vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"The address under a bank's name on a check, if there is one, is generally going to be the contact address of the bank. That will be true no matter where on the check the bank's name appears. The address of the person or business the account belongs to, if present, will appear under their name. This information block is typically near the top left corner the check, so it will be visible as the return address if the check is mailed in a ""window envelope"" designed for this purpose. The address the check is being mailed to, if it appears on the check, will generally appear low on the check and to the right, so it will be visible as the destination address when the check is mailed using a ""window envelope"" designed for this purpose. If that isn't the answer you were looking for, please clarify your question."
&gt;Clarisse Kambire’s nightmare rarely changes. It’s daytime. In a field of cotton plants that burst with purple and white flowers, a man in rags towers over her, a stick raised above his head. Then a voice booms, jerking Clarisse from her slumber and making her heart leap. “Get up!”      Ok...      &gt;The man ordering her awake is the same one who haunts the 13-year-old girl’s sleep: Victorien Kamboule, the farmer she labors for in a West African cotton field. Before sunrise on a November morning she rises from the faded plastic mat that serves as her mattress, barely thicker than the cover of a glossy magazine, opens the metal door of her mud hut and sets her almond-shaped eyes on the first day of this season’s harvest.      This reads like a bad novel.      &gt;She had been dreading it. “I’m starting to think about how he will shout at me and beat me again,” she said two days earlier. Preparing the field was even worse. Clarisse helped dig more than 500 rows with only her muscles and a hoe, substituting for the ox and the plow the farmer can’t afford. If she’s slow, Kamboule whips her with a tree branch.      GET TO THE POINT ALREADY!!!
It's sad.  My mother lost her job after a brutal divorce.  BOA bought up Countrywide, then when my mother pleaded for assistance BOA said they could not help her unless she was behind/in default of her mortgage.  She tried to do a deed-in-lieu with a lawyer and BOA refused to accept the deed-in-lieu many times.  Then BOA sold her mortgage to Green Tree (?) and they refused her deed-in-lieu as well.   This went on for over 2 years and they foreclosed on the house.  I told my mother to sue because they should have accepted her deed-in-lieu because it was approved by the court in her bankruptcy but she was tired of trying to save her house that she just walked away.  6 months after she left and moved in with my sister Green Tree called her offering a refinance at a lower rate and a mortgage payment that was less than a typical car payment.  Now 5 years later my mom is just going to pay cash for her house and never do a mortgage again.
"In the end, this is really not a finance question. It's about changing one's habits. (One step removed, however, since you are helping a friend and not seeking advice for yourself).  I've learned a simple cause & effect question - Does someone who wants (goal here) do (this current bad habit)? For example, someone with weight to lose is about to grab the chips to sit and watch TV. They should quickly ask themselves ""Does a healthy, energetic person sit in front of the TV eating chips?""  The friend needs to make a connection between the expense he'd like to save up for and his current actions. There's a conscious decision in making the takeout purchase, he'd rather spend the money on that meal than to save .5% (or whatever percent) of the trip's cost.   If he is clueless in the kitchen, that opens another discussion, one in which I'd remark that on the short list of things parents should teach their kids, cooking is up there. My wife is clueless in the kitchen, I taught our daughter how to be comfortable enough to make her own meals when she wants or when she's off on her own. If this is truly your friend's issue, you might need to be a cooking spirit guide to be successful."
With a check, there are limits on cashing the stale check, but that is set by the banks involved. With a debit card transaction, it will be up the the debit card company and your bank. Imagine a situation where a person finds an old check and tries to cash it at their bank. If the bank considers the check stale, they might reject it, or put a longer hold on the check. When the check writers bank gets the transaction, they will also decide what to do. If they reject it, the first bank will reverse the transaction. You can't count on a 90 day, or 180 day limit; most banks will ask you to put a stop payment on an old check that you don't want cashed. This is especially important step if you write a replacement check. Because there is no check number to put a stop payment on, in fact the temporary hold will fall off after a few days. There doesn't appear to be a way to stop an old transaction. Be careful if you do contact the restaurant, you could end up double paying for the meal if they swipe your card again.  Your best option may be just to keep the transaction as pending.
My assistant is in the court clerk's office. You can tell the court whatever you want. Maybe they will give you a greater percentage since you put the money down and paid for everything but you are taking that chance. But you will pay for your lawyer and you will need one. And you will pay for me the entire time. And this will be a lengthy process. You would be better served to pay my client half now."" Her office was about 2 blocks from court. I laughed at her and simply told her to have her assistant do whatever she wanted. I then left to go to clerk's office to take the hold off. She had beat me to the office (I moved my car out of her garage). By the time I got there she was outside yelling at her assistant, throwing a hissy fit, and papers were flying everywhere. We ""settled"" the next day. She got nothing other than the things she had already stolen from me. If I wouldn't have known about this loophole my ex would have gotten or cost me through attorney's fees around 40-50K for basically hiring a lawyer. My ex didn't really have any money so I am pretty sure lawyer was getting a percent. Moral of the story: In any contract like this you always want to be the one bringing in the least amount of money. There are no laws that I know of in any country where the person with the least amount on a contract will come out worse (%-wise). Like I said in the US the best case scenario that I know of for joint property is that the court pays out the stakeholder all of their contributions then it splits things 50/50. This is given no formal contract that the court upholds. Don't even get me started with hiring attorneys because I have seen the courts throw out so many property contracts it isn't even funny. One piece of advice on a contract if you do one. Make it open and about percentages. Party A contributes 50K, Party B 10K, Party A will pay this % of mortgage and maintenance and will get this % when home is sold. I have found the more specific things are the more loopholes for getting out of them.
David Brooks is a well known hack-fraud pundit over at the NYT. He thinks he is much smarter and more articulate than he actually is. His corner is kind of a right-leaning fiscal-conservative sometimes used as a counter-balance to give the appearance of neutrality on issues, despite the fact that he's not an expert or an economist. Generally you should avoid his work.   I can almost guarantee that he didn't take an 'uneducated lady friend' to a sandwich shop for lunch. And even if in a fictional universe he took her to a dumpy corner italian deli that served sandwiches, they would have the same names and dishes. And even if he did take her to a boujie boutique sandwich shop, you're probably right she probably popped her eyes seeing $12.50 for a sandwich and not weak in the knees from seeing so many vowels.
If you plan on holding the money for 15 years, until your daughter turns 21, then advanced algebra tells me she is 6 years old. I think the real question is, what do you intend for your daughter to get out of this?  If you want her to get a real return on her money, Mike Haskel has laid out the information to get you started deciding on that. But at 6, is part of the goal also teaching her about financial stewardship, principles of saving, etc.? If so, consider the following: When the money was physically held in the piggy bank, your daughter had theoretical control over it. She was exercising restraint, for delayed gratification (even if she did not really understand that yet, and even if she really didn't understand money / didn't know what she would do with it). By taking this money and putting it away for her, you are taking her out of the decision making - unless you plan on giving her access to the account, letting her decide when to take it out.  Still, you could talk her through what you're doing, and ask her how she feels about it. But perhaps she is too young to understand what committing the money away until 21 really means. And if, for example, she wants to buy a bike when she is 10, do you want her to see the fruits of her saved money? Finally, consider that if you (or you & your daughter, depending on whether you want her to help in the decision) decide to put the money in a financial institution in some manner, the risk you are taking on may need to be part of the lesson for her. If you want to teach the general principles of saving, then putting it in bonds/CD's/Savings etc., may be sufficient, even if inflation lowers the value of the money. If you want to teach principles of investing, then perhaps consider waiting until she can understand why you are doing that. To a kid, I think the principles of saving & delayed gratification can be taught, but the principles of assuming risk for greater reward, is a bit more complex.
Unanticipated unemployment is usually the triggering factor for drawing on an emergency fund. Ask yourself: what happens if I lose my job tomorrow? Or my spouse becomes unemployed? What happens if I become disabled and can't work for x amount of time? Sure, you can discount your chances of needing such a fund if you have free health care. But having health insurance doesn't change the fact that an emergency fund is a good idea. There are many ways to go broke!
In case of emergency or tragedy, they couldn't replace you as a tenant. That's why they should sublet. Then their obligation is to you, not to the landlord. How much apartment would the girlfriend and friend get if you weren't involved? What rents would they pay? That's probably how much rent they should pay for this apartment. You want a better apartment (or a better location)? That's on you. You should only do this if you want to do it. If you want to share apartments with the girlfriend and friend, then do so. Work out something equitable. If you plan on moving in together to reduce your costs, then you don't sound like you are compatible. Obviously there are reasons to move in with the girlfriend aside from costs. Why can't the friend get his or her own place? The added rent probably won't do more than pay for the added room (you could get a one bedroom without the friend). That points to an alternative way of calculating the friend's contribution: the difference between a two bedroom and a one bedroom apartment. That's the additional cost of the bigger apartment. If the friend can't afford that, then this might not be a good idea. Make sure that you can afford the apartment if one or both of the friend and girlfriend move out. You can eventually replace the friend as the tenant but don't rely on doing the same with the girlfriend. Share utilities evenly. Possibly groceries too. The friend should pay at least the added cost of the additional bedroom. Don't expect either to pay more in the new apartment than they would pay without you. You should be the only one on the main lease; sublet to them.
You receive a 1099-misc for the value of the car. You claim that as income (even though you received goods rather than cash). When you sell the car, it would be much like selling any posession, and would cause no tax consequence unless the sale price was much different than the value... When you sell the car, you may have received more or less than the value of the car (likely less). If you sold it for more, then you might need to claim the additional money as income (perhaps short term capital gains). If you sold it for less, but to a friend or relative, then you might think you could claim a loss, but the tax collector would just claim that you had given them a gift, and attempt to collect the tax from them. Contest winners often have the frustration that they are taxed at the full value of the item(s) won, even though they would not value the item at that amount. And contest prizes often do not sell for the full value stated on the 1099, and often for much less. Marginal tax rates were higher prior to Reagan, and when a contest winner would sell an item for 80% of the value, they often paid most of the proceeds to taxes.
I did some research and I found a very interesting article that had exactly my case as an example ( person has an undergrad from a nice University in the relative field and wants to do a masters to get a job in a high tech company). Here is the source. Consider “Susan:” She has an undergraduate degree from the University   of Washington in Computer Science, and is considering applying to a   master’s program at UW or an equivalent program. She’s hoping   afterwards to land a job at a top tech company. So far, she’s only   been able to get jobs with startups and smaller-name companies. A master’s degree probably wouldn’t make sense for Susan. It might   help her to land a job at a top tech company, but she could also do   that by working at a startup for a year or two and spending some time   developing her skill set through personal projects. If she did it that   way, she’d probably be a lot richer in the end.
"When an IPO happens, the buyers pay some price (let's say $20 per share) and the seller (the company) receives a different price ($18.60).  Who paid the commission? Well, the commission caused a spread between buyer and seller.  It doesn't matter who technically pays the commission because it costs both parties.  In an IPO, the company technically pays the commission, but they use buyers' money to do it and the buyer must pay more than he/she would if there was no commission. The same thing happens when you buy a home.  Technically the seller pays both realtors' commissions but it came from money the buyer gave the seller and the commissions pushed up the price, so didn't the buyer pay the commission?  They both did. The second paragraph suggests that if the investment bankers act as a simple broker, buying public securities instead of newly issued shares for their clients, then the commissions will be much lower.  Obviously.  I wonder if this is really the right interpretation, though, as no broker charges 4% to a large client for this service.  I would need more context to be sure that's what's meant. The gyst is that IPOs generate a lot of money for the investment bankers who act as intermediaries.  If you are participating in the transaction, that money is in some way coming out of your pocket, even if it doesn't show up as a ""brokerage fee"" on your statement."
Not sure why you are being downvote. I have a friend who was pregnant when her husband was ran over by a car. Single parenting sucks, and they live in a 1 br where she sleeps on the couch so her kid can have a room. People who are downvoting you are ignorant assholes.
Easy to say from the comfort of of a middle class lifestyle. I'm happy to have achieved what I have. I make a a modest but sufficient salary, as does my wife. We have many comforts that we would not have if we made even $20K a year less, a comfortable but small house; boring, safe and reliable car; cell phones. My wife grew up without enough food to eat. She used to sneak into the kitchen at night and drink the ketchup because she was so hungry, which resulted in her mom putting a padlock on the fridge. Forgive me for wanting more than that for my daughter, I must be some kind of monster capitalist.
"The bottom line is that you can decide whatever you want to do.  It is good of you to get everything in writing.  What happens if she decides to move to a different city?  What happens if she also wants to be bought out?  It should also include contingencies for your husband and yourself.  God forbid anything negative happens, but what happens if you two get divorced?  Does your husband want to be an agreement with your sister if you pass away? There does not seem to be any math to do in this case.  While she is paying the lion's share of the payment, she is also receiving the benefit of having a place to live.  It is unlikely that she can rent an equivalent place for anything close to 1400/month.  I would estimate it would be at least 1800/month to rent an equivalent property. So she put no money down, and she is paying below market ""rent"" to live somewhere.  Many people would be happy to have $400/month off and handle their own repairs (let alone you still kicking in half).   Now all that said, if you want to give her some equity based upon generosity or the desire to give her some dignity, then you are free to do so.  Perhaps 10%?"
This does NOT mean that a draft check will not bounce, so Jerry is NOT as secure in handing the goods to Tom as if Tom had handed him cash, as it is still a check. Jerry's bank will not receive the funds for Tom's draft check for an average 3 to 5 business days, same as a personal check. Jerry will probably have access to the first $5000 within two business days... provided that he deposits the draft check in person at his bank's branch or in a bank-owned ATM. In the United States, Regulation CC governs funds availability. Regarding official, draft, or tellers checks: ""If the customer desires next-day availability of funds from these checks, [your bank] may require use of a special deposit slip."" Mobile deposit availability in the U.S. is NOT regulated in this way and will likely be subject to a longer hold on more, if not all, of the check! Draft checks, don't, as a habit, ""bounce"" in the colloquial sense of ""returned for insufficient funds."" This is because they are prepaid and drawn upon a financial institution's account. Banks are insolvent far less frequently than other businesses or individuals. Draft checks, tellers checks, official checks, bank checks, etc CAN, however, be returned unpaid if one of the following is true: As an aside: an institution is not obligated to honor a stale dated check, but may do so at its discretion. If you have a personal check outstanding for over 6 months, it may still clear and potentially overdraw your account. In this case, contact your bank ASAP to process a reversal. The depositing bank mis-scans the check and the issuing bank refuses the resulting data. I have seen systems mis-read which data field is which, or its contents. Also, there is the possibility the image if the check will be illegible to the issuing bank. The draft check has been cancelled (stop paid).
This is a standard check. To complete the order, I need to enter the bank routing number, my account number, name address, and phone, if I wish. The name of the bank is required for the order, but does not appear on the printed check.   For checks you print, this will be no different. It's your name, and address, not the bank's, that goes on the check.
The guy is crazy, but I thought revoking was harsh. The secret service interviewed him after a recent facebook post about buying a strand of hillary clinton's hair for $5k from her booksigning so he could check her DNA like the one he has a copy of.  If anything, he needs a padded cell not a max security prison cell. He's there until January now...
I like Nathan's answer some, but am horribly curious as to why you have not made payments on a $3500 student loan?  If you are wealthy enough to afford a new car, this should be paid off next week.  IMHO. Above all else your financial goals should dictate if you buy a new car.  What are they for you?  If the goal is to build wealthy quickly then Nathan's advice may be to unfrugal for you.   If your goal is to impress people with the car you drive and accumulate very little real wealth then purchasing or leasing a car should be a top priority. So to answer your question correctly one must understand your goals.   For 2016, the average car payment is $479 per month.  If you invested that in a decent growth stock mutual fund in 40 years you'll have around 2.6 million.  However, you do need something to drive now.  If you can cut your car expense to $200 per month, and save the other $279 you will still end up with about 1.5 million in that same 40 years.   Personally I attempt to shoot for $200 ownership cost per car per month.  Its a bit difficult as I drive a lot.  Also I would not purchase a new car until my net worth exceeded 2 million.  At that point my investments could mitigate the steep depreciation costs of owning a new car.
In general, deposits into an NRE account must be the proceeds of remittances from outside India. If you send your friend a cheque, denominated in Indian Rupees, drawn on your NRE account (which is an account held in a bank in India), that cheque will most likely be refused by your friend's bank for deposit into your friend's NRE account. Your friend could deposit it into an NRO account, though, but that deposit would likely draw the attention of the income tax people.
It's because they're used to it and it works for them.  Everything other reason is meh. Used to, you could float a check to payday... have no money in the account, yet write a check a couple days before payday because you know that's how long it takes for the check to get to your bank and when it does, you'll have the money.   But most (if not all) business that still accept checks (a dying subset, for sure) electronically present the check now.  They take it from your hand, run it through a machine at the register, and it immediately clears the bank, just like a debit card would.   We're nearing the end of the check era, atleast on personal accounts.  Kids growing up now won't even know what a check is, aside from it's namesake on a type of bank account.
A lot may depend on the nature of a buyout, sometimes it's is for stock and cash, sometimes just stock, or in the case of this google deal, all cash.   Since that deal was used, we'll discuss what happens in a cash buyout. If the stock price goes high enough before the buyout date to put you in the money, pull the trigger before the settlement date (in some cases, it might be pulled for you, see below).  Otherwise, once the buyout occurs you will either be done or may receive adjusted options in the stock of the company that did the buyout (not applicable in a cash buyout). Typically the price will approach but not exceed the buyout price as the time gets close to the buyout date. If the buyout price is above your option strike price, then you have some hope of being in the money at some point before the buyout; just be sure to exercise in time. You need to check the fine print on the option contract itself to see if it had some provision that determines what happens in the event of a buyout.  That will tell you what happens with your particular options.   For example Joe Taxpayer just amended his answer to include the standard language from CBOE on it's options, which if I read it right means if you have options via them you need to check with your broker to see what if any special exercise settlement procedures are being imposed by CBOE in this case.