vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Some countries don't have robust life insurance markets.  Some countries have horrible travel fatality statistics.  Some countries don't have very good liability law enforcement.   Is $2 on top of a train ticket in the US to send your family a $20,000 payment if you die on the train worth it, probably not.  The fatality rate is pretty low here, lots of people have their own life insurance, and the US justice system carries a big liability stick. If you're moving around on trains a lot in other countries where the fatality rate is much higher, you can't buy life insurance on your own, and the legal system doesn't punish negligent operators it might be meaningful, especially for frequent travelers who have dependents. Is buying this coverage a reasonable and cost effective way to insure a person's life, no, clearly not.  You're buying a policy to insure your life against being mauled by tiger in New York on a Tuesday, when you've never seen a tiger and don't live in New York.  Obviously, if you want life insurance you would not buy coverage this narrow. Personally, I think this is really akin to an impulse buy candy bar at a checkout line of a market.  They're dangling this in front of you for an amount of money that's insignificant because some people will pick it up without thinking about it.  They're tickling your fear of death just enough to get a dollar from you, but not enough to keep you off the train.  And obviously the math works out for the insurer or it would not be offered. Separately, regarding probability, it's not about an incident occurring in a train, it's an incident occurring in this particular train on this particular day/time.  If there's a 1 in 10,000 chance of dying on a train in a year the chance of dying on a particular train on a particular day is likely to be one in billions or more.  This really isn't about whether or not this coverage is valuable given the risk, it's about whether or not they can get you to impulsively spend a dollar.
"I'm not intimately familiar with the situation in Australia, but in the US the powers that be have adopted an interventionist philosophy. The Federal Reserve (Central Bank) is ""buying back"" US Gov't debt to keep rates low, and the government is keeping mortgage rates low buy buying mortgages with the proceeds of the cheap bond sales. While this isn't directly related to Australia, it is relevant because the largest capital markets are in the US and influence the markets in Australia. In the US, the CPI is a survey of all urban consumers. If you're a younger, middle class consumer with income growth ahead of you, your costs are going to shift more rapidly than an elderly or poor person who already owns or is in subsidized housing, and doesn't spend as much on transportation. For example, my parents are in their early 60's and are living in the house that I grew up in, which they own free and clear. There are alot of people like them, and they aren't affected by the swing in housing prices that we've seen in the last decade."
Firstly currency prices, like any asset, depend on supply and demand. Meaning how many people want to exchange a currency to another one vs. wanting to buy that currency using another currency. Secondly, it really depends on which country and economy you are talking about. In emerging economies, currencies are very often influenced by the politics of that country. In cases like the US, there are a myriad reasons. The USD is mostly governed by psychology (flight to safety) and asset purchases/sales. In theory, currencies balance, given the inflation of a country and its trade with other countries. e.g. Germany, which was always exporting more than it was importing, had the problem of a rising currency. (Which would make its exports more expensive on foreign markets. This is the balancing act.)
I can see that dollars are more useful than Yuan (after all, in my example, Russia may wish to buy from countries other than China).  What proportion of, say, international trade by Japan with countries other than the US is conducted in dollars?
Rates are arrived at by the cumulative buying and selling on the foreign exchange market, much the same way that stock prices are arrived at.  If there are more people wanting to buy dollars with euros, EUR/USD goes down.  If more people want to buy euros with dollars, then EUR/USD goes up. The initial rate was about $1.18 per euro when it began trading on January 1st, 1999.  It replaced the European Currency Unit at that time, which was a weighted basket of currencies of (more or less) the participating countries. You're correct about the printing press in the US and other countries.  The exchange rates do reflect in part how much of a relative workout those printing presses get.
Thank you.  Some of these guys don't seem to understand several points.  Too wrapped up in politics instead of economics.  * Any job that went south of the boarder was leaving anyway.  I think Mexico uses a lot more of our raw materials and services than China would.  *  I pointed out on that link that almost 40 million jobs were created in the three countries until 2007.  Someone responded and 47 million workers.  But I think it's better than 47 workers and 0 job creation...  I should also point out that I'm pretty sure the US added more jobs than Canada or Mexico.  * NAFTA provides you with much more buying power.  20 years ago a poor person could not buy an iphone if it existed back then.  Currently anyone can afford any combination of Iphone, Xbox, computer, above ground swimming pool, etc.    *  If you are against NAFTA, you might as well be for tariffs on trade between states.  After all, if we were better with tariffs as a country, imagine how much better your state would be with them.  Imported beef from Texas?  Pay an extra 30% for what you buy.  Your local economy will improve so much while you pay more and are buying less stuff.  Especially if Texas gives an export subsidy to their beef guys, now why would beef producers sell in Texas for 3 a pound when they can make 4 a pound exporting?  Even Texans would feel the sting.  Tariffs on trade is genius...
Tax Refund: The US generally does not refund tax like other countries. For larger sales, you might want to try state tax refunds, check here: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/373/~/how-to-obtain-a-refund-of-sales-tax-paid-while-visiting-the-united-states US Customs: You never pay US customs when you leave, they don't care about what you take out of the country. You might have to pay customs in your arrival country afterwards, and the rules depend on the country you arrive in. Most countries have a limit on how much you can bring for free, typically in the range of 500 $, but that varies a lot. Also, some countries do not count used articles, so if you wear your new clothing once, it does not count against the limit anymore.
Here is an overview of who owns US Debt from Wikipedia, it indicates that approximately 1/3rd of US debt is held by foreigners (mainly the central banks of other countries), approximately 1/2 of US Debt is held by the federal reserve, and the rest is owned by various America organizations (mutual funds, pension funds, etc). The money is loaned via bonds, treasury bills, etc. When you put money in your pension fund, you very likely buying US debt. The US Treasury department all has a comprehensive page about how public debt works in the United States here: an overview of public debt from the treasury. I wasn't able to find a similar breakdown for other countries, but Wikipedia has a comprehensive list of how much debt is owed by other countries: a list of countries by public debt.
&gt; Queuing for service also occurs in the US...   Agreed, we have that in addition to cost inflation. When I refered to countries with massive government involvement, I was not excluding us. Really our system is little different that that of the Netherlands.  Nothing more on the boomers? I didn't see you mention them again...
Michael Pryor is 100% correct here. This is almost certainly a scam. If you want confirmation, look at the feedback of the buyers and of folks who buy stuff from them. You'll typically find that they run through a bunch of low value auctions, build up some feedback, then all of the sudden buy and sell lots of laptops or other high-value items. It's a big scam that has been going on for a decade or more. If you are actually trying to sell things like computers overseas, particularly to third world countries, the sign of a legitimate buyer is usually someone who will have you ship to an import-export company who handles the customs stuff and the bureaucratic nonsense required to deal with government on the other side. I had a bunch of Sun equipment in the late 90's that was purchased by folks in Latin America via EBay. They bought from EBay because the local resellers had a monopoly on the products or couldn't get sufficient quantities. All of them used companies, mostly in Miami, which handled the actual export at the customer's expense.
"I also don't know the specific details for Finland and/or Belgium, however many countries have tax treaties, which generally prevent double taxation (i.e., paying tax in both countries on the same base income). Being that both Finland and Belgium are EU member states, I'm quite certain there's a provision that covers this, and the same would apply: You pay taxes on what you earn while in Finland to Finland, and to Belgium what you earn while in Belgium. All of this is similar to what you presented, however there's also a section where you'd declare how much taxes were paid in other countries. One other thing to note, which will be the determining factor in the above, is whether EU law requires you to change residence to BE for the time you're there. If not  then you'll be paying taxes in Finland the entire time on the entire amount. This comes from an Irish governmental site: ""By working in another member state and by transferring your residence there, you are likely to become ""resident for tax purposes"" there. The definition of fiscal residence varies from one member state to another. You must comply with the laws of the country where you have established your residence. The laws on personal taxation vary considerably from one member state to another and you may be liable for taxation in more than one country. In general, you are subject to income tax in the country where you are living but this may not be the case if you are a “posted worker” – see below. In general, property is taxed in the country in which it is situated but, again, there are variations. Tax agreements have been concluded between most of the member states of the EU, which are intended to avoid double taxation, if you derive income from different countries. In general, national fiscal rules must respect the fundamental principle of non-discrimination against nationals of another EU country."""
If you really believe that the US isn't the most litigous societies in the world, I don't know what to tell you. I believe this administration has been the most difficult to understand, and therefore I can also agree with confusing. Bureaucratic, while perhaps other countries have us beat in more processes, the overall lack of alignment between processes and goals would probably qualify that statement as well. You should read into him though, he's a pretty smart guy who has made some good decisions, including giving up short term profits because of the risk to society.
I would not expect you to be an expert in VBA and to be able to write something in depth from scratch but rather be able to figure it out using outside resources. Since I am not writing in VBA on daily basis I forget shit all the time but if there is something that needs to be done I can guarantee you I will figure out how. Knowledge of how to integrate Excel with a database via VBA is good (for both pulling in data and updating a database). Tl;dr 1. Don't downplay your Excel knowledge but don't make yourself out to be an Excel God, you never know how much knowledge the other person has 2. Demonstrate that you have experience with commonly used Excel-related functions; efficient construction of workbooks 3. Demonstrate that if you don't know how to do something in Excel you will be able to figure it out; provide an example 4. Knowledge of VBA is good, especially integrating with outside databases. Provide example of a time you used VBA and why you did. Best way to learn this stuff is through experience; If you want me to critique your Excel work I would happy to. The following project would give you good experience: Download data for 20 countries (just choose at random, make sure you include U.S. though) on GDP in US dollar current prices and PPP basis for all years. from IMF http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/01/weodata/index.aspx 1. Build a dash board that calculates the year-over-year growth of both GDP $, and GDP PPP 2. Set it so you can dynamically select which country to display 3. Set it up so you dynamically change start and end date 3. The chart should automatically adjust its range based on the date selected 4. Create three aggregates, developing countries, developed countries and world EX US 5. With these aggregates have an option to show the y/y growth using either the average (mean) or on a GDP weighted basis. This is just an idea that would give you some good experience. It is not anything I need so only do it if you want to build your skills.
And wall street banks gain huge amounts of paper currency units by manipulating the price, mostly to the downside. Others say that countries like china and russia are also interested in low gold prices because they want to buy as much physical gold as possible. Knowing of the value that is not reflected by the price at the moment. Is there one more source of distrust in governments? Yes. Since 1971, all paper currencies are debt. They receive their value by the trust that those with debt are willing and able to pay back their debt. If this trust is lost, the downward manipulation (if you think that such a thing exists) of the gold and silver prices in the futures markets might fail some day. If this is the case (some say when this is the case). you might see movements in gold and silver prices that bring them back to equilibrium with the amount of printed paper currencies. In times of the roman empire you got a good toga and a pair of handmade shoes for an ounce of gold. In our days, you get a nice suite and a good pair of shoes for an ounce of gold. In the mean time, the value of each paper currency in the history of each country went to zero and the US $ lost 98% of its initial value. As long as there is not enough distrust, more paper currency is made in equity markets and bond markets on average. (Be aware that you earn that currency only after you were able to sell at this price, not while you hold it) Gerd"
An option gives you the option rather than the obligation to buy (or sell) the underlying so you don't have to exercise you can just let the option expire (so long it doesn't have an automatic expiry). After expiration the option is worthless if it is out of the money but other than that has no hangover. Option prices normally drop as the time value of the option decays. An option has two values associated with it; time value and exercise value. Far out of the money (when the price of the underlying is far from the strike price on the losing side) options only have time value whereas deep in the money options (as yours seems to be) has some time value as well as the intrinsic value of the right to buy (sell) at a low (high) price and then sell (buy) the underlying.  The time value of the option comes from the possibility that the price of the underlying will move (further) in your favour and make you more money at expiry. As expiry closes it is less likely that there will be a favourable mood so this value declines which can cause prices to move sharply after a period of little to no revaluing. Up to now what I have said applies to both OTC and traded options but exchange traded options have another level of complexity in their trading; because there are fewer traders in the options market the size of trade at which you can move the market is much lower. On the equities markets you may need to trade millions of shares to have be substantial enough to significantly move a price, on the options markets it could be thousands or even hundreds. If these are European style options (which sounds likely) and a single trading entity was holding a large number of the exchange traded options and now thinks that the price will move significantly against them before expiry their sell trade will move the market lower in spite of the options being in the money. Their trade is based on their supposition that by the time they can exercise the option the price will be below the strike and they will lose money. They have cashed out at a price that suited them and limited what they will lose if they are right about the underlying. If I am not correct in my excise style assumption (European) I may need more details on the trade as it seems like you should just exercise now and take the profit if it is that far into the money.
The chickens don't get a say in how KFC is run, they just turn up and are fed for a while. Quite morbid but that's the situation.  Businesses are the people who decide to even use Equifax, and on this whole disaster no one has said anything or come out in support of your Congress sorting it out.   I really do worry for America and the world, because unfortunately America seems to keep being on the forefront of these practices. What ever goes in America is soon hailed as success and fed to other countries.  But it's madder still because you guys keep lobbying new gun laws so you can keep the right to bare arms against an oppressive state!
You clearly have no understanding of the issue.  As an example, lets say Apple sells an iphone in France.   Apple has to pay income tax and tarrifs and whatever else on that money they receive for the iphone they sold. That makes sense, they use France's infrastructure and citizens to sell the phones.   Then when the money comes back to the US (the money is not coming back at this time), Apple is taxed on the same money from the iPhone they just paid taxes on in France. That makes selling iPhones outside of the US difficult due to tax law and regulations that other companies don't have to deal with. This makes it easier for other phone manufacturers to sell phones at a profit and not Apple. This hurts Apple at the end of the day and keeps the money in foreign countries when it could be re-invested in the US...  What is the point of selling internationally if you are going to have to pay two sets of taxes and likely lose money?
Minimum wage has only went up $2 in twenty years while housing, gas and education has tripled. Also, the US is the only developed country where people go bankrupt trying to pay medical bills - I know, I am Portuguese finishing my studies here. I never paid more than $100 in anything relating to healthcare. Anything. My first month here, I got sick and stayed at the hospital for about a week. $50k in medical bills.  The fact that we have people defending this greedy and vile society in which people work their entire lives to afford so little, be so miserable, fat and depressed is troubling. I would pick twenty other countries before I picked the US to live in. I had no idea you were so backward thinking, so mean and cynical to each other. Like that one Icelandic woman on Michael Moore's documentary said, you have serious problems of compassion. You don't care if your neighbor succeeds or not. That's a sick society in decline. You're just not aware of it.   If you work full time, I don't care what the job is, you should be able to live a life with dignity.
I don't see how anything you said contradicted anything I said. Those countries are still highly social-democratic, no? They are hardly as deregulated as the US, their governments provide things like universal health care, free or near-free post-secondary education, and they have regulations providing more vacation and other time off, they follow the precautionary principle wrt pollution, and so on. None of these things are being eliminated or in danger of such.
&gt; 1 funny how you picked the highest estimate for the US and the lowest estimate for the UK Mea culpa. It appears average cost for the US is [$30K](https://www.medigo.com/blog/medigo-guides/coronary-angioplasty-cost-guide/) (my personal family experience with it is $50K though). This means the US costs would have to come down by only 80% to be affordable by US families. I still strongly disagree that this could be accomplished by deregulation of any kind. And that's not even considering the loss in quality that would likely accompany such a move. &gt;2 if anyone expresses wishful thinking it's you Sources man. Sources. There is no argument without facts. &gt;I live in a country with UH. Well then we're both operating from a position of ignorance. I don't know what it's like with UH and you don't know what it's like without it. In that case - all I can do is look at the money the US spends vs everyone else - and then look at our national health outcomes vs. everyone else (e.g. heart health, maternity health, life span, etc.). America sucks at both. &gt;You'll still have the same problems, except that you get a hefty tax increase on top and end up shoving 50-60% of your income down the state's throat in addition. There are a handful of countries that charge that much income tax. But the bottom line is that those countries, on the whole, *still spend less on healthcare than the US*. So while that 10 or 15% of your check that goes towards UH sucks - remember that if you were in the US you'd be paying 20 to 30% to an outside company for insurance. Plus you'd have to deal with pre-existing conditions and finding doctors in network and jumping all the bullshit hurdles Americans do on a daily basis without any of the convenience of having *one single system* to coordinate those resources. So you're either paying down the government's throat - or your paying twice that down a private company's throat.
Well, it's the same fundamental principals as all investing.  Buy low, sell high.  Buy things that will be scarce in the future while they're abundant.   Buy up everything and create artificial scarcity.  It's the same thing that's done with diamonds and was done with oil for quite some time.   Small markets like tickets to a show are just much more vulnerable to being cornered.  How do you legislate against ticket scalpers without turning yourself into a hypocrite?   Obviously you're not going to pull the plug on Wall Street or angel investing or any other investing strategy, and you'd have a hell of a time shutting down DeBeers.  Capitalism isn't perfect if your desire is fairness.
In an ideal world Say on 24th July the share price of Apple was $600. Everyone knows that they will get the $ 2.65 on 16th August. There is not other news that is affecting the price. You want to go in and buy the shares on 16th Morning at $600 and then sell it on 17th August at $600. Now in this process you have earned sure shot $2.65/- Or in an ideal world when the announcement is made on 24th July, why would I sell it at $600, when I know if I wait for few more days I will get $2.65/- so i will be more inclined to sell it at $602.65 /- ... so on 16th Aug after the dividend is paid out, the share price will be back to $600/- In a real world, dividend or no dividend the share price would be moving up or down ... Notice that the dividend amount is less than 1% of the stock price ... stock prices change more than this percentage ... so if you are trying to do what is described in paragraph one, then you may be disappointed as the share price may go down as well by more than $2.65 you have made