against broker/dealer insolvency.  Don't think they provide protection against theft."
&gt;Thank you very much for your reply.  &gt; &gt;I'll look more into the CFA but I have a question - does it require an undergrad degree in finance/accounting to become licensed if you pass? Obviously that's an area that I need to do more research but a great place to start based on your suggestions.   No, you do not need anything but to be in your fourth year or graduate from any undergraduate program. It's a three test process (Level 1/2/3) and it will take you years to become a chartholder. People recommend 4-6 months of study for level one, it is quite difficult. More information on r/CFA, or CFAI's website.  &gt;If I take it in December I'll be 5 months from my masters. In that case it makes more sense to complete the masters because quitting that close to the end really throws a lot away. I know counseling isn't specific to the field, but people skills seem to be the cornerstone of every career.   I don't know enough about counselling to really advise you, nor do I really know about the hiring process or decision criteria. You can ask on wallstreetoasis (WSO)  &gt; I'm more interested in a career that is not as emotionally taxing   Uhhh, I don't know about that, but I really don't know anything about counselling. Can you tell me what a day in the life of a counsellor is like and how you see the career and challenges faced in the industry or by people in your current/future positions?
"The muni bond business .  Are you really too dumb to understand that's how he's referencing it in the article? He's not talking about a specific company or companies numbnuts he's talking about ""The business of muni bonds...i.e the total outstanding municipal bond market."". Try some reading comprehension on for size.        To walk you through it there are multiple uses of the word 'business'.  Among them are the two you're having a real problem with in your reading comprehension.    1.  Business = Company:  I run a dry cleaning business.   2.  Business = Industry:  I am in the dry cleaning business.          What he is (clearly) referring to when he says ""a business worth $3.7 trillion""  is ""business = industry"" in the second manner listed above. You're interpreting it as if he's claiming the first manner.  That's incorrect. Factually and grammatically incorrect.   Yours is the type of ignorance that morons on Reddit rely on to make their arguments work.  I'm done here with you since you don't seem to be able to parse out rudimentary information from an article."
"This question has been absolutely perplexing to me.  It has spawned a few heated debates amongst fellow colleagues and friends. My laymen understanding has provided me with what I believe to be a simple answer to the originator's question.  I'm trying to use common sense here; so be gentle. FICO scores, while very complex and mysterious, are speculatively calculated from data derived from things like length of credit history, utilization, types of credit, payment history, etc. Only a select few know the actual algorithms (closely guarded secrets?).  Are these really secrets? I don't know but it's the word on the street so I'm going with it! Creditors report data to these agencies on certain dates- weekly, monthly or annually.  These dates may be ascertained by simply calling the respective creditor and asking.  Making sure that revolving credit accounts are paid in full during the creditors ""data dump"" may or may not have a positive impact on ones FICO score. A zero balance reported every time on a certain account may appear to be inactive depending on how the algorithm has been written and vice versa; utilization and payment history may outweigh the negativity that a constantly zero balance could imply. Oh Lord, did that last sentence just come out of my head? I reread it four times just make sure it makes sense. My personal experience with revolving credit and FICO I was professionally advised to: Without any other life changing credit instances- just using the credit card in this fashion- my FICO score increased by 44 points.  I did end up paying a little in interest but it was well worth it. Top tier feels great! In conclusion I would say that the answer to this question is not cut and dry as so many would imply. HMMMMM"
Capitalism has become a religion and laze faire capitalism is a fundamentalist death cult within that religion. laze faire capitalism is to Capitalism as ISIS is to Islam. Wealth has become people's God. And I'm glad the Pope is challenging them. There's too much idol worship and dogma and fundamentalism when it comes to Capitalism. And people need to stop acting like regulation and redistributing wealth are blasphemous in all circumstances.﻿
&gt;They would get caught on other crimes, and then rat you out for immunity.  I'm not sure I buy the major premise of that implied syllogism:  Those who commit a crime will commit other crimes.   My friends will be committing a crime.   ∴ My friends will commit other crimes.   Will those who commit a crime necessarily commit other crimes? Perhaps there's a tendency which could be demonstrated, some correlative relationship, but it seems you're assuming that the commission of one crime means there will be commissions of additional crimes.
Take all of the overachieving wannabe investment bankers that you went to college with and stick them in an echo chamber, and you have WSO.     I wouldn't overthink it. As you identified, it's all over the top, and not at all reflective of reality. That said, there is some really insightful content on there from time to time from individuals who really know their stuff (Thebrofessor, blackhat, etc).    Some of the users are legitimately taking the piss though (Dick Fuld...)
My understanding is that EWU (and EWUS) are both traded on US stock markets (NYSE & BATS), and as such these are not classified as PFIC. However, they do contain PFICs, so iShares takes the responsibility of handling the PFICs they contain and make adjustments in December. This contains the information about the adjustments made in 2016. https://www.ishares.com/us/literature/tax-information/pfic-2016.pdf On page 106 of the statement of the summary information they describe how they handle paying the necessary tax as an expense of the fund. https://www.ishares.com/us/library/stream-document?stream=reg&product=WEBXGBP&shareClass=NA&documentId=925898~926077~926112~1180071~1242912&iframeUrlOverride=%2Fus%2Fliterature%2Fsai%2Fsai-ishares-trust-8-31.pdf (I'm not a tax professional)
"&gt; If you are a corporation residing in Canada, you still pay Canadian taxes on worldwide income, even if that income is sourced in another country.  For corporate tax, that's not exactly true see the Foreign Accrual Property Income rules (FAPI). Only for what is considered ""investment business"" income does the company have to pay Canadian taxes on worldwide income. ""Active business"" income, which would but pretty much everything BK is doing, is repatriated tax free like any other inter-company dividend. In the US that active business income would be subject to a CFC tax."
Automated trains are all over the place. CBTC is the standard signalling system for any new installs and most metros are converting to it when their old equipment ages out.  That's the main component required for unattended train operation. Some agencies keep a driver in the train anyway for failures and other problems (most interruptions in North America are customer medical issues) and pausing service on a busy metro line can cost millions per hour.
If this is true, can you explain to me how this deal came to originate itself?  My thoughts are like this:   Tim's looking to expand and grow their company and market share, looking to join or merge into a company.    RBC and Citi step in and help Tim's find the perfect pairing with respect to their priority as a company.  RBC and Citi then help Tim's sell themselves TO BK?  The real question is: since 3G Capital are really the ones that are pulling the strings on this deal, are they just outsourcing all the analysis work to Lazard JP and Wells Fargo?   P.S I would really like to know more on how deals like these are handled and who does the advising/analysis for who, and etc.
"In a domestic setting, Letters of Credit are often used to build public works needed to support a development.  So if you're bulldozing a few 3 story buildings to build a 50 story tower, the municipality will build appropriate water/sewer/gas/road infrastructure, and draw from the developer's letter of credit to fund it. The 'catch' to the developer is that these things usually aren't revokable -- once the city/town/etc starts work, the developer cannot cut-off the funding, even if the  project is cancelled. A letter of credit definitely isn't a consumer financing vehicle. The closest equivalent is a ""line of credit"" tied to an asset like a home."
Also see: http://meyersandheim.com/how-to-win-an-insider-trading-case/ However, between these two extremes of a bystander with no duty to the corporation and a corporate officer with a clear duty to the corporation stood a whole group of people such as printers, lawyers and others who were involved in non-public transactions that did not necessarily have a duty to the company whose securities they traded. To address this group of people the courts developed the misappropriation theory. The misappropriation theory covers people who posses inside information and who are prohibited from trading on such information because they owe a duty to a third party and not the corporation whose securities are traded. Yours is the perfect example. You owe a duty to your employer to operate in its best interests. As for the broader, more common example, where you overhear information in an elevator, restaurant, in line at the coffee shop, etc., trading on such information was found not to be insider trading in SEC v. Switzer: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/590/756/2247092/ In this case, Mr. Switzer overheard information at a track meet and traded on it with profits. The court found: The information was inadvertently overheard by Switzer at the track meet. Rule 10b-5 does not bar trading on the basis of information inadvertently revealed by an insider. On the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, the court orders judgment in favor of defendants.
"Thank you for some specific issues, from a former member.   I see the company I work at making similar motions, hopefully I can start saying things like ""look, here is how that played out at GE""  Currently I'm trying to push the idea of RACI here so we'll see if we can't actually start an improvement.   Edit: and not in response to you, but it's amazing how much push back I got from the generic ""blame the execs"" crowd. Large org are different from family businesses. It seems like people feel it's like running a coffee shop."
It's not enough just to check if your order doesn't exceed 10% of the 20 day average volume. I'll quote from my last answer about NSCC illiquid charges: You may still be assessed a fee for trading OTC stocks even if your account doesn't meet the criteria because these restrictions are applied at the level of the clearing firm, not the individual client. This means that if other investors with your broker, or even at another broker that happens to use the same clearing firm, purchase more than 5 million shares in an individual OTC stock at the same time, all of your accounts may face fees, even though individually, you don't exceed the limits. The NSCC issues a charge to the clearing firm if in aggregate, their orders exceed the limits, and the clearing firm usually passes these charges on to the broker(s) that placed the orders. Your broker may or may not pass the charges through to you; they may simply charge you significantly higher commissions for trading OTC securities and use those to cover the charges.  Since checking how the volume of your orders compares to the average past volume, ask your broker about their policies on trading OTC stocks. They may tell you that you won't face illiquid charges because the higher cost of commissions covers these, or they may give you specifics on how to verify that your orders won't incur such charges. Only your broker can answer this with certainty.