vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
There is no research or scientific data to arrive at how much in Single Fund is good, how much is more risky. Its a question of risk appetite, how much money if you loose you are fine. This is similar to making a decision as to how much diversified should a portfolio be ... i.e. what mix of FD/Mutual Funds/Shares/Gold/Real Estate one should have.
"A good answer to the question really depends on where you want to live, ultimately. Where you want to live pretty much dictates your investment priorities. If you want to invest in ""terrain"" so you can build a house next to all the ""cool,"" people in Guayaquil that should be your first priority. Your new wife may have an opinion on that matter, you should consult her. In real life, most people are less concerned about their absolute level of wealth than with ""keeping up"" with their friends, or other reference group. If you don't buy the ""terrain,"" the danger is that in five years, it may go up three, four, five times and be out of your reach, even if your other investments do well on the absolute standard.  While it's fairly easy to invest the equivalent of $250K in Ecuadorian land, it's hard to invest that much in Ecuadorian stocks. If you want to buy stocks with that kind of money, it will be U.S., European, or maybe other Latin American, e.g., Brazilian stocks. That kind of asset allocation would tell me that you are thinking of leaving your country at some point. If you're ""undecided,"" a sensible allocation might be 50-50. But in any event, first decide how you want to live your life, then adopt the investment strategy that best supports that life."
Beer fridge This is the principle motivation behind why it is critical that you cover the surveys and correlation of those models and sorts of the brew ice chest that you are truly considering. Via painstakingly considering the data and perspectives of other individuals you will have the capacity to incorporate into your determination procedure different factors, for example, sizes and shapes, limits, hues, outline points of interest and limits and execution proficiency, support and repair and numerous others.
Deciding the business valuation Minneapolis isn’t an easy task and this requires a perfect graph. While you have decided on the values you need to avoid the following four don’ts that will save you from suffering any loss in the selling process. Click below:
There are a few factors I like to consider when I'm reasoning financially over my households cars. How many KMs will the car travel each year because I like to factor in how often tires will need to be changed, how much tires for my models cost as well as how gas efficient they are. Knowing how much the car is driven and in what environmental/road conditions is also important factors to know because that will help guestimate possible repairs cost. Also possible taxes should be taken in to consideration. For example a few years ago I had a diesel Citroen C5 that had yearly taxes of roughly 500$. The replacement costs only 150$ a year in taxes. So switching cars 3 years early would have saved me 1050$ in taxes. So some information on possible taxes, how far you drive each year, what environmental conditions, type of driving (daily long rides or just short etc..) as well as the fuel efficiency of both cars would help to better calculate your costs for say three scenarios. Car change in 12, 24 and 32 months respectively.
Financial advisers like to ask lots of questions and get nitty-gritty about investment objectives, but for the most part this is not well-founded in financial theory.  Investment objectives really boils down to one big question and an addendum.  The big question is how much risk you are willing to tolerate.  This determines your expected return and most characteristics of your portfolio. The addendum is what assets you already have (background risk).  Your portfolio should contain things that hedge that risk and not load up on it.  If you expect to have a fixed income, some extra inflation protection is warranted.  If you have a lot of real estate investing, your portfolio should avoid real estate.  If you work for Google, you should avoid it in your portfolio or perhaps even short it. Given risk tolerance and background risk, financial theory suggests that there is a single best portfolio for you, which is diversified across all available assets in a market-cap-weighted fashion.
Time is money. If those hours spent researching to save $3 made you a better profit than you would have otherwise had buying the more expensive product and using the rest of the time to make more than $3, then you came out on top. If you consider this general premise in every spending decision you make, you should always feel that you made the right choice.
"how do I decide which model to purchase so that I get maximum amount of utility considering how much money I would have to pay?"" You should have a fixed budget for buying a TV, based on a small portion of your available cash, and not spend more."
Your risk management process can be as simple or as complex as you choose to make it, but there are five key elements you should concentrate on getting right to ensure effectiveness. Get these wrong and the rest of the exercise is a waste of time.
Everyone should keep track of what they spend. When you see how much you are spending on each category of expense, you can make good decisions about how much your life is improved by something vs. how much you spend on that thing.  Everyone makes better decisions when they are informed by accurate information about those decisions. There's no reason why personal finances are different from any other decision you make in life. This remains true whether you make very little or very much. Some people define rich as being able to live on less money than you earn.
What the people believe is fairly important in a team. Are you an atheist? How well do you think you'd work within a team of fundamentalist Christians?  Philosophy applies to cost benefit analysis, you want to build a team that are going to work together the best, this includes being likeable to one another.
In general, things to look for are: Things to look out for: I'd recommend two places: I'd recommend reading up on HSA's in this related question here.
In addition to stoj's two good points I'll add a couple more reasons: 3)  In some situations there are secondary factors involved that can make it a good deal.  These normally amount to cases where you can buy the insurance with pre-tax dollars but would have to pay the bills with post-tax dollars. 4)  Insurance companies know much better what things should cost and often have negotiated rates.  A rich person would generally be well-served to have health insurance for this very reason.
"The words ""good"" and ""bad"" are evaluations and are the conclusions which you reach after a chain of thought.  You look at the situation, you identify the problem, you think of a solution, and you offer an evaluation.  So, when you call a policy ""good"", you jump over any analysis tied to context and facts straight to a conclusion.  Absent the thinking which helped you reach the conclusion, the conclusion itself is worthless.  So, statements like ""Taxing the rich more is a good policy"" are equivalent to saying [""Fire bad!""](http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-segment---frankenstein/n10838?snl=1)  Ultimately, they just tell us how you feel about the policy.  We don't care how you feel about it, we care how you think."
You will find lots of rules of thumb but there is no universal truth to how much you should save. There are factors you DO need to consider though: you should start as early as possible to set money aside for retirement. You should then use a retirement calculator to at least get an understanding of the amount you need to set aside each month to achieve the desired retirement income; your default should be not to spend money and only spend money when you must. Leisure, travel and eating out should come last after you have saved up; you should have funds for different terms. For example, my wife and I have an emergency fund for unexpected expenses or losses in income. The rule of thumb here generally is to have 3-6 months of salary saved up. A longer term fund should be created for larger expenses like buying a car or preparing the cashdown on a property. Finally, the retirement fund which should cover your needs after you have retired.
I would suggest tracking income accurately for several months. Then you will have a real number (not a guess) of what an average month is. Then, you can budget on that. You will also have real numbers that allow you to calculate how long the bad stretches are, and thus determine how much cash reserve is necessary to make the odds of going broke in a bad period unlikely. Having that, you can make a budget based on average income, which should have some allowance for enjoying life. Of course initially the cash reserve doesn't exist, but knowing exactly what will happen when it does provides a good motivation for building the reserve rather than spending it today. Knowing that the budget includes rules for spending the reserves reduces the incentive to cheat. Of course, the eventual budget should also include provisions for long term savings for retirement, medical expenses, car maintenance, etc. You can do the envelope thing if that's helpful. The point here is to solve the problem of the variable income, so you can have an average income that doesn't result in a budget that delivers a soul crushing decrease in quality of living."
"Lots of good answers here about budgeting and other ideas.  Here's a couple more: Think about offense and defense.  Offense is how much money you make.  Are you making enough to survive on?  Is there a way you could bring in more income?  Defense is what you do with your money.  Do you have expensive habits?  Do you have problems with impulse spending?  Do you live in an expensive area with a high cost-of-living?  Think about some of these areas and pick one to attack first. If it is the defense side that is causing you problems (you did mention trying to live on less), consider reading Your Money or Your Life by Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin.  There's a really good summary of it on the authors' site.  The basic idea of the mechanical part of the book is that you figure out how much you're truly making per hour, and then evaluate your expenses based on how many hours of your ""life energy"" you are using for that expense.  Then you evaluate whether you think that's a fair trade or not.  There's a lot more to it than that, but it's an interesting way to get a different perspective on your spending habits, and may be enough to entice you to change those habits."
"good vs ""bad"" debt in the context of that post. At least in the UK this can be a good tactic to reduce the cost of credit card debt. Some things to consider"
There is a downside to good outcomes, which is that it can cause us to be blind to just how extremely different is the experience of others. Not all experience such terrible outcomes - but many hundreds of thousands in the US alone - do, and sometimes worse. It is not helpful to be unrealistic about this: life is not inherently kind. However, none of this suggests that being co-dependent or giving up your own financial well-being is necessary or advised to help others. Share your budgeting strategies, your plans for the future, your gentle concerns, and give of your time and resources as generously as you can - within your own set budgets and ensuring your own financial well-being. And most of all - do not so easily give up on your family and friends, and count them as life-long hopeless ne'er-do-wells. Let's all strive to be good, kind, honest, and offer non-judgmental support and advice to the best of our ability to the people we care about. It is ultimately their choice - restricted by their own experiences and abilities - but need not be fate. People regularly disappoint, but sometimes they surprise and delight. Take care of yourself, and give others the best chance you can, too."
Coolness - It's not only a matter of staying calm when being up or down. You must keep yourself from chasing a stock that appears to be running away. Or from betting all your money that something(like say a crash) will happen tomorrow because that would be great for you. Use your head not your heart. Empathy - You need to understand what other speculators, investors, institutions and algorithms are going to do when there is a new development or technical signal. And why. For publicly traded corporations, fundamentals and technical indicators only have the value that people(and their algorithms) choose to assign to them at that particular moment. And every stock has a different population trading it. There is no rule of thumb. Patience - To trade successfully, you must avoid trading at all costs. Heh. If you can't find any good trade to do, don't open positions in order to meet your targets, buy a new smartphone, or to fight boredom. Diligence - If your strategy relies on tight stops, don't make exceptions. If your strategy relies on position sizing, don't close when you are a few points down. Luck - In the end almost every trade can turn against you very badly. You must prepare for the worst and hope for the best. You can't buy luck, or get luckier, but you can attempt to stack probabilities: diversify, buy options to insure your positions, reduce holding time, avoid known volatility events, etc.
There is no rule of thumb (although some may suggest there is). Everybody will have different goals, investment preferences and risk tolerances. You need to figure this out by yourself by either education yourself in the type of investments you are interested in or by engaging (and paying for) a financial advisor. You should not be taking advice from others unless it is specifically geared for your goals, investment DNA and risk tolerance. The only advice I would give you is to have a plan (whether you develop it yourself or pay a financial advisor to develop one). Also, don't have all your savings sitting in cash, as long-term you will fall behind the eight ball in real returns (allowing for inflation).
I think there are similar downsides to creative careers though.  When everything you do is subjective, it can be just as bad.  Creative decisions are based on intangible thought processes, so instead of having endless powerpoints explaining a decision with data, you have endless powerpoints that have no practical, logical drive at all.  Source: worked for a major media company.
A guy who does a sports talk show here in the US can be pretty smart about some things.  His advice:  If you are wondering if something is a good idea, say it out loud.  In his book he cites the fact that people thought, at one time, it would be a good idea to allow smoking on airline flights.  Keep in mind you are using liquid oxygen, news paper, and are 10,000+ feet up in the air.  Say it like that and you hit yourself in the forehead. Read the title of your question in a day or two, and you can answer it yourself with a resounding NO.
Think of your stupid, most incompetent friend.  Now think if you want them to support themselves, if you want to personally support them for the rest of their lives, or if you want them to die so they aren't a burden.  That's really what it all boils down to.  Even if we make the assumption that the person's bad results are due to their stupid decisions (not due to their stupid biology but their stupid choices),  then the answer is what?  They die, somebody else takes care of them, they take care of themselves.  If taking care of yourself requires a really good brain, excellently made choices, and a superior work attitude, then a lot of people will fail.   If taking care of yourself can be done with a poor brain, a variety of bad choices, and a simple willingness to work, then a lot of people will succeed.
The final decision must be made by you, but from personal finance perspective it's the high risk investment. The first consideration is, do you have enough money to invest? You need money for much more that 7 months, because the money won't flow immediately. At best you should have finantial reserves for 18-24 months. The second, do you wish to risk? You can place a deadline, for example if after 18 months you're still on minus, you give up and return to the normal work. It will mean you've worked for 18 months for nothing, while having expences, so it's effectively a lost.
There's probably a risk committee and an investment committee where several high level executives analyze and discuss the investments they will do and which risk level to take.  Is all based on numbers and evidence, but in the end people decide how much risk to take.  Then there Risk Management I suppose supervises the risk and that they don't go over the threshold (measured by VAR or whatever)
I really think /r/personalfinance would be a better platform for this, there's people there who deal with this all the time. I would repost this question there with the additional information;   1. Your age 2. Your savings, including IRAs/401ks 3. Total amount of all debt, including credit card and student loans 4. Your income 5. Your future plans (plans to retire? to which country? back to school?) 6. Your family situation (married / unmarried, kids / no kids)  All of these things impact any financial decisions you might have, that's why personal financial advisors exist.
Mutual Funds are relatively evaluated and this is likely what you want.  Your answer is likely the information ratio.  If your interested, Active Portfolio Management by Grinold, Kahn is probably a good book to read.  That  being said, hedge funds will generally have absolute mandates and will be more likely to use a sharpe ratio.
Ask the folks administering your plan. They're the ones who define and implement the available choices for that specific plan.
You work backwards. A top-down budget. i.e. 'bottom-up' is to list what you want, and perhaps find that there's nothing left for retirement savings, top-down divides from your gross income down to each expense. Say you make $60000/yr, $5000/mo. $1250 is about what you can spend on housing. You can go with the smallest apartment you can tolerate, a tiny 2 BR with roommate, or get the biggest apartment or house you can afford for this money.  In the end, this question may be closed as 'opinion-based.' It's not simple to answer and it's more about your own preferences. Quality of life is more than your house/apt size. I've known people who lived in tiny spaces, and used public transportation, but took 3 week-long trips each year. Others who lived in big houses, drove fancy cars, and somehow when their first kid entered high school, realized they had saved nothing for college.  Decide on your own priorities and tilt the budget to reflect that.
Being the geek that I am, I actually developed a financial model of a few different career/salary scenarios when I graduated in 2000. While it may not matter from a financial POV, it's a nice thing to reference later on to help you stick with your financial goals. My recommendation would be to not factor in inflation upfront... build a model based on the current value of money. You course-correct things in the future when inflation starts kicking in. Also, your retirement income requirements will vary dramatically depending on other decisions that you make. (ie. kids, mortgage, college, etc) If achieving the lifestyle that you desire 10, 20, or 30 years down the road looks difficult because your salary isn't keeping up with your earnings/savings goals, you need to either re-evaluate your priorities or look for better compensation.
Good health is only partly luck. Eating right, exercise, moderate drinking, getting vaccines, and not smoking are all choices that make a huge impact. Sure there are just people with bad genes but for the average person those choices make a bigger difference.
Why is it important?  Are you saying Lewis gets credit for correctly identifying the person to befriend, based on their likelihood of helping him?  You're talking about assisting factors *likely* to help while avoiding the ones likely to harm you.  Lewis made dumb choices twice and was still successful. Even then, the 'big shot' might have turned out to be Murdoch or Conrad Black, and earned him a trip to jail.   Either way, the factors involved are ultimately out of your control however much you encourage them.
"Perhaps, but you could make a similar case against many many things, like alcohol. Non drinkers would probably consider it completely net negative, but most casual drinkers positive. Which segment of society gets to make the ""moral"" decisions? If straight majority then you get potentially 49% unhappy people.   I believe that if people truly had to pay for the consequences of their actions, they would make smarter decisions. Of course that means that people need access to accurate information."
"I spend hours researching two comparable products to try to save $3. Me too! I have also argued for hours with customer support to get $5/month off a bill (that's $60/year!), and I feel guilty every time I eat out or do something remotely luxurious, like getting fries with my $1 McChicken. Geez, even when I play video games, I hate spending the in-game currency. For me, it's obsessive-compulsive traits that cause it, but please note that I'm not claiming @Eddie has them. Just speaking for myself here, but I hope it helps. I still struggle with my miserliness, but I can share what works for me and what doesn't. I don't think I'm valuing my time nearly as much as I should. Me neither, but knowing that doesn't help; it makes it worse. For me, putting a dollar amount on how much I value my time does not work because that just complicates the problem and amplifies how much time I spend solving that multi-variable optimization problem. Consider trying to convince Monk not to avoid germs in order to build antibodies; it just makes him think more about germs, raising anxiety and making easy decisions (use a handkerchief to touch doorknobs) into a hard decision (should I touch it or should I not?). It also amplifies the regret whenever you finally make a certain choice (""what if I did the calculation wrong?"" or ""what if I'm going to get sick tomorrow because I touched that doorknob?""). Making the problem more complicated isn't the solution. So how to make it simpler? Make the decision ahead of time! For me, budgets are the key to reducing the anxiety associated with financial decision making. Every six months or so, my wife and I spend hours deciding how much to spend per month on things. We can really take our time analyzing it because we only have to do it occasionally. Once we set $50/month for restaurants, I no longer have to feel like a loser every time we eat out -- similarly for discretionary spending and everything else.
Neither I nor the greater study of Economics disputes the emotions of the individual in making their decisions.  Short term, non-cooperative decision making is a classic, very common example of where people make decisions in the short run that do not benefit them in the long run based on their emotional reaction to the situation at hand. Thats why we compensate people for the value of their labor and not our moralistic interpretation of their needs.  I also have disputed the generosity of individuals in making their decisions, which you have failed again and again and again to rebut.  I have also disputed the use of false morality in state level judgements of what people should do.
Healthcare - can they go directly on to your health insurance, and at what cost? And get those immunisations lined up to ensure no later illnesses that can be expensive and avoidable. Education - how are the schools in your area and what is the schools policy?  Should you be considering moving and how long in advance?  Your first choice may have a long waiting list, even for pre-schools.  All these can have an impact on the investment in your current home. Child-proofing - how safe is your existing home and will you need to invest in some child-proofing (stairs, cupboards, basements, electricity outlets)?