vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"So is it better for people to be jobless vs. make this min wage? I am not being an asshole, because I do agree that it is impossible to live off that kind of wage and it should be a temporary job and not a sustainable one. I am just curious to what people who think ""something has to break to get it fixed"" would say"
Fantasy Land doesn't exist. People who desire the good life, work the hardest. No one who truly understands business would pay great wages for an unskilled worker. If you cannot advance your career where you are, you need to find a new job. If you don't want more responsibility (which comes with more pay), stop your bitching. If your one line, oh so witty, comment is anything like your work ethic, I assume you don't make shit for money.
Check out r/flipping.  It is in line with your original method of accumulating capital, with more complexity and potential for profit.  Many people quit their jobs and do it about 20 hrs per week with better pay, but more risk.  Amazon and Ebay are your pals.
"&gt; I guarantee you that there's someone, somewhere (probably many someones in many somewheres) that would be happy to do your job for a lot less money. Probably, but I am in a very different type of labor market than a Boeing union worker. Firms compete over candidates pretty ruthlessly, and the use of headhunters starts in the first couple months of work - sometimes before you even leave college. I started using a headhunter immediately after junior year ended. Boeings requirements for it's mechanics is ""pass drug test, graduated high school"". The requirements for getting my job were ""attend a top university in the US, have a GPA in the top 5% at your institution, and then beat out on 90,000 other applicants for the fewer than 1,000 slots. The selectivity rate for the job is nearly 6-fold higher than getting into Harvard undergrad. What I'm getting at is that it's not a matter of ""other people would willingly do my job for less"", it's the fact that those people are unable to get my job to begin with as the companies are unwilling to lower their standards and are competing for a very small pool of talent. But the minute they thought that they COULD do so without any ill consequences I know that they would outsource my position to India and I wouldn't blame them for doing it. &gt; Does that mean that all publicly traded companies have a duty to demand tax incentives to not move to North Carolina, or Poland, or Cambodia? My company has found a way to move a lot of it's back office employees out of state to cheaper areas. It is, in fact, the duty of any public company to strive for profit maximization. In the case of Boeing the cost savings over the next 30 years by moving to North Carolina (or Missouri, or whatever) would be incredible, which is why they have spoken about it. &gt;Calling someone overcompensated means that the prevailing wage in the competitive labor market for the same quality of work is lower, not just assuming that someone would be willing to do it if you offered them $40k and a wrench. It is. They are already being paid a lower rate outside of Washington State.
"&gt; is it worth the risk to give up ""guaranteed"" money welding to take the risk and run another location  I think not.  you're acting smarter now than 90%+ of college kids who are clueless and are going to end up flipping MBA burgers  welding is a very in-demand professional skill.  I read recently some earn up to $180,000 per year for mission critical welding like planes, space ships, some military applications, precision equipment etc  plus, there's no reason to commit to anything now.  you have to wait for the man in control to pass along, a new location to be selected and built and nearly open for business for you to think about it  stay the course.  you're doing great"
"Annnd cue the wall-o-text. Hokay, so here ya go. I'm the son of a commercial/industrial plumber who has been in the business for the past 28 years and does ~$2M/yr. in sales. First of all, you need to determine your target market. If he's planning on primarily doing residential work (i.e. fixing toilets, snaking drains et cetera) he may want to re-think things. Residential plumbers are typically not very well-paid, nor are they really well-liked (people assume that you're automatically an idiot or that you are trying to screw them in regards to your pricing). Commercial and industrial plumbing is where any money is at if he doesn't want to have a crew of 30-50 plumbers on-call 24/7, including holidays and weekends. If he's interested in making a lot of money, he's got to first determine if he wants to be an open or closed shop (union status). Having a unionized company can sometimes grant you the ability to be awarded specific contracts for governmental bids on various buildings and schools, but these contracts are typically pretty difficult to get. Also, even if you do get the job, you're contractually obligated to use only unionized labor on the project, which can be to your benefit or to your detriment depending on the worker they send you. The other issue is that if you go for these types of contracts, there are plenty of other companies that you'll be competing against that have been in the business a long time and who already have pretty well set-up contacts for receiving that type of work. Also, as an aside, lettering your truck (putting a decal on the side or anything more than your plumbing license number) is typically union-only. This act typically differentiates unionized companies from non-union companies. Next, he must decide what area of plumbing he wants to specialize in. There is process plumbing, fire sprinkler, medical gas piping, et cetera that he can choose to do that can focus his company into more of a niche market, granting him more work and higher prices for his work. This is your cash cow.
"You have a few options, none of which are trade off free: Apply for a credit card, and live off of that. Here, of course, you will go into debt, and there are minimums to pay. But, it will tide you over. In any case, you are getting unsecured credit, so your rates will probably be very, very high. You don't want to build up a lot of 20% per annum debt. An alternative to this would be to go to any bank and ask for an unsecured loan. Having no income, it will be difficult, though not necessarily impossible, to secure some funds. When I was in between houses, once, for example, I was able to borrow $30,000 in unsecured debt (to help me construct my new house!), just based on my income. Grant you, I paid it 2 months later, in order to avoid the 10% / year interest, but the point is that unsecured debt does exist. Credit Cards are easier to get. Arrange for personal financing through your parents or other relatives. If your parents can send you remittances, the terms will most likely be more generous. They know your credit and your true ability to repay. Just because they send you money doesn't mean you have to live with them. As a parent, I have a stake in ensuring my children's success. If I think that tiding them over briefly is in their best interest and mine, you better be sure I'll do it. A variation on this is Microfinance - something like Kiva. Here, if you can write up a story compelling enough to get finance, there are people who might lend you money. Kiva is normally directed towards poorer countries and entrepeneurs - but local variations exist. UPDATE: Google-backed 'LendingClub.com is far more appropriate to this situation than Kiva. Same general idea, but that's the vendor. Find freelance, contract, or light employment. Your concern about employment is justified - you don't want to be in a position where you are unable to travel to an interview because Starbucks or McDonalds will fire you if you don't show up for a shift.
On the contrary, you have no evidence that these kids are bitter and grumbling.  I'm not saying they have a good job/life, also change is not a privilege.  You and anyone can do it, first you have to know you can (sadly the kids in Indonesia probably don't know this), second you have to do it.  Yes it takes will and determination, but luck is only a small part of it (of course it helps).  Skill is only involved in what it might be trying to accomplish.  If you don't have the will and determination to change your situation, having the skill wont help and you don't have any business being bitter or grumbling.  Pack up the family, move across the country, try a different place.  Move to a different country.  Yes it takes effort, it can be hard if you don't have funds.  I know of many cases of people doing this, it only fails if you let it.  Stop blaming others, take some responsibility and do what needs doing.  If you work in something that's so specialized you can't do anything else, then you need to learn some new things.  I have employees that are this way.  Talk about wanting to go to collage, but can't afford it.  Its frustrating talking to them.  I know how much you earned over 4 months of summer work.  Your now going to live off that earnings for the next 8 months and come back in the spring and do it again.  (my employees are seasonal and we can't work in winter)  Instead of buying that new 4wheeler, go to fucking collage, you keep talking about how much you want to, don't brag about the $5k fish house you bought and the $7K snowmobile to go with it then bitch about being unable to go to collage and being trapped at work.  Go do what needs to be done.  The people that I see bitching the most, are the ones least likely to do anything about it.  Of course I don't interact with children in Indonesia or people who are slaves.  If you enter into the agreement to work, you are agreeing to is, be ok with the agreement or don't do it.  Saying no is a skill many people are not good at.
"I'm not a tax professional, but as I understand it, you are not expected to commute from San Francisco to Boston.  :) If your employer has not provided you with an external office, then yes, you have very likely met the ""convenience of the employer"" test. However, to take the home office deduction, there are many requirements that have to be met. You can read more at the Nolo article Can You Deduct Your Home Office When You're an Employee? (Thanks, keshlam) The home office deduction has many nuances and is enough of an IRS red flag that you would be well-advised to talk to an accountant about it.  You need to be able to show that it is exclusively and necessarily used for your job. Another thing to remember: as an employee, the home office deduction, if you take it, will be deducted on Schedule A, line 21 (unreimbursed employee expenses), among other Miscellaneous Deductions.  Deductions in this section need to exceed 2% of your adjusted gross income before you can start to deduct.  So it will not be worth it to pursue the deduction if your income is too high, or your housing expenses are too low, or your office is too small compared to the rest of your house, or you don't itemize deductions."
"&gt; The worst that could happen to the employee is they could lose their job.  Yes, that's my point. An employee is not going to risk saying ""no"" to a violation of labor laws when their livelihood depends on keeping the pay check coming."
"I'm really not.  Want a different job?  Develop the skills and/or education for that job and apply.  Again, your life is in your own adult hands, excuses about circumstances, fairness, ""privilege"", etc, aren't going to change the fact that you are responsible for the outcomes in your life.  The sooner you accept that, and stop blaming everything listed above, the sooner you'll be on the road to a better life."
Not even close.  PnL is part of the job requirement.  Past performance is not indicator of future results.  Sound familiar?  If you were successful managing a multi-asset 200 mio portfolio making 20-25%/year at Fortress... It will be quite a bit more respected than coming out of some 10 person prop shop on the west coast managing 5mio single asset making 25-30%.    Not to mention just the proximity to the street permits the networking that is most essential for opening these doors in the first place.
I have spoken to a lot of people that are in the workforce, that have a CFA, and the consensus I have gotten from a lot of them is that it *can't hurt* to get your CFA, but it also sometimes isn't extremely relevant to have, or may put you above a different candidate.  I would suggest figuring out what you want to do within the workforce first and see whether or not a CFA is going to be a requirement and or a necessity for wherever you would like to work, I also would recommend on not waiting too long to get it.
"Thanks for the response. I apologize I should have specified about the govt. job, I was referring to was a state job. More specifically it was 3 jobs with the California BOE as an Auditor 1 and Business Tax Rep. and also another job with the county assessors office as an Audit/Appraiser.  The state jobs were my best bet because of connections but they can only do so much since its a govt. job and people are cracking down on nepotism. With the little amount of research I just did, the pre-requisite to take the PMP certification is Four-year degree, 4,500 hours leading and directing projects. and 35 hours of project management education. That seems like a bit much and a somewhat vague as to what counts as relevant ""hours"" so i'll have to look into it more. But as of now, given my experience the PMP is not something I can't obtain until I have those hours under my belt?"
Charterholder here...it might help you get into industry..it might not. There are no guarantees and the exams are demanding. You have to really commit to learning the material.   Networking and presentation skills (interviewing) will always be the primary factor in where you can get hired.
I suppose that is true. If we take me anecdotally, i turn down down boring work. If I have some decent problems to solve, I perform. Payment isn't a factor. Though, I still don't want to take a job that pays less unless it is very interesting.
"I think it really depends on what work/lifestyle you are looking for. I'm sure your more than capable of going down either route, but you should weigh up the pros and cons of each A consultant would be great, you'd be your own boss and you have overall say on how your business/career plans out, but be prepared to put in a hell of a lot of work to get it off the ground. Long hours, little time for social/family etc. But in the long run it'll pay off Employee, no worries about running your company, just turn up and perform your duties. You'll get the whole benefit package: healthcare/pension etc. You can probably go on expense paid training courses etc It depends, do you want to just be an employee working ""for the man"" or do you want to be ""the man""? I wish you luck in whatever you do! :D"
"Your comment to James is telling and can help us lead you in the right direction: My work and lifestyle will be the same either way, as I said. This is all about how it goes ""on the books.""    [emphasis mine] As an independent consultant myself, when I hear something like ""the work will be the same either way"", I think: ""Here thar be dragons!"". Let me explain: If you go the independent contractor route, then you better act like one. The IRS (and the CRA, for Canadians) doesn't take lightly to people claiming to be independent contractors when they operate in fact like employees. Since you're not going to be behaving any different whether you are an employee or a contractor, (and assuming you'll be acting more like an employee, i.e. exclusive, etc.), then the IRS may later make a determination that you are in fact an employee, even if you choose to go ""on the books"" as an independent contractor. If that happens, then you may find yourself retroactively denied many tax benefits you'd have claimed; and owe penalties and interest too. Furthermore, your employer may be liable for additional withholding taxes, benefits, etc. after such a finding. So for those reasons, you should consider being an employee. You will avoid the potential headache I outlined above, as well as the additional paperwork etc. of being a contractor. If on the other hand you had said you wanted to maintain some flexibility to moonlight with other clients, build your own product on the side, choose what projects you work on (or don't), maybe hire subcontractors, etc. then I'd have supported the independent contractor idea. But, just on the basis of the tax characteristics only I'd say forget about it. On the financial side, I can tell you that I wouldn't have become a consultant if not for the ability to make more money in gross terms (i.e. before tax and expenses.) That is: your top line revenues ought to be higher in order to be able to offset many of the additional expenses you'd incur as an independent. IMHO, the tax benefits alone wouldn't make up for the difference.
"Actually, I'm less of a fan of the American tax and hyper-spend system than I am of Burger King.  I'm MORE likely to go to Burger King based on this news.  Dutifully paying your taxes without question is the most immoral activity you can engage in.  I worked for/with the government for 20 years and the amount of waste and fraud is absolutely appalling.  ""Close enough for government work"" is no longer a joke, it's become a disgusting mantra.  Every government ""worker"" is defrauding you every day they go to work and do 5 minutes of actual work then spend the rest of the time surfing the web and socializing.  It's sickening.  Hurray for Burger King!"
"A reason to get an accountant is to avoid penalties for possible mistakes. That is, if you make a mistake, the IRS can impose penalties on you for negligence. If the professional makes the SAME mistake, the burden of proof for ""negligence"" shifts to the IRS, which probably means that you'll pay more taxes and interest, but NO penalties; hiring an accountant is prima facie evidence of NOT being negligent. I would get an accountant since this the first time for you in the present situation, when mistakes are most likely. If you feel that s/he did the same for you that you would have done for yourself, then you might go back to doing your own taxes in later years."
Okay bad decisions, time to move on: Then move on with your life and don't fall for this kind of thing again. In the end you can probably end this with a net profit, or at worst, a small loss.  You are welcome to breathe a sigh of relief.
No workplace is perfect.  There are probably a lot of things they are doing that seem wrong or don't make sense.  The problem is figuring out when it is something that matters, and when it is just an annoyance that can be lived with and hasn't yet found the resources to get fixed.  So be a bit humble, even if you see things you know are wrong, you should not necessarily think you work with a bunch of monkeys.  On the other hand, you may be starting your first job working with a bunch of monkeys.  Good luck.
I have an interview coming up for an investment operations position. As someone who's fresh out of college, and who doesn't have the qualifications to get into the front office, I've realized that I'll probably have to take a job in the back office. The pay for this job would actually be solid, especially for the area so I am not disappointed with that. Ideally I'd like to be a financial analyst though.  If I were to get a job in the BO (at this point point I'd access the offer if one was made) how can I make sure I don't get stuck for the next 30-40 years?
(Also posted in r/FinancialCareers)  Hello all,  For the past few months I've been deciding on what I want to do with my career and how to progress in my chosen field. After a lot of thought, I want to get into Finance, most likely corporate finance with the end goal of Controller or CFO. Right now, I am an accounting analyst at a small company just a few years out of a B1G school with a BS in Economics. I feel that my work experience is relevant enough to land an entry level or lower level job as an analyst somewhere. My other option is to go back to school and get a MFin. I'm leaning towards focusing most of my effort on the job search option. So, I have a couple of questions:   1. Does it make sense to focus on the job search or should I add skills via grad school?   2. If you feel searching for jobs is the best route, how do I best position myself as a non business graduate to get a new role?  3. Any other advice is appreciated.  Thanks!
Worse comes to worse, you can switch majors later.    Going to a 'target' school might make things easier, but I know people from my school (a rather un-prestigious school in Canada) who graduated and wound up at Goldman Sachs and Bridgewater...  If you have the drive and knack for it, you'll be ok.  But if you're doing it because you're not good at science, you'll probably wind up with a pretty average job...
"He's right, I've had several hiring managers who looked over my resume tell me to leave out my warehouse job. The pay is very good but because it's not white collar it's essentially useless for the positions I'm looking for (fintech). They've actually done sleight research on this finding callback rates for similar resumes- they look for keywords that indicate you're at a higher ""class."" Seeing blue collar work isn't very good and, while it will give you an edge over someone with NO job, in the long run it can look very bad on your resume."
I've been in both situations, and there are methods for dealing with both. If your spending is not very carefully controlled, that's a big issue. I won't try to rehash all the personal finance advice about this, but I will just warn that when you are desperate and you know there isn't enough money even if you spend perfectly, there is a strong tendency to just give up and not even try because what's the point? Learned helplessness is hell, but it can be overcome with effort and tightly holding on to any glimmer of hope you find to do better each day. If you are in a field like engineering or computing (and some other fields, though I am less personally familiar with the current employment climate in those), there are usually companies who want to hire you as a paid intern or part-time employee in the hopes of getting you when you graduate. Those last two semesters of undergrad are a technicality to employers, they know it doesn't really change your skill set much. Many companies are actually more interesting in hiring someone on who hasn't finished the degree yet than getting someone recently post-degree, because they can get you cheaper and learn if this is a good match before they have to take the big risk of full-time hiring. You need to use this system to your advantage. Its hard when you feel destitute, but talk with career councilors in your school, your department advisor, and/or main administrative staff in your main academic department. Make sure you are on the right mailing lists to see the job offers (many schools require you to subscribe to one because at a school like UNC it easily gets way too much traffic each day). You need field-relevant experience, not just to finish the degree, but to be able to really open up your job opportunities and earning potential. Do not be shy about directly calling/emailing a contact who reaches out to your school looking for ""recent graduates"", and especially any mention of flexibility on early start for those who are almost finished. You can say you are in your final year (you are), and even ask if they are open to working around a light school schedule while you finish up.
The unstated bit of info is that most minimum wage workers who want to work full time aren't able to. The employers prefer part-timers who get fewer benefits, and whose shifts can be altered at the last minute to match up to real or forecasted demand. If you are a retail clerk or fast food worker, you generally can't get a full time job and with the constantly shifting hours you find it a challenge to get a second part time job because you can't tell the hiring manager in advance when you'll be available to work.