vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
The core competency of banks is to lend money from depositors and re-lend that money to borrowers.  They do not have the expertise to develop real estate.   They have trouble evening managing foreclosed real estate, such that they have to sell them at a discount.
Some people planned, and have achieved, the ability to retire young purely because they've built up an income portfolio that covers their expenses. Assuming you want that, the question is whether stock assets that pay dividends is the type of investment process that resonates with you, or if something else fits you better. I believe the OP says they'd prefer long hold times, with few activities once the investment decisions are made, and isn't dissuaded by significant work to identify his investments. Both real estate and stocks fit the latter, but the subtypes of dividend growth stocks and hands-off property investing (which I assume means paying for a property manager) are a better fit for the former. In my opinion, the biggest additional factor differentiating these two is liquidity concerns. Post-tax stock accounts are going to be much easier to turn into emergency cash than a real estate portfolio. Whether that's an important factor depends on personal situation though."
I've pulled back in recent weeks from Amazon purchases and prime, in looking at the big picture I've come to realize I can't support a single conglomerate when it comes to retail, price isn't that important to me, I want to see real people, interact with real people and believe my purchases help them make a wage for what ever purpose they need that money for. Amazon is a monopoly in my view and I can't any longer support monopolies.
"Ah .. I don't know Chicago very well, but several classmates ended up there and report that real estate + tax are expensive. Here in Philadelphia, several marginal neighborhoods are in the middle of a real estate boom (some say bubble). People are demanding new construction, but don't care where it is. 600k for a row home is pretty common in Kensington. Same old gentrification story .. first the artists moved in for cheap rents, then coffee shops and then the developers. For those not aware, those parts of Kensington was ground zero for the 1980's crack/crime epidemic .. only the most marginal of blue collar workers couldn't afford to leave.   Sounds like Gary, Ind got themselves on the wrong side of that line. Maybe in a couple decades it will get ""rediscovered"". Kinda sad, but we do have a history of letting places fail (eg. Wild West ghost towns)."
The long-run goal is to eliminate poverty through wealth creation. If that makes for some weird new social interactions, I'd say that's a reasonable cost.  I mention comparing to earlier periods simply as a measure of progress to determine whether or not there is a problem that needs correction, such as a specific group in society experiencing real wage stagnation, or truly anemic growth rates relative to earlier periods. It's the slope of the trend line for each group that I'd be worried about, where linear or exponential is good, and logarithmic should indicate a potential crisis.  Ultimately, I believe that it's not a persons absolute circumstances that matter, but the rate at which those circumstances are improving throughout their lives that most strongly affects their subjective well-being (but that's just my theory).  As for real estate costs, you're absolutely correct that this is a problem, but it's as easily explainable problem. Supply is artificially constrained in most of the US due to the need for explicit government permission (in the form of building permits and zoning laws) in order to build new units. Basic economics says that when supply is artificially restricted, prices will rise.  In areas where government is restrictive, such as San Francisco, prices rise sharply. In places where government is more permissive, like Houston, prices remain much more reasonable.
Russ Krivor Russ and Igor Krivor are brothers who started DLC Residential in 2005. As early as 2004, the Krivor brothers noticed that there was a growing need for single-family homes in Miami, Florida. This knowledge quickly turned into a business as they began to help investors grow their wealth through real estate. Igor and Russ Krivor change their business model based on what is most likely to yield real returns for their investors.
Igor Krivor Russ and Igor Krivor are brothers who started DLC Residential in 2005. As early as 2004, the Krivoruchko brothers noticed that there was a growing need for single-family homes in Miami, Florida. This knowledge quickly turned into a business as they began to help investors grow their wealth through real estate. Igor and Russ Krivor change their business model based on what is most likely to yield real returns for their investors.
Walmart doesn't sit on a lot of cash. If they want to give Amazon a real fight then they'll need to retain more earnings and I wonder if investors will like that. I expect a short term stock dip at minimum.
IF you are looking Your best Bartlett NH Real Estate for Sale at I Love North Conway NH, We offer full service real estate brokers in Bartlett NH and nearby area. For more information call Office: 603-569-4663 Bill Barbin Cell: 603-986-0385.
You always see articles of how financially distressed people are, but then other articles on how home prices are rising and people don't want to sell their homes for less (to meet the pent-up demand for starter homes).  A nice, long, prolonged drop in real estate prices would solve so much. With the decline in retail I hope it comes.
In response to one of the comments you might be interested in owning the new home as a rental property for a year.  You could flip this thinking and make the current home into a rental property for a period of time (1 year seems to be the consensus, consult an accountant familiar with real estate). This will potentially allow for a 1031 exchange into another property -- although I  believe that property can't then be a primary residence. All potentially not worth the complication for the tax savings, but figured I'd throw it out there. Also, the 1031 exchange defers taxes until some point in the future in which you finally sell the asset(s) for cash.
"So you are back to saying that the price Walmart charges for each item depends on the income level of the purchaser.  That's not fair, so neither are taxes based on the income levels of taxpayers.  I don't think road sweepers should be subsidized so they can drive a Rolls Royce car. And I don't think they should be allowed to live in a Rolls Royce location unless they can afford to compensate those they exclude from it.  The fact they currently are is outrageous as it causes a shrunken economy and excessive inequalities.    Real estate bubbles are caused by not have a LVT. Obviously there could be no ""bubble"" as it would have already been taxed away."
The right time to buy real estate is easy to spot. It's when it is difficult to get loans or when real estate agents selling homes are tripping over each other. It's the wrong time to buy when houses are sold within hours of the sign going up. The way to profit from equities over time is to dollar-cost average a diversified portfolio over time, while keeping cash reserves of 5-15% around. When major corrections strike, buy a little extra. You can make money at trading. But it requires that you exert a consistent effort and stay up to date on your investments and future prospects.
To supplement existing answers: the appraised value does not necessarily represent the net amount the bank could actually recover with a foreclosure. Let's look at it from the point of view of the bank. Suppose the property appraises at $200,000 and they do what you want: loan you $200,000 with the property as collateral. Now suppose a short time later, you quit paying the mortgage and they have to foreclose. Can the bank get their $200,000 back? An appraisal is only an estimate; nobody can predict perfectly how much a property will sell for. Maybe the appraiser missed something significant, and the property will only fetch $180,000. Even if the appraisal was accurate when it was made, property values may have dropped in the meantime. Maybe a sudden economic crisis is driving real estate prices down across the board. Maybe interest rates have spiked. Maybe the county has changed the zoning regulations to locate a toxic waste dump next door to the property. In any of these cases, the property may again fetch well under $200,000. Maybe the condition of the property has changed. Perhaps you trashed the place and it will take $30,000 to clean it up. (People have a tendency to do things like that when they get foreclosed.) If the bank wants to get full market value for the property, they will incur the usual costs of selling a property: paying a real estate agent's commission, painting, renting furniture to stage the property, and so on. This will eat into the net amount they actually get from the sale. It may take some time (perhaps months) for a property to sell at its full market value. During this time, the bank is out $200,000. That's money they would rather be loaning out at interest to someone else, so this represents lost income. Foreclosing a mortgage is a fairly complicated procedure. The bank has to pay its staff, including lawyers, for a significant number of hours to get the foreclosure done. There will be court filing fees and so on. If you refuse to leave, they may have to get the sheriff to evict you; that has a fee as well.
From Wikipedia: A hard money loan is a specific type of asset-based loan financing through which a borrower receives funds secured by the value of a parcel of real estate. Hard money loans are typically issued at much higher interest rates than conventional commercial or residential property loans and are almost never issued by a commercial bank or other deposit institution. Hard money is similar to a bridge loan, which usually has similar criteria for lending as well as cost to the borrowers. The primary difference is that a bridge loan often refers to a commercial property or investment property that may be in transition and does not yet qualify for traditional financing, whereas hard money often refers to not only an asset-based loan with a high interest rate, but possibly a distressed financial situation, such as arrears on the existing mortgage, or where bankruptcy and foreclosure proceedings are occurring. This implies to me that these loans are only against real estate. Presumably, because it doesn't move and can't be simply taken away, as in the case where you have say, a high value diamond or painting.
WTF is wrong with that? Gee i think i know why the number of homeless veterans has increased in the past 10 years. You become a career post office employee by taking an exam. And what's wrong with being a Career Postal Employee? A Letter Carrier, A Postmaster? WTF do we look down upon these careers.. My kids watch Sprout and PBS kids programs and guess who brings goddam birthday cards? It aint the goddam FedEx, UPS, or DHL man. These are careers and individuals that are pillars of our society. You meet people at the post office, you interact with other citizens, and the Post Office in your Town give your Town legitimacy! Its really sad.. TL:DR **What Congress is allowing to happen to the Postal Service is a fucking crime!**"
"You may want to hold onto the $5000 and keep it in savings.  Interest rates are for crap, even in ""high yield"" accounts, so you can rightly not consider it investing.  You should be graduating college soon.  It would suck if an emergency crops up to prevent you from graduating.  I assume that you are going into a high paying career given your nice income from internships.   Your best investment is yourself at this point.  Completing your education, and obtaining your degree trumps all.  You could use that extra 5000 as a hedge/insurance policy/emergency fund to help insure you graduate.   Also you are likely to have some moving expenses once you graduate.  That 5K could be used to help cover those costs.   The worst case is you graduate with no emergencies, you get a nice signing bonus and relocation package, and you still have the $5000.  Well you still have until 15 April 2015 to put money in your ROTH for 2014.  This holds true for every tax year.   Given your current financial status, you are likely to find yourself soon contributing the max to your 401K and ROTH.  Once that happens, money beyond that can be invested into mutual funds stocks that are not tax advantaged, real estate, or some other choices.  Well then you have some things to think about."
"There are a lot of false claims around the internet about this concept - the fact of the matter is you are giving yourself the ability to have money in a tax favored environment with consistent, steady growth as well as the ability to access it whenever you want.  Compare this to a 401k plan for example....money is completely at risk, you can't touch it, and you're penalized if you don't follow the government's rules. As far as commissions to the agent - an agent will cut his commission in half by selling you an ""infinite banking"" style policy as opposed to a traditional whole life policy. @duffbeer703 clearly doesn't understand life insurance in the slightest when he says that the first three years of your premium payements will go to the agents pocket.  And as usual offers no alternative except ""pick some high yielding dividen stocks and MLPs"" - Someone needs to wake up from the Dave Ramsey coma and realize that there is no such thing as a 12% mutual fund....do your research on the stock market (crestmont research).  don't just listen to dave ramseys disciples who still thinking getting 12-15% year in and year out is possible. It's frustrating to listen to people who are so uneducated on the subject - remember the internet has turned everyone into ""experts"" if you want real advice talk to a legitimate expert that understands life insurance and how it actually works."
"Of course people can change careers to something else and irregardless of their previous training.  Everybody grow in their career to something else.  But to be a CHIEF Information Security Officer, the Chief, you need to be an expert and knowledgeable person in your area.  I very much doubt that somebody who showed interest in Music, studied Music for 7 years and failed in that area is ""material"" to be a Chief Information Security Officer even after 10 years of working in that area. (Susan failed in her Music career, otherwise she will not try something else like computer security).  But with my doubts, yes there are few cases of somebody with one background and studies becoming a real expert and leader in a totally different area. It's rare!!!!!  For lower level jobs, yes, a music major may become a descent programmer or project manager. I doubt they will become experts and best in the field.  Let's concentrate on this particular case: Susan had no talent, and I gave you some quotes of what she said. The FACT is she is responsible for the biggest breach of personal data in the history of the world. Her becoming a CISO for Equifax is mostly due to her knowing someone or someone knowing her. And even if it's not the case, it's mostly due to her being like typical many clueless managers: expertise in political backstabbing of anyone in your way, being very ""social"" with the right people, etc.  Do you want me to give a list of top managers and CEOs that destroyed successful and big companies. Trust me, in most cases, they did not have the qualification of even the studies to run a company or do their jobs."
Ok. So mum and dad is the government and the child is the citizen? Or is it that mum and dad is the past and the child is the actual government?  Our problem is that we managed our real estate so well that we never got a recession on it since the 1990s.   That and immigrants only wants to live in the VA area or GTA.   The rest of the country is fine. I live in Montreal and you can rent a nice apartment for less then 1k a month 20 mins from downtown and a house is still 400-600k.
"The elephant in the room is the research. From the article it seems to conclude that the majority of the research happened in the US, but Microsoft is claiming it happened overseas.  From what I've seen a lot of *initial* research does happen in Microsoft international offices, all further development to bring it to market might be done in the US but the idea sprung elsewhere.   From a taxation perspective you can argue that the patent was invented offshore and profits should be allocated there, or you can argue that it was the US development investment that made it profitable and so profits should be allocated in the US. Both are right - and this makes the US so interesting to invest in.   If you invest in the US and then license offshore to sell back to a US entity - thats just exploiting a loophole. If it was invented offshore, thats what the laws are trying to protect.   Personally I think Microsoft is doing pretty well here, like the demo of translations from chinese sign language to english - MSR Asia invented it, but it will be US teams transform it to a feature that derives income. Where should it be taxed if it does become a real product? How many other areas of Windows, Visual Studio, Office, Azure were ""invented"" by non-US teams and should also be taxed offshore?"
A second strategy I've heard of is buying calls and puts at a given strike price. For example, if you bought Dec '13 calls and puts on SPX @ 115 today, it would cost you about $35 dollars. If the price moves more than 35 dollars away from 115 by DEC '13 (in either direction), you've made a profit. If you reflect on that for a bit, you'll see why VIX is considered a volatility index. I guess I should mention that shorting a stock and buying a put option at the market price are very similar, with the exception that your loss is limited to the price of the option. Is there ever an instance where options investing is not speculative? The term 'speculative' is not well defined. For many people, the answer is no. It's very easy to just buy put options and wait for prices to fall, or call options and wait for prices to rise. Moreover, the second strategy above essentially gives you similar performance to a stock without paying full price. These all fall under the headline of increasing a risk portfolio rather than decreasing it, which I figure is a decent definition of speculation. On the other hand, there are ways to use options minimize risk rather than increase it. You can buy underwater options as portfolio insurance, if your portfolio drops below a certain amount, you still have the right to sell it at a higher one. And the Case-Schiller index is run in part, on the hopes that one day there might be a thriving market for real estate options (or futures). When you buy a home or lend money to someone to buy one, you could buy regional Case-Schiller options to protect you if the regional market tanks. But in all of these cases, it's required for someone else to take the opposite trade. Risk isn't reduced, it's traded around. So technically, there is a speculative element to these as well. I think the proper question here is whether speculation is present, but whether speculation can be put to good ends. Without speculators, the already very thin market for options would shrivel faster.
Currency exchange is rather the norm than the exception in international wire transfers, so the fact that the amount needs to be exchanged should have no impact at all. The processing time depends on the number of participating banks and their speeds. Typically, between Europe and the US, one or two business days are the norm. Sending from Other countries might involve more steps (banks)  which each takes a bit of time. However, anything beyond 5 business days is not normal. Consider if there are external delays - how did you initiate the sending? Was it in person with an agent of the bank, who might have put it on a stack, and they type it in only a day later (or worse)? Or was it online, so it is in the system right away? On the receiver side, how did you/your friend check? Could there be a delay by waiting for an account statement? Finally, and that is the most common reason, were all the numbers, names, and codes absolutely correct? Even a small mismatch in name spelling might trigger the receiving bank to not allocate the money into the account. Either way, if you contact the sender bank, you will be able to make them follow up on it. They must be able to trace where they money went, and where it currently is. If it is stuck, they will be able to get it ‘unstuck’.
Or at least use the equity in the medallion to diversify. Borrow against the medallion to buy an income property, or put it into a balanced portfolio of financial securities. It looks like the same problem with real estate: people are spending their capital instead of putting it to work. Holding most of your wealth in a single asset and then borrowing against that asset to fund consumption is a recipe for bankruptcy.
"&gt;During the dot-com boom, tons of people with liberal arts degrees and no experience wound up as ""software engineers"". Not all of them sucked, but many did, and the dot-com crash sorted that out. As an engineer, I saw this first hand, and it wasn't a bad thing -- I had a lot of co-workers in 2000 who weren't pulling their weight. This is going to sound heartless, and maybe it is, but if someone has been unemployed 3 years, maybe it is time for a career change.  This was what I'm arguing about not the economics of the situation. You make the argument that it is not a bad thing because their skills were lacking. But that isn't the case with the receptionists and this is not just one branch that is suffering. I think its a terrible thing that has little to do with the skills of people and the ""right"" career path.  When there are no jobs or very little jobs being unemployed for 3 years is hell and considering a career change it not as simple as you make it sound."
And by ""others"", I mean that you should really not consider buying absolutely anything until you've viewed at least 6-10 other options in some depth - and you probably want to double or triple that number if you are looking to make this the last big business transaction of your life. If you don't you'll be relying on little more than dumb luck to carry you through - which in this area of business, you don't want to do because the dollar amounts and liabilities involved can bankrupt you in no time flat. With that general advice out of the way, here's a tiny nutshell version of valuation of commercial real estate. There are a few key parts involved in commercial real estate: land, improvements (buildings, docks, stuff like that), income, and wages. Land: the value of the land is based upon what you could sell it for, as-is. That is to say - who else might want it? This alone has many important factors, such as zoning laws, the neighborhood (including your neighbors), water/utilities, pacts on the land (someone may have insisted the land not be paved into a parking lot, or really anything like that), alternative uses (could you put a golf course on it, or is the land suitable for a big building or farming?), etc. And is this in a growing area, where you might hope the value will increase over the next decade, or decrease, or basically stay flat (and possibly cause losses compared to inflation)? Improvements: anything on the land is both an asset and a liability. It's an asset because it could add to the value of the land, but it might also reduce the land value if it interferes with alternate land uses. It's a liability, both in the legal sense and in that it requires maintenance. If you want to rent them out, especially, that means concern about any foundations involved, termites, roofs, sewage/septic tanks, utilities that are your responsibility (pipes, poles, wires), as well as any sort of ac/heating you may have, docks, and so on. These things are rarely free and absolutely can eat you alive. Income: Ah, the best part, the constant influx of cash! But wait, is it a constant influx?