vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
I don't know how to explain reading comprehension without coming off as condescending, which I hate.  Since that is the case, I'll simply suggest that the meaning of the above comment is much more evident than it may seem at first glance.  You can do it.
There is no clear answer, it might be or not be. Depends a lot on your situation. 1)Yes it is taxable but as Italy has a double taxation agreement with UK, you might not have to pay. You can get a detailed guidance on the HMRC website. 2) Apply here for a certificate of residence  3)You can only claim back if Italy taxes you more than UK would. If it is less than you will have to pay the remaining portion to HMRC. You do this in the self assessment form/tax return/call up HMRC. 4)Tell the truth, explain your whole scenario and don't withheld relevant information assuming you may lower you tax by doing so.
"There are a few things you are missing here. These appear to be penny stocks or subpenny stocks. Buying these are easy.... selling is a total different ball game. Buying commissions are low and selling commissions are outrageous. Another thing you are missing in this order is... some trading platform may assume the ""AON"" sale. That is All Or None. There was an offer of 10k shares @ .63. The buyer only wanted 10k what was the broker to do with the other 20k? Did you inform the broker that partial sales where acceptable? You may want to contact your broker and explain this to them. The ALL OR NONE order has made plenty of investor a little unhappy, which seems to be your new learning experience for the day. Sorry, school of hard knocks is not always fun."
It IS a discussion. Historically yes, A minimum wage job was able to support a family.   Do you feel that only the wealthy should be able to afford to have children? With the ever widening income gap and dwindling middle class please explain how this is not a possible reality.  Since you do not adhere to the classical definition of what minimum wage should provide. What DO you think minimum wage should be able to provide? And individual to live independently free of assistance at 40hrs a week? Do you feel they should have to work over time simply to afford to exist? Should a minimum wage worker have to depend on government assistance to get by (with or without overtime).  Do you feel so low of your fellow human being that you'd rather see them starve than increase to a living wage?
As described by the other answers, there are pretty harmless explanations for that behaviour. You could be slightly worried because he gave you exceptionally good deals for both instruments, but that's neither here nor there. Maybe he simply prices all items way up to be able to give a great discount on either sale. You can't ever know; the actual price you pay in the end is what counts. What I would do: If I expect in advance (or if I notice during the negotiation) that I am put under pressure in this way, I usually try to do exactly the same, in reverse. That is, I take  a minute to explain up front that I will not, under any circumstance, buy right now, but that this is a purely informational event. I will make sure not to have my money/card with me. Any high-end salesman worth his sale should have no problem with that at all. Money aside, you are shopping for something that will mean a lot to you. The salesman is not some peddler of arbitrary wares. Everybody understands that not only do you not want to pay too high a price, but also that you want to really get the item you want, and want to be happy with it for a long time. This is a tough decision, often, and if the salesman cannot, or does not want to respect that, then it would be a clear signal for me that dubious things are going on. In fact, you would probably be unhappier if you got the wrong item for a great price than if you got a great item for a slightly too-high price. That is something you should probably not tell the salesman ;), but can keep in mind. So getting the greatest deal of all times is probably not so high on your priority list.
I don't need to back anything up.  It will do him good and will help him stand out.  Explain why this is not the case - it's on you dumbass.  I made the comment 1st, so if you want to refute it then you need to provide proof that my opinion is invalid.  As well, I'm reporting you yet again because you're still acting like a child.  You're verbally attacking a stranger because of an opinion.  Maybe you have an MBA, maybe you don't... one way or another you don't deserve to be called an adult.  This is the 3rd attempt to ask you to be civil and you continue to be insulting, like somehow being Mr. Big on the interwebs makes you special.  Grow up you idiot.
"Nope, its not legal. Easy to explain: If you know something that isn't public known (""inside"") it's called insider trading. Hard to prove (impossible), but still illegal. To clarify: If the CEO says it AND its known in public its not illegal. In any case the CEO could face consequences (at least from his company)."
In my personal experience, and from potentially a lot of data... anytime people repeat something a lot commonly, especially when I hear it from primarily people that havent actually worked for the company, its probably accurate and not worth further research. Of course you sir are a truthful, honest and wise individual but nay what about that guy you dont like? Is he? Of course not! We dont even need the raw data or methodology.  Further the earth is probably flat, everything in the universe revolves around that earth, and the tide moves in tide moves out you can't explain that.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You could argue that Nokia was overvalued at the time, but I think you're right. As incompetent as Elop was/is, you have to have many tiers of management making strategic mistakes to explain what happened to Nokia.  Their first sin was failing to anticipate how a pocket-computer/smartphone would disrupt the mobile market.   Their second sin was failing to respond to the clear evidence that this was happening in 07/08 with the first iPhones -  think of how rubbish their Symbian OS continued to be until they adopted Windows Phone.  Their third was their failure to accept a future as a mere OEM. Had they started producing flagship android phones, in say 2012, then I believe we wouldn't see Samsung as dominant in the western market as it is now.
Microsoft is already paying Firefox for distributions (which may explain why Google is cutting them off).  I wonder when Google will pull the plug on Ask.com? Ask is the largest subsidized advertiser on Google by an extremely wide margin. They pay nothing for it... all they do is run AdSense ads and Google takes a cut. Crooked as shit, if you ask me.
Lol. When did I ever say that? I said you don't know the difference between the two. The fact that you think JP Morgan is responsible for CDO's and MBS's is comical.   So again, here's your post  &gt;Maybe if fuckers like him could manage their house then government wouldn't have to bail them out and there wouldn't be a need for as much regulation. But no, he's going to keep gambling and expect tax payers to cover his losses, and then has the audacity to bitch about it. Fuck him  Now do please explain how JP Morgan  * didn't properly manage their mortgages  * needed to be bailed out by the government  * gambled  * had the tax payers cover their losses  I'd love to see what other bullshit you come up with to defend these statements.   On the other hand, if you want to cut the shit and acknowledge you're both retarded and wrong, I'm more than happy to educate you on the recent financial crisis and why JP Morgan was a godsend to the US economy.
"I see you have posted other questions regarding household budgets.  This is a huge first step.  Once you see what is coming in, then list everything that goes out regularly...and then try to break down what is leftover into spending, household maintenance, gifts, haircuts, whatever...it becomes very obvious if you have x to spend and you spend 3x. I budget a certain amount of discretionary money for both my husband and myself to spend each month.  All of our basic expenses are covered under other categories, but I found out long ago that we each need some money to blow on Starbucks, DVD's, books, etc without having to defend or explain it.  If we spend too much, it digs into the next month's amount, or if we are careful, we get to carry it over. I can impulse shop guilt free because it's budgeted in. Long story short, if you set up a budget and have an amount budgeted for most reasonable expenses, and see what is left over...it becomes harder to ""unwittingly"" overspend.  When you are paying attention to your money, and start looking carefully at how you are spending it, you'll notice."
"So, the soviet union purchases its own debt, and this is a shining example of a historical empire that worked in your mind? Come on man, you aren't that fucking stupid are you? You don't need me to explain why that is a very, very incorrect choice do you?  I asked you to name an empire, historically, that purchased its own debt and was successful in doing so. You have still yet to do that.  And btw, there are many, many different forms of ""fallacies"", don't be a redditor and only learn one. Ad hominem is the same thing as saying personal attacks, and its pretty overused on this site."
"once again: the problems you have commented about (i.e. decline of UK manufacturing and foreign policy) and your very crude version of historical causality, combined with the policy conclusions you have suggested (the need for common immigration and policy regime with the US) suggest to me that either you haven't quite grasped post-war euopean history, or you've ventured into the realm of conspiracy theory.   PS: ""when they're charismatically explained in such a systematic and specific way"" is not a phrase commonly used in english. explain what you mean by that, please."
&gt;why does m2 seem like exponential? how can fractional reserve do something like that? unpossible.   You don't understand fractional reserve then. Please explain carefully exactly why fractional reserve cannot do that. Handwaving does not count. As I posted M2 tracks M1 by about a factor of 10, or do you dispute this? If so, why? If not, then you have to ask the question can M1 grow as fast as it has? It clearly has done so. And if it has, then banks have **not** added money beyond the money multiplier, since there is enough M1 to account for M2.  What about this do you not understand? All the data is there for you to check.   &gt;Steve Keen says otherwise  He is wrong. A bank cannot lend money it does not have. I am willing to borrow a quadrillion dollars. Where is the bank that will lend it to me? See, you're wrong.
Fixed-rate mortgage is supposed to give you security. You are not going to get the best possible rate, but it is safe and predictable. Your argument is the same as complaining that you are paying for home insurance and your home hasn't burnt down.  Switching to a variable rate mortgage right now seems a bad idea, because there is some expectations that rates are going up. If you can overpay, that is probably what you should do unless you can invest with better return after tax than your mortgage interest. It doesn't just shorten the time of your mortgage; every time you overpay £500 your mortgage principal is down by £500, and you pay interest on £500 less.  And if the interest rate goes up over the next five years as you seem to hope, that just means you will pay higher interest when your mortgage needs renewing.  You can't hope to always make the optimal decision. You made a decision with very low risk. As with any decision, you don't know what's in the future; a decision that is low risk if the risk could lead to fatal results is not unwise. You could have picked a variable rate mortgage and could be paying twice as much interest today.
That doesn't mean it's not ""real money"", it absolutely is: those promises are buying groceries and tires and making mortgage-payments and paying dentist bills and getting people to dig up stuff out of mines that will be fashioned into iPads, and all kinds of stuff. Where this hurts most people in the brain is that they kind of accept dollar bills as axiomatically and intrinsically valuable. So trying to explain in reverse how they are the same as promissory notes or credit-certificates is like trying to convince them that a plane ticket is the same as an airplane (which is obviously not true). That's why I started with this imaginary world without money. If you let go of any preconceptions, and stop trying to think through the analogies and don't read it trying to predictively look for the outcome conclusions, if you just read it and follow the story through, it is obvious that the *only* intrinsic difference (in that imaginary world) between apple-certificates, loddars, and privately-issued IOUs is the *credibility of the issuer*. Trying to understand this stuff via analogy will make your head spin: Taking it all the way back to the thread-topic and the question at the top of the page, what makes it so difficult is the tendency and mental impulse to analogize money as a ""thing"" that ""is"" somewhere, and therefore has to ""go"" somewhere. But that's an intrinsically and substantially imperfect analogy, which is what makes it hard to explain to a five-year-old. And you can't make the reality fit that analogy and stay sane. Even if you refuse to accept all this maddening abstraction and insist on only doing transactions with physical cash, or gold pieces, *the value of those markers is still 100% contingent on everyone accepting that everyone else will continue to believe that everyone else will continue to accept that currency...* Money is essentially a promise that other people will keep. Instead of giving you food, your employer gives you a ""universal gift certificate"" that you can redeem anywhere, and everyone else will accept it, because they can in turn redeem it anywhere else.
9.8 m/s^2  What you need to explain how those building came down at free fall.  As far as Palestine is concerned, there is no justification for Apache helicopters and F-16s to bomb unarmed women and children, but obviously to the mind of an Israeli, its bravery. The time for bravery will soon be at hand and when the wall they built to keep people out become the walls to the ghetto they built themselves, the answer will be plain as day
The easiest one to explain is swapping a variable interest rate with a fixed interest rate.  Now like your 5.  You are a being bullied on a playground, and the most important thing for you is to buy lunch!  You have a bully on the playground who asks for money randomly, he's variable.  It depends on how much sleep he got last night, and what he ate for breakfast, but by dealing with him he has a large amount of 'market risk'.    You always try to bring enough money so you can pay the bully and still eat lunch.  But this isn't an ideal situation...it's too sporadic.  Instead you have an agreement with a 'mafia' like bully.  He agrees to deal with the 'variable' bully, at a flat rate.  So now you can plan ahead, and you now always have money for lunch.  (The mafia bully still would owe the money to the variable bully, because in real life these would be banks)  That's the deal.  You are mitigating your risk from switching from variable to fixed.    This example is extremely simple, but the idea is, you can remove variable risk by using a 'swap' for a fixed rate.
Is there evidence of Russian money laundering through bitcoin or is this your assumption? As I understand it laundering through btc would require you to explain why your wallet has millions in it, doesn't seem useful  Edit: unless you maybe distributed the bitcoin to fake users and had them spend it on your own digital services? Would people be able to track the coins through the ledger and see that you're indirectly circulating coins from your personal wallet to your business one? I don't know I'm in too deep now
"Other than the inconvienent fact that Treasury cannot sell to the Fed by law your theory is nice. You forget the step where the open market buys from the Treasury since they desire bonds to invest in, and the Fed can buy only from the open market.  Secondly, the Fed does not give cash to the Treasury. The mint (a branch of the Treasury, not the Fed) prints cash.  So it seems your understanding of how the money system works is quite wrong, yet since this is the Economy subreddit instead of the Economics subreddit, I expect you to get upvotes for saying what is popular even though it is laughably incorrect.  You seem to not like cash that was not ""even existing previously"". All cash was not existing previously. How do you expect people to make transactions? Barter?  You call them interest free loans (but above claimed they will never be paid back?), but then the Fed is making a profit on them? It seems you contradict yourself with all that handwaving.  It would be interesting for you to explain how (and why) money (not cash) gets added and removed to the economy.   Yay for ignorance!"
Policies vary, and sometimes an advisor is able to put in a special request to waive you through some of these issues. Academia is heavily, heavily reliant on developing a good relationship and clear communication with an advisor who is willing to work with you to achieve your goals. Written policies are sometimes very firm, and sometimes all you have to do is ask the right person and poof, suddenly the rules change. It's a weird system, but don't be afraid to explain your situation and ask what can be done. Don't assume a written policy is 100% ironclad - sometimes it is, but it often isn't. Inquire About Other Government and Community-based Assistance Being destitute is awful, and having to ask for help can feel terrible in it's own way, but doing what you have to do to have a better future can mean pushing through and being willing to ask for help. This can mean asking parents and close family if they can contribute to help you finish your degree, but this also means checking with your local community programs to see if you qualify for anything. Many communities have food pantries and related programs that will help you even if you don't qualify for something like SNAP (aka food stamps), because they know times can get hard for anyone and they want you to spend what little money you have on building a better life. Your university may even run a food pantry for students in need - use it. Get what assistance you can, minimize spending in any way you can manage, put all the money towards doing what you need to do to get to a better place. It's even nicely reciprocal - once you work through your hard times and get things on track, you can return the favor and help give back to programs like the ones that helped you. Make Sure Your Long-Term Goal Makes Sense Finally, this is all predicated on pulling out all the stops to finish your degree. But this assumes that this is a good plan. Not all degrees are helpful for all people in all areas of the country. Do your own research to make sure you aren't throwing good money after bad, and are pursuing a goal that will make sense for you and what you want.
"&gt;That's where you are wrong, kiddo. I've got a minor in economics, and a BBA/MBA in Finance. You are talking to a guy that is both more educated than you on the topic and actually works with low-income people more often than you. One, I don't give a shit, and, two, you have no idea how much education I have or what I've done. But you still can't grasp the concept that statements like this mean nothing, have no bearing on whether your right or not, and is the equivalent of ""I'm older so I'm right."" However, if you were economist, then I'd actually care about your experience. &gt;Liberals outweigh conservatives by a wide margin in academics. It's fairly obvious why when you dive into it. Want research funding? There has to be a problem. Suggesting that the market is sorting out wages already and that there is no need for a minimum wage won't get you paid. You have to make bogus studies like the one you provided, which gets regurgitated in hundreds of forms by similarly desperate professors. Oooh shitting on the academic community because they don't agree with your views. Someone's been drinking the kool-aid of Breitbart and other extreme right-wing new sources. I've heard this argument before. It's the classic, ""I'll come up with anything to justify my views and explain facts I don't like."" Are you into conspiracy theories by the way? Besides, there is no proof of your last claim. But you are right, that academics lean liberal. Funny though how the intelligent people that go through years of schooling, get Ph.D's, and base their ideas and degrees off scientific research lean liberal and not conservative... And yet conservatives come up with any way they can to explain that inconvenient fact, with zero proof of course.
"If you have a president who thinks climate change is a fantasy, why should one waste time advising him on how to deal with it? And I know climate change has occurred throughout the time but not at this pace and is certainly to a large extend our fault.   And can you explain to me what an advisory council represents? It's not meant to be there to fight for your ""ideas"". It is there to advise the president on how to act according to their knowledge. Let's be honest. He doesn't listen to the advice of the members. He made up his mind a long time ago. Correct me if I am wrong."
Another suggestion I heard on the radio was to give the child the difference between the name brand they want, and the store brand they settle on.  Then that money can be accumulated as savings. Saving money is as important a feature of the family economy as earning money. Be careful with what you have a child do for reward vs what you have them do as a responsibility.  Don't set a dangerous precedent that certain work does not need to be done unless compensation is on the table.  You might have a child who relies on external motivations only to do things, which can make school work and future employment hard. I would instead have my child do yard work, but while doing it explain opportunity costs of doing the work yourself vs hiring out.  I would show my kid how saving money earns interest, and how that is essentially free money.
"And this investment and money is under control? HAHAHAHAHAHA   Awesome. Looks more and more like a Ponzi the further and further you go. Please, explain how having the fed purchase our own debt is ""under control"" please. Show me some other great empire in history that managed to purchase its own debt."
you dont understand the way markets work if you think that. speculators exist in every market. there are FX speculators, does that mean that the the US dollar, yuan, or yen is a game of musical chairs? If an asset or commodity has a use for everyday people, then they are going to buy that asset or commodity. Speculators or traders bring liquidity and reduce volatility to make the price less volatile so everyday people will be able to use it. Bitcoin is a new technology and people are trying to figure out what its value should be. This is r/finance and I have to explain this? Obviously there are many people out there who find value in a decentralized digital currency.