vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
All Bank fees were included in the service tax ambit [For example Check bounce, issue of duplicate statement, fees charged for remittance etc]. However as quite a few Banks structured the Remittance Business to show less charges and cover the difference in the Fx rate involved, the Govt has redone the service tax and one needs to pay Rs 120 for an amount of Rs 100,000.  There is no way to avoid service tax on remittance if you are using a remittance service.
To calculate any daily return, all one need do is divide the final value by the initial value, subtract 1, and multiply by 100%: This can be applied to either the futures alone, the investments used as margin collateral alone, or all together. Margin collateral as a factor of a derivative's return Collateral can take many forms. Many suggest that cost and revenue for a derivative trade should also take into account margin requirements.  This can become problematic. If a futures position moved against the trader, yet the margin was secured with equities at the maximum, and the equities moved with the trader, the futures trade could be interpreted as less of a loss because the collateral, which is probably totally disassociated with the futures position, increased in value. Then again, if a futures position moved with the trader, yet the margin collateral moved against the trader then taken together, the futures trade would look less profitable. Furthermore, most likely the result of a futures position and its collateral would never produce the same result, so extrapolation would become ever more difficult. For ease of analysis, a position's cost and revenue should be segmented from another unless if those positions are meant to hedge each other.  Margin is not a cost, but it is a liability, so margin will affect the balance sheet of a futures trade but not its income statement, again unless if the collateral is also used to hedge such futures position.
"First, excellent choice to say no to non-subsidized loans! But I'd say you are cutting things very close either way, and you need to face up to that now.  $35/mo extra at the end of the month is ""within the noise"" of financial life, meaning you should think of it as essentially $0 each month or even negative money, since one vet bill/school books/unforeseen problem could remove it for the entire year, easily.  You are leaving yourself no buffer. But by taking the loan, unless you are (as Joe said) socking away savings to pay for it upon graduation, you are guaranteeing you'll leave college with debt, which I think should be avoided if you can.  Could you do a hybrid plan in which you worked hard to do the following?: If you do these things or something along these lines, the loan is probably OK; if not, I'd be concerned about taking it. [Probably unnecessary, but: Keep in mind that student loans are not excusable by bankruptcy, so one is on the hook for them no matter what]. Also consider whether you can take a semester off now and then to catch up financially.  The key is to really stay far from the edge of any financial cliffs."
Listen Bernie Bro, if you think any centralized government will ever be fully accountable to we the people, you need to put down the hash pipe. Bernie wasn't even accountable to his own donors, that's why they're suing him ;)   The only solution is for the government to stop inserting itself between people and Healthcare. Only then with direct pricing, lower barriers to entry, private charity and consumer choice can we lower costs. Cartels only exist because of state mandated regulation, patent law and government mandated Healthcare.
Conserve precious time, cash, and energy by way of simplifying your kitchen area. Silicone baking mats take the place of food preparation sprays and parchment paper, so you have less to purchase as well as a lot fewer preparation steps. With 4,000 uses prior to buying a replacement, these baking mat sets pay for themselves time and time again.
Thank you for clarifying your meaning.   Though I'd counter that if your goal is to manipulate economic exchanges between individuals with the intention of guiding the economy at large to a specific desired outcome, I think that capitalism is not the economic system for you :P   I just think it's not so cool to treat Bob's artificially-caused job loss as an acceptable casualty on the grounds that overall *hopefully* everyone (including Bob) will be better *eventually.* I think Bob might object pretty strenuously, in fact, and that Bob should get a say.   Presumably there will be enough people who are willing to sacrifice their current jobs - and undergo the short term hardship - in pursuit of a better future that the mandated wage increase can proceed as desired.
The government started the crisis and the banks concluded it.    Barney Frank and the House Committee on Financial Services continually pushed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to issue new mortgages with the intent of increasing home ownership.  The House set goals for mortgage issuances; thus Fannie and Freddie lowered the requirements for obtaining a new mortgage.  Other banks saw this happening and were forced to lower their requirements for issuing mortgages.  Then, the banks realized they were holding a lot of risky mortgages on their books, so they found a way to spread the risk among other banks and investors.  Through financial ingenuity to reduce risk and maximize return, they created a new investment (securitized the debt) where risky mortgages were bundled, the earnings tranched, and resold to investors.  In this way, they transformed hard-to-sell subprime mortgages into salable AAA and AA debt.  This depended on the fact that the risk of default on each mortgage was *independent* of the others.  This scheme reduced risk and increased returns for banks and investors.  However, the securitized mortgages contributed to a higher overall *system* risk.  As long as there weren't mass defaults, everyone was better off.  Well, clearly there were mass defaults on risky mortgages, which destroyed the securitization scheme and brought down the banks.    The missing element in all this was a strong, competent regulatory body that looked out for the country's welfare.  Everyone else was looking out for themselves: Barney Frank &amp; the House looked out for their voters' agenda to push home ownership.  Home buyers were taking advantage of the favorable credit.  The banks satisfied mortgage demand.  The banks also figured out a way to sell risky mortgages to investors so more could be issued.  However, no one looked out for the system-wide risk.
The Coinage Act of 1792 of the Continental Congress established that the lowest money of account for the United States is one-thousandth (1/1000) of a dollar. This sub-unit is the mille (also written mil, mill). Other sub-units  given by the act are the disme for one-tenth (1/10) of a dollar (for which, etymologically, is the origin of the word dime), and the cent for one-hundredth (1/100) of a dollar. The ten-thousandth of the dollar value is taken on account by a few financial organizations, but has no official given term. For the monetary value of USD 27.4955, it may be quoted as twenty-seven dollars, forty-nine cents, and five-and-a-half milles.
If you are in the United States,  Real Estate gains are taxed as capital gains 15% currently but will go up in 2011. You may be able to exclude $250,000 filing single (500k married filing jointly) if you have lived in the condo 2 out of the last 5 years. See IRS Publication 523 for more information. You are only taxed on the profit from the sale. If you paid $100,000 and you sell it for $125,000 you would owe capital gains tax on $25,000 if you don't meet the conditions in IRS Publication 523.
When you sell your primary residence, you are required to capitalize any loss or gain at that point; you do not carry over your loss or gain (as you might in an investment property).  As such, the timing of the purchase of the next house is not relevant in this discussion: you gained however much you gained already.  This changed from the other (rollover) method in 1997 (see this bankrate article for more details.) However, as discussed in IRS Tax Topic 701, you can exclude up to $250,000 (single or filing separately) or $500,000 (married filing jointly) of gain if it is your primary residence and meets a few requirements (mostly, that you owned it for at least 2 years in the past 5 years, and similarly used it as your main home for at least 2 years of the past 5 years).   So given you reported 25% gain, as long as your house is under a million dollars or so, you're fine (and if it's over a million dollars, you probably should be paying a CPA for this stuff). For California state tax, it looks like it is the same (see this Turbotax forum answer for a good explanation and links to this California Franchise Tax Board guide which confirms it: For sale or exchanges after May 6, 1997, federal law allows   an exclusion of gain on the sale of a personal residence in   the amount of $250,000 ($500,000 if married filing jointly).   The taxpayer must have owned and occupied the residence   as a principal residence for at least 2 of the 5 years before the   sale. California conforms to this provision. However, California   taxpayers who served in the Peace Corps during the 5 year   period ending on the date of the sale may reduce the 2 year   period by the period of service, not to exceed 18 months.
Insurance in India is offered by Private companies as well [ICICI, Maxbupa, SBI, Max and tons of other companies].   These are priavte companies, as Insurance sectors one has to look for long term stability, not everyone can just open an Insurance company, there are certain capital requirements. Initially the shareholding pattern was that Indian company should have a majority shareholding, any foreign company can have only 26% share's. This limit has now been extended to 49%, so while the control of the private insurance company will still be with Indian's the foreign companies can invest upto 49%. It's a economic policy decission and the outcome whether positive or negative will be known after 10 years of implemenation :) Pro's: - Brings more funds into the Insurance segment, there by bringing strength to the company - Better global practise on risk & data modelling may reduce premium for most - Innovation in product offering - More Foreign Exchange for country that is badly needed.   Con's: - The Global companies may hike premium to make more profits. - They may come up with complex products that common man will not understand and will lead to loss - They may take back money anytime as they are here for profit and not for cause.   Pension today is offered only by Government Companies. There is a move to allow private companies to offer pension. Today life insurance companies can launch Pension schemes, however on maturity the annuity amount needs to be invested into LIC to get an annuity [monthly pension].
If you are married filing separately, you need to choose the same type of deduction (standard or itemized) as your spouse. Since you checked the box on line 23b, you indicated that your spouse chose the standard deduction, so you must use the standard deduction also.  The standard deduction for married filing separately this year is $6300, but because you checked one of the boxes for yourself in 23a, you get to add another $1250 to your standard deduction, for a total deduction of $7550. This number belongs in line 24.
Digital is the buzz word everywhere and to keep pace with the changing trends, the business world has to become digital in every way. SMO Companies India is a premier digital marketing agency which recognizes the requirements of the clients and worked towards the development of strategies for them which can yield positive results. One such very effective medium to reach the target audience is through the Facebook Advertising plans in India. The professionals in the company are experienced techies who can offer remarkable solutions to connect with the target audience and promote the goods or services among them to generate profits. http://smocompaniesindia.com/facebook-marketing-plan.html
&gt; Are you aware that General Foods is strongly lobbying to mandate GMO labeling?  That's odd since they haven't existed in that name since the 1990.   &gt; What folks here don't get is it's generally in the industries interest to not mislead.  Bullshit. they will do whatever they can do that they think will increase the bottom line. if a company thinks that onerous labeling requirements would help their bottom line because they think they can use them to their advantage over other companies then they will push for it.
Although there is plenty of blame to go around for this epidemic, which really started with our involvement in the Vietnam War, I don't see enough blame in these stories for the insurance companies that have refused to pay for any other form on pain management other than opiate drugs. What is the doctor supposed to do when their patient is in pain and opiates are the only relief the patient can afford?  Certainly many docs have over prescribed these mess but they don't decide what treatments are and are not available for their patients.
Nowadays, there are many companies online that are coming up with various robotic sets for kids of different age groups and mentality. There are kits that have the manual and the instructions to assemble the parts and make a robot. Various kits possess a variety of robots like easy to assemble robots are for the beginners.
To answer the last question first: there are no tax consequences to you. If your family member is married (or has a joint owner of the funds), and so are you, each of them can give each of you the $14K annual gift, which would be $56K. The remainder of the $70K would be subject to either (1) Gift Tax for the tax year in which it was given, or (2) applied to the lifetime exclusion. Either way would require filing a form with the IRS.
"Good, though I don't expect the Republican Congress to let this get implemented. Mandatory arbitration and ""tort reform"" are basically just ways for companies to legal-Houdini their way out of taking responsibility for their actions. The fact that the self-declared ""party of personal responsibility"" supports things like that is the height of hypocrisy.  Class-action lawsuits are not without problems. The people who were wronged often recover only a small portion of the damages they deserve, but when the government abdicates its responsibility to enforce the law, class-action lawsuits are often the only way to hold companies accountable for their misdeeds."
"&gt;Fully half of the universe is making mediocre money, and no one talks about them. All anyone ever speaks of is CEO's and fund managers printing fucking billz.  No shit.   Just like most people with computer degrees, and in statistics, and engineering. But for some reason only finance has these problems?  &gt;Literally anything else. Programming is better, statistics is better, engineering is better. Fuck - go learn a trade. Even ignoring the outsized pay they are receiving, you can typically work for yourself, and you actually create shit  The millions of consulting and banking employees are humored that you think it'd be better for them to plunge toilets. But at least you admit they're paid better and you just don't ""like"" the field.  &gt;AND you dont have to spend 100K (SEC numbers) on a fucking degree.  100k? Mine was &lt;10. Most people's are in the SEC outside of Vandy and the morons who are out of state. They're some of the the best value in the country, given you actually get good grades and get a real job.  To summarize, you've done nothing but rant about how much you don't like the field, admitted they make a lot more, provided no real rationale why someone should not pursue this degree/field, and your suggestion is to be a Carpenter instead.  Just for more background, I'm a math/statistics major, one of your preferred options.   Yea, get the fuck out of here."
The word equity always refers to the ownership of something, whether it be a company or a home. The wikipedia article is differentiating companies by how they raised money for operations. Equity companies, by their definition are those that sold an interest in the company in exchange for capital. Debt based companies, again by their definition, are those that borrow money from investors, but instead of an ownership stake they promise to pay back the money presumably with interest.
Huge gamer. But it isn't linked to gaming at all. It is linked to the issue of broadband in the U.S. Your water and Electricity are so cheap because those industries have been tightly regulated into very fixed rolls. Your Internet Service and Wireless are so expensive because they have not been.   Now think how easy your water and electricity is to use, do the companies dictate what containers you can use to collect water? Where you can store the water? Etc? Does the electric company tell you what type, for how long, and how many devices you can plug in to the service you pay for? no they don't outside of some regulations put in place for standardization and safety they are not allowed to dictate what you do with the service you pay for. This is the direct opposite of what ISP, Cable, and wireless providers do.
I have a buddy that used to run one of those companies that buys gold like the ones you see on TV. Here's the deal... 1) If the jewelry isn't total junk, get it appraised. Making raw materials into jewelry obviously increases the value since you can't buy jewelry for the price of raw gold. In many cases it will be worth more as jewelry, but not always. Depends on the piece. 2) Those companies generally rely on the fact that people selling jewelry to a gold dealer are in a hurry to get cash and are very negotiable on what they will take for it. Depending on how predatory they are, you will probably get between 50 and 75% of the market rate. They make a living on the spread and people's need for quick cash. They usually resell it immediately to a 3rd party that actually melts it down and resells it.  So the short answer to your question is no, you won't get close to market value with these companies. You would do better if you didn't have to go through the middle man, but then those final buyers aren't generally the ones who have set up shop to deal with the general public.
They are, just now where you might expect them. They can't bring it to major cities yet, but there are some companies bringing fiber to rural areas. They are doing this where the max dsl speeds are not fast enough to be considered broadband and there is no other alternative that qualifies. There is a government grant program which gives them money to bring fiber or any broadband but there's no reason to not run fiber if you're going to the trouble. If / When these companies can become profitable enough to move into territories without the grant you will see google fiber competitors. In my town they are basically circling the city with fiber to the home just by covering the grant areas and expect to bring it in the city where we have charter, which is actually pretty good except for the upload speeds, within two years. Charter has already been upping their offerings in the area and has even doubled the speed at no cost for people in areas that are being served by the new fiber or will be soon as there is some overlap.   Fiber isn't that far off for most people, because from what I understand almost everyone lives with 2 miles of a fiber run if you have cell phone access as most all cell phone towers have fiber to them, and the way it works is odd in that no normal ISP owns the fiber, it's by other companies that have to sell access to whoever can pay for it. This is just what I've heard from some discussions with people about the fiber company here so I don't know everything, maybe someone else here has more information.
That's very true, but there are companies that have business models which would be viable if that gun were taken off the table. These are the good companies.  Our focus should be on diminishing the power of Washington to play favorites, as that will clear the way for the deserving to succeed and the undeserving to fail.
"Everyone tells stories so that their side is the good guy and the other the bad guy.  One way we do this is to cast good acts as a reaction to other bad acts.  They acted first and we are just restoring balance and justice to the universe.  &gt;They're strategically aligning stimulus with tax changes benefitting the rich to make it appear as though the tax changes make the economy better, because they know it will make it worse.  That is one way to frame the issue.  We are preserving the ""norm"" and they are ""changing"" things for the worse.  The problem is the truth of the matter is a long succession of back and forth moves.  It is trivial to reframe the issue.  Take the Affordable Care Act:  &gt;High-income taxpayers also help pay for Obamacare. The health law requires workers to pay a tax equal to 0.9% of their wages over $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing jointly to finance Medicare’s hospital insurance. It also imposes a 3.8% surtax on various forms of investment income for taxpayers whose modified adjusted gross income is over $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing jointly. Those provisions will account for $346 billion in revenues by 2025, according to the CBO. –[Source.](http://time.com/money/collection-post/4537027/how-is-obamacare-paid-for/)  Are they ""benefitting"" the rich or correcting a ""harm""?  If you pass legislation which entails spending and your consistent solution is to burden one portion of the populace to provide benefits all around because the rest cannot afford how you attempt to solve the problem, then do you think those you burden might politically organize?  Don't get me wrong.  I lived in Japan for over a decade and very much appreciated living in a country with national health care.  I just don't believe in good guys and bad guys in all this."
First, your references are only tangentially related to your claim.  &gt; If you have twice the generation capacity in renewables (wind/solar) and can store 20% of your yearly consumption, then you are fine.  Right. If you do that, you're fine to run your hospital off-grid with no backup generators without significant risk of the life support systems going offline.  The requirements for a grid-connected single family home are much lower. Generating 100% of your power needs and having one powerwall (for half a day of storage) will drastically reduce your electricity demand.   Home solar doesn't need to completely replace grid power - a 70% reduction in demand would be sufficient to reduce generation requirements to only existing hydro / wind / nuclear plants.
What are your thoughts on companies like Gilead Sciences and Danaher? Over decades they have shown to make astute acquisitions.   Do you believe such companies have an institutional decision-making framework that fights against the principal-agent problem you are alluding to?  For context:  Around the turn the century Gilead bought an HIV drug that became the backbone of a combination therapy they used to gain &gt;90% market share for more than a decade and a half. Second, circa 2013, they bought Pharmasset for ~$11 billion, and since 2014, drugs containing Pharmasset's backbone generated greater than $40 billion in revenue for Gilead.
As soccer is one of the most popular game which is played worldwide so there are many companies used to manufacture the soccer ball. But the Best cheap soccer balls manufacture are as like the Adidas they are the main sponsor for the FIFA and the other game and their ball is very much popular among all soccer lovers. Nike is also one of the big sponsors for big events and there is lots of other brand also who used to manufacture the soccer ball.