vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Because salaries aren't high enough.  If the salaries were higher more people would pursue that field.  I'm not going to begrudge anyone making billions, but Microsoft is raking in cash, and it's obvious that they'd rather horde it than spend it on talent.  Well, ask a professional sports team about that equation.  Just because salaries are in the 100s of thousands doesn't mean that they're too high.  Especially when you look at these companies financial filings.
No one can advise you on whether to hold this stock or sell it. Your carried losses can offset short or long term gains, but the long term losses have to be applied to offset long term gains before any remaining losses can offset short term gains. Your question doesn't indicate how long you have to hold before the short term gains become long term gains. Obviously the longer the holding period, the greater the risk. You also must avoid a wash sale (selling to lock in the gains/reset your basis then repurchasing within a month). All of those decisions hold risks that you have to weigh. If you see further upside in holding it longer, keep the investment. Don't sell just to try to maximize tax benefits.
"Gotcha, so for that job, I would try and get a basic understanding of how pulling queries and tables works.  (ie What does that even mean?  And if you have multiple tables how would you get the information you want?  That's really going to be the important part.   But a lot of times it really depends on the quality of the data, something possibly only IT knows.)  Do you know any basic programming?  A lot of it is just understanding what kind of questions you need to be asking, googling it, then understanding how to incorporate the google answer into your software.  On a side note, the Hyperion, Oracle Essbase, and Access will all be a little different coding wise.  Hyperion you may not really even need to do any ""coding.""  I'd also probably look up what Hyperion Financial Planning is and get familiar with the interface.  It's not hard, just weird if you've only ever used excel (and much more stringent)."
"First piece of advice: fire your agent.   A pushy agent is a bad agent.  From what you've told us, he's actually given you poor advice regarding mortgage interest rates.  Rates are already at historic lows.  That and the precarious state of the world economy mean that further rate cuts are more likely in the near term. Second piece of advice: While more information on the real estate market you're in would help,  going in at asking price is rarely a good idea.   Sale prices from ""the last few years"" are not relevant to what you should pay, because the last few years include a financial crisis caused in large part by the bursting of a housing bubble.  They could be even less relevant depending on your location because of a spike in foreclosures in certain areas of the U.S.  There was already a ton of housing inventory before, so an increase due to foreclosures is going to depress prices further.  Now that banks are finally practicing the due diligence they should have been all along, your ability to be pre-approved for large mortgage amount puts you in a strong position.   Use a tool like Zillow or Redfin to see what properties in that area have sold for over the past six months.  You should also be able to see a history of what prices the particular property you're interested in has been offered and/or sold at in the past.  Also check and see how long the particular property you're interested in has been on the market.  If it's been on the market more than 60-90 days, it's priced too high."
Note that if 1)  The stock prices are continuously differentiable (they aren't) 2)  You rebalance continuously in the absence of trading fees and taxes then the return fraction (future price / original price) will be the geometric mean of the return fractions for each investment. If you don't rebalance then the return fraction will be the arithmetic mean. But the arithmetic mean is ALWAYS greater than or equal to the geometric mean, so continuous rebalancing in the case of continuously differentiable prices will always hurt you, even abscent trading costs/taxes. Any argument in favor of blind rebalancing which does not somehow fail in the continuously differentiable case is simply wrong. See https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/38536036/to%20karim.pdf -JT
I mean, it's hardly random. We're at the point where her father has a significant chance of not making it to the end of his first term. If it's impeachment (as opposed to say, a stroke), there's pretty good odds she's not coming out unscathed.
IMO, QE2 will likely have no perceptible impact in the near term. Keeping all of your savings in a bank guarantees that you will lose money to inflation & taxes. I'd suggest consulting a financial advisor -- preferably someone who understands issues facing someone with assets in the US and Canada. In terms of what portion of your savings should be in USD vs. CAD, that's going to depend on your situation. I'd probably want more assets in the place that I'm living in for the next several years.
First, what free market? What does that mean? Last I checked a lot of major banks, car manufacturers, oil, and food companies are subsidized. Second there's basically two options. Let people starve which will lead to riots. Or something like a basic income. However the problem with basic income is that it doesn't change the infinite growth paradigm which will be confronted by the finite planet.
Because as an executive you have a fiduciary duty to be present... on the sheer chance you can spare shareholders from losing more value than they need to... or to even improve it. Not to mention the fact that they like their newfound access to Washington... even if they can't influence anything.. I'm sure they like the limelight. Besides... a lot of these executives don't even have any skin in the game. Most just get millions in salary or free stock. Worst case scenario it's just a giant mad hatter's tea party lol.  This is assuming that what you said about Trump is correct. I'm not really energized politically. But I do know the responsibility of ceos to shareholders.
"Paul calls it unanimous. The government site does not. What does a unanimous voice vote even mean? [Here is the govt site where the votes are viewable](http://oversight.house.gov/markup/full-committee-business-meeting-30/). Note at the bottom that the **postal bills** have the statement ""Outcome: Favorably reported to the House of Representatives by **unanimous** consent"". Note that **bill 459 does not** state that. Watch the video and you'll see that Ron Paul has a little bit of trouble with reality."
December, 5, 2011 ( 03:00pm ) :-  All markets including stocks &amp; Commodities are moving towards upward direction on the strong cues comes on the expiring today.  Little bit Volatile comes over the settlement in MCX today. Gold &amp; Silver contracts are expiring today.  Dow Jones Industrial average future up by80 points from the optimism coming from the European Countries.  All European Countries getting financial aid from the side of IMF which is provided through the European Central Bank.  Nifty have strong resistance at 5150 levels  under this level  short term trend still bearish side.  Gold have strong support at Rs 28960 above this trend bullish under this trend down for short term.
"What you're pretty systematically failing to appreciate is the **pain** felt by people during structural unemployment.  Yes, they should get an education, but guess what, they're probably too old for it to be worth or so far behind on the education ladder that it'd be a real struggle.  Maybe they should move to a city where there are jobs, but moving is expensive and so is living in a city.  The libertarian arguments here have the same problem as the (more extreme) arguments about civil rights.  Yes, the ""equilibrium"" will converge to a society without discrimination, where people get educated because low-skilled jobs don't pay much anymore, etc.  But those arguments completely neglect the pain of getting from here to there.  Maybe you think the government always screws things up (despite pretty glaring arguments to the contrary), and maybe you think the free market always ends up with the most efficient solution (despite some pretty glaring examples to the contrary), but that still doesn't mean that inefficient government programs that cost the future (GDP, whatever that means) can't be an appropriate means of reducing the overall suffering of the populace in both the short and long term."
"I mean that is disjointed, are you implying the financial collapse of Hoover and Coolidge was the result of government entitlement programs and that the New Deal was other than that? You've got things reversed, the stock market collapse was financial deregulation and speculation with hands off free market principals you seem to root for. The New Deal and Truman Doctrine expanded entitlements and have avenues for access to education, trade skills, work digging and filling holes, publicly funded infrastructure and technology. Truman in fact wanted a single payer system. ""Concrete"" economics work, the hand of the free market cannot fill the void left by withdrawal of public funding."
What is the goal of the money?  If it is to use in the short term, like savings for a car or college, then stick it in the bank and use it for that purpose. If you really want this money to mean something, then in my opinion you have only one choice:  Open a ROTH IRA with something like Vanguard or Fidelity and invest in an index fund.  Then do something that will be very difficult:  Don't touch it. By the time you are 65, it will grow to about 60,000.  However, assuming a 20% tax bracket, the value of that money is really more like 75,000.   Clearly this will not make or break you either way.  The way you live the rest of your life will have far more of an impact.  It will get you started on the right path. BTW this is advice I gave my son who is about your age, and does not earn a ton of money as a state trooper.  Half of his overtime pay goes into a ROTH.  If he lives the rest of his life like he does now, he will be a wealthy man despite making an average income.  No debt, and investing a decent portion of his pay.
"Seriously. What does this mean? My understanding of how they calculated unemployment figures was by the number of new and ongoing unemployment claims being filed. ""Dropped out""?? Does that mean they died, or exhausted their benefits? People don't just STOP looking for work, and ANNOUNCE it, do they?"
Icahn also bought a substantial amount of GM in the early 2000s... They were bankrupt just a one short recession later. (Though by that time I'm sure he had cut his losses)    Icahn's fund's track record over the last few years hasn't been great either, as they've consistently underperformed the market.    Point being... Having Carl Icahn invest in your company doesn't mean it's a good company and it's well documented that your chances of getting rich by selling Herbalife are only slightly better than your chances of hitting the lotto.    The FTC ruling spared Herbalife in the short term..but I think it's inevitable that they'll run out of steam at some point.  Though without having a good idea of when, it's a very risky short.
The classic answer is simple. Aim to build up a a financial cushion that is the equivalent of 3 times your monthly salary. This should be readily accessible and in cash, to cover any unforeseen expenses that you may incur (car needs repairing, washing machine breaks down etc). Once you have this in place its then time to think about longer term investments. Monthly 'drip feeding' into a mutual stock based investment fund is a good place to start. Pick a simple Index based or fund with a global investment bias and put in a set amount that you can regularly commit to each month. You can get way more complicated but for sheer simplicity and longer term returns, this is a simple way to build up some financial security and longer term investments.
"&gt;the population is burdened with debt and anxious about job security,  and long term security  and healthcare (and not sending them into poverty because of it)  and the country remaining solvent  and what the next financial crisis will be   and the terrorist boogymen  H. L. Mencken once said, *""The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.""*   I don't know how imaginary it all is but they sure are menacing the shit out of us with it."
"what does negative Total Equity means in McDonald's balance sheet? It means that their liabilities exceed their total assets.  Usually is means that a company has accumulated losses over time, but that's just one explanation.   But, isn't McDonald a very healthy company, and never lost money? Just because a company has ""always"" money does not mean it's a healthy company.  It may have borrowed a lot of money in order to operate, and now the growth is not able to keep up with the debt load. In McDonald's case, the major driver in the equity change is the fact that they have bought back over $20 Billion in stock over the past few years, which reduces assets and equity.  If they had instead paid off debt, their equity would not be negative, but their debt may be so cheap (in terms of interest rate) that it made more financial sense to buy back stock instead of paying off debt.  There are too many variables to assess that in this forum."
"Keynes is hard to defend. He makes some very basic arithemetic errors in the core of his work. However, the best defense of Keynes (at least with respect to his intellectual contribution) is Roger Garrisons ""Time &amp; Money"". Garrisons argument is that Keynes is right if you dismiss time as an irrelevant variable. Time is a complicated issue and Keynes was brilliant in the way he managed to describe an economy that exists outside of time.  Keynes more or less admits that the solution is very short term with long term harm. He just doesn't think the long term problems are all that bad. I really don't think he would defend what his work has been twisted to advocate."
"a controller and comptroller are the exact same thing.  The terms are interchangeable.    From your wikipedia article:  &gt;A Comptroller, or Financial Controller  From the reddit job posting:  &gt;reddit is Hiring! Positions: redditgifts programmer and **Controller** (finance)  In finance, the term ""controller"" is actually more common."
10% seems to be a little bit too optimistic, but 5%-8% annually on average is doable. 1% is way too little, you're doing something wrong, unless you mean real return (i.e.: after adjustment for inflation), and even then it's not too high. At any given year it may be easy or difficult, but the point is that we're talking about long term averages. For example, if you look at the DJI for the last 30 years, you'll see a rise of 1300% (give or take), which annually is ~40%. In the last 3 years the rise is even steeper, but in the last week - it is negative. So it depends on your time line and the way you manage your investments. You've got to balance between stocks and bonds and cash, but even if you park your money in cash you can get more than 1% right now (Capitol One on-line savings is 1.15%), and that's with the lowest rates ever, so getting 1% over time does mean that you're doing something wrong IMHO.
If you're waiting for it to be 50% off it's all-time high, you're not just waiting for ""a good time to invest"", you're waiting for a major crash. It could certainly make sense not to immediately put everything into US stocks, but that doesn't mean you should put nothing in. As Trevor Wilson commented, you could put some of the money in and then gradually add the rest over time, reducing the risk of unluckily buying at the peak. (This can also reduce the psychological angst of worrying about whether you're doing the right thing, which is worth taking into account.) Also note that if you get rid of the treasuries, you eliminate a good chunk of the stuff that you thought was too close to the peak anyway. Your two basic points (asset allocation and low-cost funds) have a strong Boglehead flavor. You may already have looked at the Bogleheads wiki; if not you should take a look. If you are comfortable with that philosophy (and I think it's a sound one), you should remember that part of that philosophy is not worrying about ""timing the market"". You pursue a buy-and-hold strategy if you believe the market will go up in the long term and don't care much about what it does in the short term. That said, as mentioned above, you might want to ease in your investment over time, rather than buying all at once, if only to avoid tearing your hair out if the market goes down in the short term. Incidentally, your proposed portfolio is similar to this one that they mention, although as I said above I think this is too conservative if you are 30 years old and consider yourself a ""5 out of 5"" in terms of risk tolerance. I'm not sure if you already saw that in your research, but since that portfolio apparently has a name and is known, you might be able to find information about its risks and benefits by searching for discussion of it by name."
Hey, you seem like you read a lot about what a quant does on the Internet... I'm guessing zerohedge mostly and maybe some financial pop culture books about the financial crisis. Why don't you leave that out of this discussion as it is pretty misleading. Quants price relative risk and that is important for a number of reasons.
Somewhat of a false dichotomy..  While it's obvious that a long term solution to get people off the welfare rolls is preferred, in the mean time giving a man a fish will prevent him from, you know, starving to death..   There's a very real human component to poverty that is frequently missed when budget discussions come up.
"Oh look, the cockroaches have crawled out of the gutter to wage financial war.  Lets just refresh our memories, are you not the fucking assholes who were rating every piece of shit the banks produced AAA, along side the banks you were the core architects of the Global financial crisis and proved unable to rate even a dead cow, if memory serves. And when asked what the fuck you were smoking your answer was  ""We did not know""  The fundamental reason for your existence was to know  And inspite of that, the Junk Toxic shit the Fed bought was still rated AAA by you so the Fed paid Top Taxpayer dollar for worthless shit.   Yet here you are . . passing sovereign ratings . .well ok  The fastest growing debt for China is US treasuries . . .so that would mean US debt is bad and the Orange orangutan is going to, as predicted, Default.  I think your time would be better served, evaluating the assets the Fed is going to unwind in October  . . .That is US $ 4.5 Trillion of cow shit you help create, how about you get to work and tell us whats what before the only thing America's food stamps can buy is Radio active grass."
Doesn't mean you can't be morally opposed to the conditions of the animal treatment without it being due to Media sway.    And it also doesn't mean that just because the media hypes up a viewpoint that there aren't justified reasons to agree with that viewpoint.   How else do we hear about information from several states away? Not everyone has friends and family everywhere or who has gone to everything.
People ITT struggling with the concept of a status symbol.  There's nobody more concerned with outward appearance than Hollywood celebs and a bunch of them drive the Prius.  Status symbol doesn't only mean how much you paid.  The environmental factor weighs in.  The coolness factor.  The fact that so many people are anticipating what Tesla will do next.  It's not just price tag.
"You really should try reading the article. Your opinion on the title is great and all, but you'd probably ask more relevant questions if you actually knew what we were talking about here.   &gt; Will the taxpayers be given a refund on their tax bills if this deal goesn't through?   No. Are you familiar with taxes in the US at all? That is not something this country does often.   &gt; What else will the tax dollars be spent on ?  Pretty much anything? Money can be spent on many things. Currency in general is a great trade assistant. Are you familiar with how money works?   Seriously. Read the article.   &gt; The reality is, either the state can invest in things that create jobs, or they can spend on things that create nothing.  I mean no, this isn't all that the state can do. That being said, ""create jobs"" is a huge gray area that doesn't require making horrible financial decisions that will never, ever give a positive ROI. If you think this is literally the only job creating opportunity this state has, or if you can't track that it's even possible for a state to consider more than one thing at a time, I dunno what to tell you.   Also. Read the fucking article. It's like 6 paragraphs. I have no idea why you think that anyone should read your opinion if you can't even put in the time to see what the conversation is about."
For example, if the Dow, S&P 500, NASDAQ are all down does that necessarily mean the Canadian stock will get negatively impacted? Or is it primarily impacted by the Canadian market? The TWMJF stock makes up a very small part of the Canadian market so it affects the overall market, but this doesn't mean that the overall market affects this stock. So then the answer is: no, the TWMJF stock price will not necessarily follow either US or Canadian market indexes.  However, there can be major events which can affect the markets, including the stocks which make up the markets. TWMJF will probably be more sensitive to Canadian events than US events.
I wouldn't confront him. It's really none of your business what he has done or not done with your money as long as you've been a faithful tenant. Whoever gets the house after the foreclosure wants you to stay. I mean, a faithful tenant paying rent is a whole lot better than no one in the house at all. The new landlord (if it's the bank) probably will leave you alone for the most part. Just take MrChrister's advice and document everything and don't let the bank bully you around. It's not your fault the owner got foreclosed on. Remember that the foreclosure process takes months so just because papers got served today (hypothetically) doesn't mean next week the bank takes over the house.