vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Oh, give me a break. This argument asserts that people can never veer from the career path they chose at 17 when applying for universities. It's also inconsistent to state that veterans--regardless of whether they studied IT or cybersecurity--are qualified, then go on to state that only people who studied IT in university are qualified. This argument asserts that all adult education and job retraining efforts are for naught, and that experience on the job is less important than the primary focus of study decades ago.    Seriously, give me a break, and join the real world.  I'm not making any claim as to her competence in the role because there were clearly severe mistakes made, but the idea that decades-old coursework in a constantly-changing field is somehow more valuable than recent experience is ludicrous.   Should I fire my DBA who has a law degree, since despite his 25 years IT experience, he clearly doesn't have any interest in informatics?  Should I fire my PM who was a non-degree-holding housewife until entering the workforce eight years ago after her divorce?  Should I promote my MBA-holding Marine rifleman to head Risk &amp; Compliance, since military experience is apparently more applicable than the Finance degree of the person who currently holds the role?  The only thing at issue here is whether she has training or certifications, hired experienced experts for key roles, built a culture of openness and honesty, followed best practices, and built a competent organization.  Her actions are what speak to her inability to properly manage her organization; what undergraduate degree she holds doesn't matter one whit.
When inflation is high or is rising generally interest rates will be raised to reduce people spending their money and slow down the rate of inflation. As interest rates rise people will be less willing to borrow money and more willing to keep their money earning a good interest rate in the bank. People will reduce their spending and invest less into alternative assets but instead put more into their bank savings. When inflation is too low and the economy is starting to slow down generally interest rates will be raised to encourage more spending to restart the economy again. As interest rates drop more will take their saving out of their bank accounts as is starts to earn very little in interest rate and more will be willing to borrow as it becomes cheaper to borrow. People will start spending more and investing their money outside of bank savings.
"What was the true reason they wanted to use my accounts for? We wouldn't know the true reason. The scammer can do multiple things. What exactly he would do in your case ... I am very eager to know what a person was up to who would give to me so much information about themselves. I know some of you will jump on the chance to yell ""it was not their true address"", but.... it is where they wanted me to send the cards to. And I was to give proof of my identification ie; a copy of my drivers license, my articles of incorporation and the real estate development project prospectus. Also they were only willing to work with certain banks ie; Citibank, Bank of America etc. I can not understand what they were doing wanting such access to accounts that had no money in them save the amount I used to open them with. It looks more like they would open accounts under your name, but they would be controlling the accounts. i.e. what goes in and out. i.e. they would be able to deposit and withdraw from a new account they set-up. They would want to use this account for illegal activities, so that if caught, the account opening paper trail leads to you. Even if they gave you an address, it could be rental. Like they have copies of your Company registration and ID proofs, they can use these to get another rental property ... and then send letters to some and ask them to met there."
So let's get started (all data as recent as I could find, oldest source is for 2010): * [Most americans don't invest in the stock market](https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2014/pdf/scf14.pdf) About 48.8% of americans owned publicly traded stock directly or indirectly, with a much smaller percent (13.8%) owning stock directly - pages 18 and 16 respectively. It's important to note the predominance of indirect ownership which suggests this is mostly retirement accounts. It's entirely possible people are irresponsible with their emergency savings, but I think it safe to say we should not expect people to *dip into their retirement accounts* for relatively minor emergency expenses. The reason is obvious, even if it covers the expense they now have to make up the shortfall for their retirement savings. This is further supported by the same source: &gt;""The value of assets held within IRAs and DC plans are among the most significant compo-nents of many families’ balance sheets and are a significant determinant of their future retirement security."" Ibid (page 20, PDF page 20 of 41) There is also a break down of holdings by asset type on page 16, PDF page 16 of 41. * [This data is skewed by the top 10% who keep more of their wealth in different asset types.](http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html) For a breakdown between the 1st, 10th, and 90th percentiles see **table 3.** So far it seems pretty hard to maintain a large percent of americans have their wealth stored outside of savings accounts, mattresses aside. * [Here's my original reply as to the breakdown of americans assets by type and percent holding.](https://imgur.com/a/DsLxB) Note this assumes people *have* assets. [Source for images/data.](https://www.census.gov/people/wealth/data/dtables.html) Most people use savings accounts, with runner up falling to checking accounts.
&gt;Oh, but when you look at PayPal and VISA/MasterCard, there's like one. Or two.  Yeah, no. I work in credit card processing, PayPal isn't even the largest, let alone the only processing company, nor is it the only way (or even the safest or best way) to make online purchases.   And Visa/Mastercard don't control the issuing of cards to individuals, banks do. Every credit card is issued by a bank.  &gt;Denying legal use of money in a de facto monopoly is to me not morally better than denying legal use of money in a public utility monopoly.  No one is denying legal use of money and PayPal is nowhere close to having a monopoly.
Firstly, make sure annual income exceeds annual expenses. The difference is what you have available for saving.  Secondly, you should have tiers of savings. From most to least liquid (and least to most rewarding): The core of personal finance is managing the flow of money between these tiers to balance maximizing return on savings with budget constraints. For example, insurance effectively allows society to move money from savings to stocks and bonds. And a savings account lets the bank loan out a bit of your money to people buying assets like homes.  Note that the above set of accounts is just a template from which you should customize. You might want to add in an FSA or HSA, extra loan payments, or taxable brokerage accounts, depending on your cash flow, debt, and tax situation.
"Dude, you are over analyzing this way too much.  The fact of the matter is, if someone is sketchy enough to help you rob a bank, their character and judgement is suspect.  &gt;Moreover, it can't be that hard to find a group of 4-5 people who aren't stupid. I can think of a dozen friends of mine off the top of my head I'd have complete confidence in if we decided to rob a bank.  This sentence is a bit of a fallacy in of itself after reading the linked article above.  You want to find ""4-5 people who aren't stupid"" that will ""rob a bank.""  We just read about how the return on bank robbery is complete garbage, so anyone who would think it a good idea is de facto stupid.  Chances are, someone who was willing to commit such a large crime, will be willing to commit other, possibly smaller crimes.  And if you think there's any loyalty among criminals, you are incredibly naive..."
"From what I gathered, the point is not that he acted like a savvy business person would while at Bain, but that he's running on being an ""American job creator who will use his experience in business to create American jobs"", when most of his business experience dealt with destroying American jobs.  Ninja update: This does seem more appropriate in a political subreddit other than r/business, but /r/politics is not worthy of it."
"Yes. [Velocity of money](http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/velocity.asp) and savings rates are two important things economists look at. Note, though, that very little money is enturely taken out of the economy -- cash stuffed under mattresses. When most people ""save"" money (e.g. in a bank account), they're actually loaning it out for someone else to use, in exchange for interest. When your money is in the bank, it's just a number in a ledger."
"Your question points out how most fractional reserve banks are only a couple of defaults away from insolvency. The problem arises because of the terms around the depositors' money.  When a customer deposits money into a bank they are loaning their money to the bank (and the bank takes ownership of the money).  Deposit and savings account are considered ""on-demand"" accounts where the customer is told they can retrieve their money at any time.  This is a strange type of loan, is it not?  No other loan works this way.  There are always terms around loans - how often the borrower will make payments, when will the borrower pay back the loan, what is the total time frame of the loan, etc..  The bank runs into problems because the time frame on the money they borrowed (i.e. deposits) does not match the time frame on the money they are lending."
NO.  The legislation requires the landlord to deposit it in a bank.  Check out pages 7-10 of the linked document.  There is no mention of interest. The second clause, I believe, is probably for large landlords who hold hundreds of thousands of dollars of security.   http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/publications/tenantlandlord.pdf Q4 Once collected, what must the landlord do with the security deposit?   The landlord must either: a) Deposit the money with a regulated financial institution (e.g.,   bank), OR b) Deposit a cash bond or surety bond, to secure the entire deposit,   with the Secretary of State. ( Note: If the landlord does this, he or   she may use the money at any time, for any purpose.) The bond ensures   that there is money available to repay the tenant’s security deposit
Rewards Checking Accounts - These are checking accounts that will pay a relatively high interest rate (3% or more) provided you generate enough activity. Most of them will have requirements like you must have direct deposit setup with them, and you must do a minimum number of debit card transactions from the account per month. If you can stay on top of the requirements, these can be a great deal. If you don't stay on top of it, your interest rate usually drops back to something pitiful, though. Personally, we use the Online High-Yield Savings Account for our emergency fund. I'm not going to make a specific recommendation as to which bank to use. The best deal changes almost week to week. Instead, I will say to check out Bankrate.com for a list of savings accounts and CDs that you can sort. The Bank Deals blog is a good place to follow rate changes."
"&gt;Those ""resources"" are often employees  Yes labor is also a scarce resource. But just like other resources it needs to be used in a way that is most productive. If the govt spends $100k hiring two people to dig holes and then refill them, those two people are employed, but there is no production there. That $100k contributed to no productive growth and created no wealth for anyone. The two businessmen who did not get loans for their business would have to seek employment with another entrepreneur who could put their labor to more productive use.   &gt;No, only the base rate is set centrally.  Exactly, but the bank's rates are reliant on the federal funds rate"
Giving out your bank account number is not generally a security problem.  The first time you write your landlord a security deposit or rent check, he'll have your account number.  (It's printed on the check.) That having been said, in my experience, banks do not generally give out balance information to just anyone who calls them up and gives them an account number.  Have you asked the landlord what he needs?  Perhaps showing him a printout of a recent bank statement is enough.
The best thing for you to do will be to start using the Cash Flow report instead of the Income and Expense report. Go to Reports -> Income and Expense -> Cash Flow Once the report is open, open the edit window and open the Accounts tab.  There, choose your various cash accounts (checking, saving, etc.).  In the General tab, choose the reporting period.  (And then save the report settings so you don't need to go hunting for your cash accounts each time.) GnuCash will display for you all the inflows and outflows of money, which appears to be what you really want. Though GnuCash doesn't present the Cash Flow in a way that matches United States accounting rules (with sections for operating, investing, and financial cash flows separated), it is certainly fine for your personal use. If you want the total payment to show up as one line on the Cash Flow report, you will need to book the accrual of interest and the payment to the mortgage bank as two separate entries. Normal entry for mortgage payments (which shows up as a line for mortgage and a line for interest on your Cash Flow): Pair of entries to make full mortgage payment show up as one line on Cash Flow: Entry #1:  Interest accrual Entry #2:  Full mortgage payment (Tested in GnuCash 2.6.1)
When you want to pay a bill on line there are several ways to do it. You can give them your credit card details: Name on Card, zip code, credit card number, and 3 or 4 digit security code on the back. Most of the information is available on the card or via an easy Google search. If the crook has your card they can use it to buy something.  You can contact your bank's website and establish a one time or recurring transfer. You provide the information about the person/company. Your bank knows who you are because you used a secure system and your password. Their bank accepts the money because who would refuse money, they don't care who you are. You can provide the company with your bank info (bank number, your account number, and your name). If your bank limits their transactions via this method only to legitimate organizations, then your money will only be sent to legitimate organizations. But if the organization has no way of knowing who is on the other end of the phone or webpage, they may be withdrawing money from a bank account without the account owners permission.  In the example article a person found a charity that had lax security standards, they were recognized by the bank as a legitimate organization, so the bank transferred the money. The charity will point to the form and say they had permission from the owner, but in reality they didn't.  The subject of the article was correct, all the info required is on every check. It is just that most people are honest, and the few security hurdles that exist do stop most of the fraud.
The problem around here is while the crowd sourced nature of reddit can be great for discussions, when it comes to topics that require specialized analysis or understanding beyond headlines most of the participants are young and have very little direct experience or knowledge on what they're commenting on.  So as a business owner with actual experience that you live with and have dealt with for decades you might end up with negative comment votes, while a 15 year old who plays call of duty all day says something popular with the hivemind has hundreds of positive upvotes.   At least r/business has more people willing to consider both sides of the argument.... whereas r/politics is pretty much a lost cause. Nevermind I have a top 20 university degree in political science. For even suggesting people consider alternatives or that Obama is anything but a saint I often receive negative comment votes. I don't support Romney OR Obama, but thats as good as evil for most of these people.
"&gt; A good cashier is not someone who is better at sliding packages over a scanner. Good cashiers are friendly, engaging, fast, and have a sharp eye for shoplifting. They have good judgment and relate well to their colleagues. They care about the customer's experience. Those are nice qualities, but Wal-Mart feels they are getting enough of those qualities for the price, and let's not delude ourselves into thinking that they are high skill. Anyone could be trained in the basics of watching for theft in less than 2 weeks. &gt; Walmart has chosen to compete solely on price, not on service; therefore, they hire the cheapest cashiers and sacrifice all of the soft skills that make a cashier a pleasurable part of someone's shopping experience. Wal-Mart has realized that these qualities are nice, but not really worth that much extra money. Most people don't want to have a wonderful conversation with their checker, especially if this comes at a much higher cost at the counter. Most people have friends, and even the best shopping experience is taking away from their life. Few of us want to prolong the experience with artificial and feigned conversation with our checker, which feels like a social obligation on most days. We want an accurate total and a swift checkout. When people are trying to get out of the grocery store, they don't search for the line with the friendliest checker. They search for the one who is sliding packages across the scanner like lightning. &gt; are they missing out on an opportunity to build customer loyalty Customer loyalty is overrated. The most loyal customer isn't going to impoverish their family for a really great checker experience, and Wal-Mart knows that. I'm reminded of people complaining that Wal-Mart has manufacturers make a cheaper version of their drills for their customers. Supposedly, this was a dastardly plan to make items disposable, so people would have to buy more. In reality, Wal-Mart just realizes the average guy who buys a drill isn't seriously going to get into woodworking, like he's always saying. He's going to pull it out 2-3 times, after the initial enthusiasm wears off.
US checking accounts are not really secure, though many people use them. One form of check fraud has been highlighted by Prof. Donald Knuth and carried out by Frank Abagnale, as portrayed in the film Catch Me If You Can. Basically, anyone can write a check that would draw from your account merely by knowing your account number and your bank's ABA routing number.  With those two pieces of information (which are revealed on every check that you write), anyone can print a working check, either using a laser printer with MICR (magnetic ink character recognition) toner, or by placing an order with a check-printing company.  The only other missing element is a signature, which is a pretty weak form of authentication. When presented with such a check, your bank would probably honor it before finding out, too late, that it is fraudulent. A variant of this vulnerability is ACH funds transfers.  This is the mechanism through which you could have, say, your utility company automatically withdraw money from your account to pay your bill.  Unfortunately, the transfer is initiated by the recipient, and the system relies largely on trust with some statistical monitoring for suspicious patterns. Basically, the whole US checking system is built with convenience rather than security in mind, since other institutions are able to initiate withdrawal transactions by knowing just the ABA number and account number.  In practice, it works well enough for most people, but if you are paranoid about security, as you seem to be, you don't want to be using checks. The European system, which has largely eliminated checks in favor of payer-initiated push transactions, is safer by design.
My experience is from travelling in Central Europe and Germany, so I've dealt with much smaller amounts of money, but the general principles are the same. Many Visa-brand ATM cards allow you to withdraw money from European ATMs for a 1% fee (plus any fees the bank may charge, my bank charged zero fee) in local currency.  Even if the bank charges a 2-3% fee, the combined max 4% fee is going to be a lot smaller than most currency exchange places will offer.  There are a lot of exchange offices that are built to scam tourists out of their money.  We had no choice but to use one that ended up taking around 10% of the exchanged money (luckily we were only exchanging a small amount of currency).  Call your bank and ask what their fees are, and if they are large, find a bank with small or zero fees and move your accounts there.  Be sure to notify your bank that you are going to be travelling for an extended time in a foreign country.  Literally any ATM (Geldautomat) accepted our card (thank you VISA).  We literally walked off the plane with some USD and no foreign currency, and were able to stop at an ATM right outside our hotel (the taxi had a card reader, as most in Munich did). If you have a source of income secured within the country (which I am hoping you do if you will be living there) you could live off of your income, and use your USD to pay off things like credit card bills.  Get a Travel Rewards Credit Card (or similar card that offers no foreign transaction fees or free currency transfers).  Use this card for anything and everything you can, and pay it with a transfer from your US bank account.  Under this method you'll probably have to convert some currency, but you can do so from an ATM easily enough.
Well, first and foremost you're out of luck if GameStop hits rough times and stops refunding cash, or files bankruptcy. It's a really, really (REALLY), bad idea to use something other than an FDIC insured bank as a bank. This is a lot of administrative effort on your part when internet banking exists and most of the online checking accounts refund ATM fees.  This idea is also not funny or hilarious, I would call it something but the mods here will just edit it out........
This just goes to show you have no understanding of the subject. Rich people do not have 'trillions of dollars' sitting around in bank accounts. Most of their wealth is owning assets like means of production (factories) or real estate.