vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"A brief review of the financial collapses in the last 30 years will show that the following events take place in a fairly typical cycle: Overuse of that innovation (resulting in inadequate supply to meet demand, in most cases) Inadequate capacity in regulatory oversight for the new volume of demand, resulting in significant unregulated activity, and non-observance of regulations to a greater extent than normal Confusion regarding shifting standards and regulations, leading to inadequate regulatory reviews and/or lenient sanctions for infractions, in turn resulting in a more aggressive industry ""Gaming"" of investment vehicles, markets and/or buyers to generate additional demand once the market is saturated ""Chickens coming home to roost"" - A breakdown in financial stability, operational accuracy, or legality of the actions of one or more significant players in the market, leading to one or more investigations A reduction in demand due to the tarnished reputation of the instrument and/or market players, leading to an anticipation of a glut of excess product in the market ""Cold feet"" - Existing customers seeking to dump assets, and refusing to buy additional product in the pipeline, resulting in a glut of excess product ""Wasteland"" - Illiquid markets of product at collapsed prices, cratering of associated portfolio values, retirees living below subsistence incomes Such investment bubbles are not limited to the last 30 years, of course; there was a bubble in silver prices (a 700% increase through one year, 1979) when the Hunt brothers attempted to corner the market, followed by a collapse on Silver Thursday in 1980.   The ""poster child"" of investment bubbles is the Tulip Mania that gripped the Netherlands in the early 1600's, in which a single tulip bulb was reported to command a price 16 times the annual salary of a skilled worker. The same cycle of events took place in each of these bubbles as well. Templeton's caution is intended to alert new (especially younger) players in the market that these patterns are doomed to repeat, and that market cycles cannot be prevented or eradicated; they are an intrinsic effect of the cycles of supply and demand that are not in synch, and in which one or both are being influenced by intermediaries. Such influences have beneficial effects on short-term profits for the players, but adverse effects on the long-term viability of the market's profitability for investors who are ill-equipped to shed the investments before the trouble starts."
"So, there is no truly ""correct"" way to calculate return.  Professionals will often calculate many different rates of return depending on what they wish to understand about their portfolio.  However, the two most common ways of calculating multi-period return though are time-weighted return and money-weighted return. I'll leave the details to this good Investopeadia article, but the big picture is time-weighted returns help you understand how the stock performed during the period in question independent of how you invested it it.  Whereas money-weighted return helps you understand how you performed investing in the stock in question.  From your question, it appears both methods would be useful in combination to help you evaluate your portfolio. Both methods should be fairly easy to calculate yourself in a spread sheet, but if you are interested there are plenty of examples of both in google docs on the web."
You are a fucking moron. Do you really think India is stupid enough to let some franchisees openly steal McDonalds brand and run restaurants without the HQ engagement? McDs usually are in major metros with high incomes and high levels of visibility. Indian government can't afford to let a foreign brand be stolen in broad day light and there has never been an instance such a brand store is stolen EVER.  Advice from someone who lived in US for 20 and in India for 22 years - go visit India. For the most part, there is some levels of law and order - especially to foreign companies.
Only 20, and going through university This is an important question to ask yourself. Your earnings are 0 and will remain so, unless you start working. Are you willing to halve your money, if the markets tank after you put in your money ? Mostly good investors will buy some more, if they know the stocks they have picked are good. Considering that you have no income you will loose out on it. If you are graduating soon, it might make sense to start investing but it should be reliant on the fact on how quickly you will land a job. I would suggest stay put in the ISA for the time being. Check out if you might get a higher rate of interest if possible and transfer there. Check out  Moneysupermarket . Don't blindly put money in a ISA, see if you are getting the best deal in the market. And one thing, interest on ISA is calculated daily.
&gt; an investor is more valuable to a company than an employee is.  It IS possible to run a company without investors. Now try it without workers.  &gt; Furthermore, an investor takes on risk, something an employee does not do. When I purchase CAT stock, I may very well lose everything. I am the last in the long line of creditors. However, the employee does not stand to lose anything...  Incorrect. When you invest in CAT stock you stand to lose everything *that you invested*. If you invested more than you can afford, then that's your own stupidity.  An employee risks their entire livelihood - including all income, healthcare, pensions, etc - on the hope that the company will succeed...and they have less choice about the employment (especially in these days of 'take whatever job you can get') and much less access to the financial statements and company facts that an investor would get.
The uniform­coverage rule requires that the maximum amount of an employee’s projected elective contributions to a health FSA must be available from the first day of the plan year to reimburse the employee’s qualified medical expenses, regardless of the amount actually contributed to the plan at the time that reimbursement is sought. Citing proposed Treasury Regulations Section the IRS General Counsel has determined that: “Under the uniform coverage rules, the maximum amount of reimbursement from a health FSA must be available at all times during the coverage period. The cafeteria plan may not, therefore, base its reimbursements to an employee on what that employee may have contributed up to any particular date, such as the date the employee is laid-off or terminated. Thus, if an employee’s reimbursements from the health FSA exceed his contributions to the health FSA at the time of or termination, the employer cannot recoup the difference from the employee.” This rule is unfair and also constitutes a disincentive to establishing FSAS because of the exposure to out-of pocket expenditures arising from employees who leave the company. NSBA believes that the uniform coverage rule should also be revised if the or lose- it rule is changed. Revising the use-it or lose-it rule while leaving the uniform coverage rule unchanged will introduce an inappropriate asymmetry to FSAS. An employer should be allowed to deduct any negative amount arising from insuftîcient employee contributions from a terminating partieipant’s last paycheck. http://www.ecfc.org/files/legislative-news/NSBA_(David_Burton).pdf (emphasis added) Now, that's some fresh bitterness for you right there. (Dated August 17, 2012)
&gt; gave store coupons as part of salaries.  To be honest I don’t see an issue with this.  If Walmart is paying this on top of the employee’s wages then it’s basically just a benefit similar to employee stock options.
There is nothing inappropriate about this reply, yet I'm bumped down to -1 to make me invisible. That is not how debate is supposed to happen.  If someone disagrees, they should do it in words. Downvotes are for inappropriate conduct.
So it's morally an outrage to see it also trying even as it beats down the price of someone and tells them they aren't entitled to better, to tell them that they may not go somewhere else that thinks they are better. That is not competition and it is not fair. Indentured servitude, not slavery, is more technically correct. And yet it is a push to treat people like capital, so slavery is not inappropriate metaphorically. The topic is non-competes, but really it's about businesses not wanting to have to compete for employees; that is, about businesses not wanting capitalism to prevail in hiring. Sorry for the length."
In your own example of VW, it dropped from its peak price of $253 to $92. If you had invested $10,000 in VW in April 2015, by September of that year it would have gone down to $3,600. If you held on to your investment, you would now be getting back to $6,700 on that original $10,000 investment. Your own example demonstrates that it is possible to lose. I have a friend who put his fortune into a company called WorldCom (one of the examples D Stanley shared). He actually lost all of his retirement. Luckily he made some money back when the startup we both worked for was sold to a much larger company. Unsophisticated investors lose money all the time by investing in individual companies. Your best bet is to start searching this site for answers on how to invest your money so that you can see actual strategies that reduce your investment risk. Here's a starting point: Best way to start investing, for a young person just starting their career? If you want to better illustrate this principle to yourself, try this stock market simulation game.
If you're sure you want to go the high risk route: You could consider hot stocks or even bonds for companies/countries with lower credit ratings and higher risk. I think an underrated cost of investing is the tax penalties that you pay when you win if you aren't using a tax advantaged account. For your speculating account, you might want to open a self-directed IRA so that you can get access to more of the high risk options that you crave without the tax liability if any of those have a big payout. You want your high-growth money to be in a Roth, because it would be a shame to strike it rich while you're young and then have to pay taxes on it when you're older. If you choose not to make these investments in a tax-advantaged account, try to hold your stocks for a year so you only get taxed at capital gains rates instead of as ordinary income. If you choose to work for a startup, buy your stock options as they vest so that if the company goes public or sells privately, you will have owned those stocks long enough to qualify for capital gains. If you want my actual advice about what I think you should do: I would increase your 401k percentage to at least 10% with or without a match, and keep that in low cost index funds while you're young, but moving some of those investments over to bonds as you get closer to retirement and your risk tolerance declines. Assuming you're not in the 25% tax bracket, all of your money should be in a Roth 401k or IRA because you can withdraw it without being taxed when you retire.  The more money you put into those accounts now while you are young, the more time it all has to grow. The real risk of chasing the high-risk returns is that when you bet wrong it will set you back far enough that you will lose the advantage that comes from investing the money while you're young. You're going to have up and down years with your self-selected investments, why not just keep plugging money into the S&P which has its ups and downs, but has always trended up over time?
I think you misunderstand my point. My post *is* rather vague. I'm saying that making an open post countering the company's public stance on diversity is unwise and is an inappropriate way to address any real concerns in general.   If it is merely an opinion you'd like to voice, there are many other social outlets which would be more appropriate for personal use than the company's internal network.
"The link highlighting on that page is bonkers. Not sure I trust what nymag.com is saying about internet culture.  Also: ""It’s tough to generate revenue when your most active user base is too young to have a steady income.""  Really?"
See that's just it, the value of AIM is purely in the user base.  Unless you could purchase the user base, there are already stronger competitors.  And AIM clearly believes that its not even worth the sale.  What I mean is, suppose they believe they could raise 5 million by selling the user base (say $5 per active user).  They must be estimating their costs of transitioning it to a new owner to be higher than that.  The main issues are privacy and security.  Read the other comments in this thread, you're talking about oil companies and banks using it, they need a very high assurance level that a startup probably won't be able to provide.  Only an experienced tech company with strong financial backing would be able to make a move here, and I highly doubt they made the decision to shut it down without examining these avenues already.
...okay, dude, at *least* read up on Title VII... I mean, I know this will *also* get downvoted, but there are some pretty big exemptions in it.  &gt; (j) The term “religion” includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.  Downvote the sheer facts of law. I know you want to. But considering this business is made up predominantly of Christians and they're using the business as ministry, it would be more or less impossible to accommodate a non-religious person into the mix, unless they were absolutely separate from everything the company did (like the building caretaker example).
Whenever I've tried to actually buy something at an Apple Store I've found it a frustrating experience.  With no line-ups or registers the process of actually buying something becomes a mess of finding an employee not helping someone else and hoping no-one else is quicker than you.  I've tried using the ipads to request help but it seems they prioritize the people grabbing at them rather than the queue.  Because of this I only go to apple stores to browse.
Personal finance startup BillGuard has raised $10 million in second-round financing, and it’s using it to expand its service that helps protect accounts from fraudulent activity, the company said Tuesday.  BillGuard protects users by registering their credit and debit cards and keeping an eye out for questionable and fraudulent charges. The company uses a crowdsourced approach to identifying unauthorized charges, by not only providing its own detection but also incorporating users’ billing complaints to track and analyze payments.  BillGuard’s big second round of funding comes from a powerhouse group, including Khosla Ventures, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors and Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund.  “At Khosla Ventures we love entrepreneurs who dare to tackle large problems with disruptive, bottom-up methods,” said Vinod Khosla, founding partner of Khosla Ventures, in a statement.  At present, BillGuard is free to use for anyone who wants to sign up. So how is it going to make money? The company is talking to large banks that could act as partners and incorporate BillGuard on a per-customer basis for a small fee. BillGuard is also exploring the idea of a merchant certification program that would let merchants have access to some its data, and follow up with customers who end up with fraudulent or questionable charges.  New York-based BillGuard previously raised $3 million in its first round of funding from Bessemer Venture Partners and IA Ventures. BillGuard made its public debut on stage at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in May 2011.
I think we need some reform on what can be pat ended, but eliminating IP all together is a terrible idea. It would destroy any chances for a startup company to thrive. Let's say you invent a new widget (not an Android widget), but only have a small amount of capital to get started.   What stops a large company like Apple, Samsung, or Sony from taking your widget and copying it exactly? They have the capital to manufacture it on a global scale while you are stuck as a startup who had their idea stolen. Without IP they could do this without any repercussions.
&gt;  We don't want to go back to the days when people carried 2 cell phones; one for work and one personal.  Most people still do this, and it's a valuable strategy for work/life balance.  As a security consultant, I feel an employee has no right to connect their own unsecured device to the corporate network. Your phone should be your phone, connected to your provider account and using your provider's 3g / H signal.  The only thing on corporate networks should be hardware that has been audited and provided by the company. Not only is this easier to secure, it also protects the employee from legal action as it is the company that has responsibility for securing the phone and computer they provide. They also are responsible for all the bills the work use of that phone entails.
Short answer: No. Some of those 'automatic' payments you've agreed to (presumably by signing a PAD form) are initiated in batch by the company whom you're buying from (phone company, cable company etc). So no, the bank has no indication from one day to the next what is coming through.  And the request goes from say, your cable company to THEIR merchant bank to YOUR bank. Typically you have a monthly bill date which is fixed, and they should have terms established when it is due.  If a payment comes back NSF they can retry once - but only for the same amount and I believe it is 14 days from the initial payment attempt.  It makes it predictable, and you'd figure banks would clue in and start to predict for you when things may come out - but strictly speaking your bank doesn't know when or how much.
Companies in Korea are unlike companies in the West. While he was CEO by title the person who actually wielded top power was the son of the Chairman who was set to “inherit” the company due to...being the son of the chairman.  In Korea, people liken CEOs as essentially a royal-family system. It’s not merit based, and you often see incredibly hands off, young, and/or irresponsible CEOs while the working class within the company actually maintains its success.  It’s weird for us to think about as Westerners because we see the CEO being a merit and experienced based position optimized for shareholder earnings.
Yes the company can still pay dividends even if they aren't making a profit. 1) If the firm has been around, it might have made profits in the past years, which it might be still carrying (check for retained earnings in the financial statements). 2) Some firms in the past have had taken up debt to return the money to shareholders as dividends. 3) It might sell a part of it's assets and return the gain as dividends. 4) They might be bought by some other firm, which returns cash to shareholders to keep them happy. It pays to keep an eye on the financial statements of the company to check how much liquid money they might be carrying around to pay shareholders as dividends. They can stop paying dividends whenever they want. Apple didn't pay a dividend while Steve Jobs was around, even though they were making billions in profits. Many companies don't pay dividends because they find it more beneficial to continue investing in their business rather than returning money to shareholders.
Edit: Let's forget about Wikipedia. From the horse's mouth: The cafeteria plan rules require that a health FSA provide uniform coverage throughout the coverage period (which is the period when the employee is covered by the plan). See Proposed Treasury Regulations Section 1.125-5(d). Under the uniform coverage rules, the maximum amount of reimbursement from a health FSA must be available at all times during the coverage period. This means that the employee’s entire health FSA election is available from the first day of the plan year to reimburse qualified medical expenses incurred during the coverage period. The cafeteria plan may not, therefore, base its reimbursements to an employee on what that employee may have contributed up to any particular date, such as the date the employee is laid-off or terminated. Thus, if an employee’s reimbursements from the health FSA exceed his contributions to the health FSA at the time of lay-off or termination, the employer cannot recoup the difference from the employee. (emphasis added) http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/1012060.pdf Uniform Coverage Rule The IRS has required that “health FSAS must qualify as accident or health plans. This means that, in general, while the health coverage under the FSA need not be provided through a commercial insurance contract, health FSAS must exhibit the risk-shifting and risk-distribution characteristics of insurance.” This concept has led to the “uniform coverage” rule. The uniform­coverage rule requires that the maximum amount of an employee’s projected elective contributions to a health FSA must be available from the first day of the plan year to reimburse the employee’s qualified medical expenses, regardless of the amount actually contributed to the plan at the time that reimbursement is sought. Citing proposed Treasury Regulations Section the IRS General Counsel has determined that: “Under the uniform coverage rules, the maximum amount of reimbursement from a health FSA must be available at all times during the coverage period. The cafeteria plan may not, therefore, base its reimbursements to an employee on what that employee may have contributed up to any particular date, such as the date the employee is laid-off or terminated.
"But I have been having a little difficulty to include the expenditure in my monthly budget as the billing cycle is from the 16th to 15th of the next month and my income comes in at the end of the month. Many companies will let you change the statement date if you want, so one way to do this would be to request your bank to have statements due at the end of the month or first of month. You can call and ask, this might resolve your problem entirely. How can I efficiently add the credit card expenditure to my monthly budget? We do this using YNAB, which then means our monthly budget is separate from our actual bank accounts. When we spend, we enter the transaction into YNAB and it's ""spent."" Additionally, we just pay whatever our credit card balance is a day before the end of the month so it is at $0 when we do our budget discussion at the end of each month."
There are really only two options: invoiced, or paid. Everything else is not relevant from a tax or accounting point of view. Of course, if you're invoicing as you go along or collecting deposits once things are in your order books, then that amount of money is relevant. Working things out according to when you invoice is called working on an accrual basis. Working it out according to when you get paid is called working on a cash basis. Wikipedia explains the distinction, which also applies to your expenses: when did you incur them (get the bill) vs when you did you pay it. In some jurisdictions and for some kinds of companies, you can choose which of these two bases to work on (but no other basis.) There is advice on the UK government website about keeping your accounts. It includes a link to a PDF and on page 15 of that 100 page PDF it states: 2.14 The financial statements, with the exception of cash flow information, shall be prepared on the accruals basis of accounting. HENCE, ALL INCOME AND CHARGES RELATING TO THE FINANCIAL YEARTO WHICH THE ACCOUNTS RELATE MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, WITHOUT   REGARD TO THE DATE OF PAYMENT OR RECEIPT. That seems pretty clear to me. When you invoice. Period.