vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
I'm sure you'd find a lot of buyers for BRK.A at $1, but that's completely irrelevant to the notion of net buying/selling in BRK.A. Maybe the closest thing I can think of in terms of actual market mechanics is the comparative total volumes during the period that would still have been executed if forced to execute at the end of period price. Assuming that traders' valuations are fixed through the period in question, and trading occurs on the basis of fundamentals (which I know isn't a good assumption in practice, but the impact of price history upon future price is too complex for this analysis), we have two cases. If price falls, we can assume all buyers who executed above the last price in the period would have happily bought at the last price (saving money), while all sellers who executed below the last price in the period would also be happy to sell for more. The former will be larger than the latter. If the price rises, the reverse is true."
Read your link. Thanks.  The basic idea is that capitalism will work it out. And that each of us will pay a security agency to handle our disputes, and that rival security agencies will collaborate and negotiate with each other. And that private courts will be fair to protect their brand.  This overlooks some harsh realities that already exist with capitalism. Customers generally do not have time to purchase based on accurate information for every product. For example, airlines compete almost solely on price. Insurance companies compete on price and provide horrible, sometimes fraudulent service. But customers are left in the dark (who is to say the insurer committed fraud if it disputes it?) Banks operate with gross incompetence and deceipt and are left untouched by the justice system.   We have already discovered that just letting corporations operate without an restrictions creates serious problems. There has to be force that tempers their worst tendencies, even if that force (government) is imperfect.   I remain confused why people think that corporations are somehow more trustworthy and efficient than government agencies. Or that corporations can be used to address externalities.
"Yes, since all those things ""uncovered"" by the last audit were already covered in previous audits. You don't think that perhaps some politicians are trying to get politicial credit by chasing a ghost?  Read what Sanders wrote on his website. Then read the actual audit. Then tell me if you think he is perhaps grandstanding. A prime example is his claim that 16 trillion was lent, which is pretty dishonest. At no point was there more than about 2T lent out (from the audit itself) and at no point was the US taxpayer on the hook for over around 2T.  The quote you provide is an example of this misleading rhetoric. Go and read the actual report your news stories refer to."
"You report it when the expense was incurred/accrued. Which is, in your case, 2014. There's no such thing as ""accounts payable"" on tax forms, it is an account on balance sheet, but most likely it is irrelevant for you since your LLC is probably cash-based. The reimbursement is a red-herring, what matters is when you paid the money."
&gt;I appreciate the detailed responses, truthfully however I feel like at least half of your points are either just argumentative for its sake alone, display a deep lack of understanding of unions, collective bargaining, and the histories of both, or ignore pragmatism and cling to an uncompromising and ultimately self-defeating ideology. I feel the same way about your arguments, but I still try to respond to the content of your arguments rather than my assumptions about them. &gt;The law forces the two parties to sit at a table. The law forces the two parties to discuss a few core things, like wages. The law should not force any party to sit at any table. That violates a party's contract liberty. &gt;The idea is since these worker-employer disputes exist naturally, making them at least sit at a table together and talking is helpful in avoiding ego and testosterone fueled disruptions where no one benefits. That's nice that you think you know what's better for other people than they do for themselves, but that doesn't give you a right to force them to any table. A right to contract freedom means the right to dismiss any offer or refuse to even negotiate with a party. &gt;If this you see this as a violation of one's liberty, I really don't know what to say to that. Then I guess we have fundamentally different ideas about what is freedom and what is not. You seem to think that forcing someone to negotiate with a party, against their will, is not a violation of any of their rights. &gt;I'm not saying I don't believe you, but citation needed. Sorry I don't have time to dig up citations now. If I have time later, I'd be happy to do so. All I could find now is an inverse correlation between the state of a country's credit market and the rate of child labor: http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers476-500/r486.pdf &gt;&gt;There is an abundance of indirect empirical evidence, discussed below, concerning the role of credit constraints and educational attainment. However, Dehejia and Gatti (2002) test the hypothesis directly.
But this isn't cash though, its credit card. They'll just chargeback and we have to now report it to the police for stolen items. But we followed the general procedure, and the thieves had the pin of the CC which is why I'm a bit confused. Now we still have to verify the signature, but if the signature ends up being right should we get the money back? Because at this point the CC holder should be a lot more responsible about the CC and other people shouldn't know their PIN. If anything the signature is understandable cause you can just forge it since its in the back of the card.
I think the era of IT speaking like they are way over end user's head should be over. End users need to be more educated in this day and age and they can serve as great allies when properly instructed. Even if it has to be in layman's terms the end user should be able to somewhat grasp the concept of the work they are paying for. Of course I think this should be done with honesty and full disclosure.
It was comparing against the same period in 2011 you fucking moron. I mean seriously, it's in the second paragraph.  I'll give you some advice I got as a child. If you don't know what you're talking about, then shut the fuck up.  edit: Downvotes...Was it not comparing against the same period in 2011, you fucking morons? Don't blame the one who points out your asstardery.
In simple terms : Equity Loan is money borrowed from the bank to buy assets which can be houses , shares etc Protected equity loan is commonly used in shares where you have a portfolio of shares and you set the minimum value the portfolio can fall to . Anything less than there may result in a sell off of the share to protect you from further capital losses.  This is a very brief explaination , which does not fully cover what Equity Loan && Protected Equity Loan really mean
&gt; isn't the political will to accomplish it  Or the will is bought off very quickly.  BTW, what do you mean by dark markets? If you mean unlisted investments then that happens regularly with PE type deals anyway. If you mean private arrangements like the GS clearing house (forget the name), then yes that shit needs to die.
"The statement is (in laymans terms - if not in real terms) correct. Most credit cards (I know this to be true for VISA and Mastercard) have dispute processes and will do a chargeback on the merchant - ie take the money back from the supplier in cases where you don't receive the goods or other fraud - Particularly if they can't produce a signature and (for transactions which are not face-to-face) a tracking number. Your exact rights will vary by bank, but mostly they need to follow the guidelines set by the Credit Card company - and you do need to be a bit careful - if you received goods which were fake or a dispute arises you may be up for shipping the goods back to the merchant - and you have a limited - but reasonable time - in which to make the dispute. (The statement ""the money is the banks"" is not technically true, there is no money involved until you pay it, only credit [ they are very different, but almost no-one knows that, I communicated with a Minister of Finance on the topic], but this is quite technical and as a layman not something you need to worry about here)"
This doesn't really make sense, as the small cap indices have a similar rate of growth as the s&amp;p 500. The global scale has some relevance, but exports are included in GDP as well, so it's not the full story.  A better answer, as is noted in comments lower down, is that the S&amp;P does not **grow** at 6%. It *returns* 6% per year. The dividend yield of the s&amp;p is a bit over 2%. Dividends are not growth, they are simply income; they may also grow themselves, but rarely by 6% per year (in real terms). Additional income that's not paid out in dividends probably amounts to another 1-2%. Growth is the final 1-3%, which makes it roughly match GDP.
What does that even mean  evidence Chinese on average have high IQ than whites? Is IQ a standard on skills based on experiences or the ability to fill out tests?   What Chinese, in what region, in what period? The same goes for what whites?  German Shepherds were breed differently than shih tzu's and were trained for different roles. If you trained Shih Tzus like Germans Shepards there intelligence would rise as well.   Humans were not breed so using dogs as a analogy is false analogy.
If you earn Rupees, keep your money as Rupees, and spend the money on items denominated in Rupees, the dollar doesn't mean much to you any more than the Italian Lira means to me.... Do you mean to track as though they were dollars or actually convert as you earn the money?  From X-rates, I looked at this chart. There's been a 10% swing in the exchange rate very recently. But going back, the years are not so volatile. Year 2000 ranged 43-46, so the volatility and drop in the rupee to over 50 is only recent. Has India experience inflation that concerns you?  (disclaimer - I am slightly aware of the Euro in terms of dollar value, but not followed currencies for some time now)
A one year period of study - Stock A trades at $100, and doesn't increase in value, but has $10 in dividends over the period.  Stock B starts at $100, no dividend, and ends at $105. However you account for this, it would be incorrect to ignore stock A's 10% return over the period.  To flip to a real example, MoneyChimp shows the S&P return from Jan 1980 to Dec 2012 as +3264% yet, the index only rose from 107.94 to 1426.19 or +1221%.  The error expands with greater time and larger dividends involved, a good analysis won't ignore any dividends or splits.
Depends on your time scale, but generally, I don't think it would work. What you'd really be betting on in this case is mean-reversal, which does not hold true in the equity universe (atleast not in the long run). If you look at the historical prices of the S&P, you'll notice it increases in terms of absolute dollar value. On the short term, however, if you feel the market has significantly undervalued or overvalued a security, then mean-reversal might be a reasonable bet to make. In that scenario, however, it seems to me that you are really looking for a volatility trade, in which case you might want to consider a straddle position using options. Here, the bet you'd be making is that the price at expiration will be inside a certain band (or outside the band, depending on your position).
"Say we are in 'normal times.' Passbook rates are 5% or so. Longer rates, 6-7%. I offer you a product with these terms, for $10,000 I will return a ""Guaranteed"" $10,000 in 6 years and based on the stock market, 1% for every 2% the S&P is up beyond 10% at maturity. As the seller of this product, I take $6666, and buy a fixed investment, 6 years at 7% in treasuries will return the $10000. Really. I then take the $3334 and buy out of the money calls on the S&P each year to capture the gains, if any, and to deliver on my promise.  This is one example of a structured deposit offering. They can have nearly any terms one can imagine. Tied to any product. S&P, Crude Oil, Gold. Whatever."
Outsourcing a call centre company is not essentially necessary for your company at this particular moment, but it’s a worth consideration in the long run if you are seriously concerned about expanding your trade efficiently on the global pitch. It is definitely one of the rare schemes where you can decrease the stress levels in the office, yet reap the rewards in terms of business expansion and brand reputation.
"Alright, I will go through bullet point by bullet point and try to best figure out what you will be doing in layman's terms. Please bear in mind that I do not work for a hedge fund, but rather a much larger entity, so a lot of the work you will be doing is pre-populated: &gt;Roles = In this role, the individual will be the main point of contact for the client on all things related to understanding their trading profit &amp; loss and how their valuations have been sourced. In addition, the Product Controller will work with internal partner areas to ensure all required processes have been performed to verify the valuation accuracy of the client’s portfolio. From my understanding you will act as the middle man between the client and the analyst. As such here is how a real interaction may go: Client X calls, you answer - ""Hello, iDade's office, how can I assist you?"" Client X asks, ""Hey iDadeMarshall I was curious what my capital gains were on my FB purchase?"" iDade: ""Ok, let me pull up your account, just a moment. It seems as though your current capital are $30,000 (*LOL*) on your FB purchase."" Client X: ""Hmm, well do I have any significant loses that I may be able to sell off to off-set the tax on the capital gains?"" iDade: ""Why yes you do, it seems AAPL has taken a mighty tumble, would you like to sell a position to assist you in offsetting?"" Client X: ""Why that would be great. Thanks for your help."" The conversation could go on, and that is a pretty deep conversation for the level you are going in, but I have had conversations like these before. The second part of the bullet just means that you will be checking and rechecking the grunt work of the analyst, and in some places actually performing the grunt work. The work will most likely be along the lines of finding returns for different time periods.
I am a firm believer in TD's e-series funds.  No other bank in Canada has index funds with such low management fees.  Index funds offer the flexibility to re-balance your portfolio every month without the need to pay commission fees.  Currently I allocate 10% of my paycheck to be diversified between Canadian, US, and International e-series index funds. In terms of just being for beginners, this opinion is most likely based on the fact that an e-series portfolio is very easy to manage.  But this doesn't mean that it is only for beginners.  Sometimes the easiest solution is the best one! :)
Blockchain, the shared database technology that powers cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, has over the past three years developed an almost unchallenged reputation as the next big thing in finance and technology. Many prominent financiers, technologists and entrepreneurs have staked their reputations and fortunes on it. Take Blythe Masters, the former JPMorgan executive who is attributed with creating the credit default swap. After she joined Digital Asset Holdings, a blockchain start-up, in March 2015, she said that the technology should be treated as seriously as the development of the internet in the early 1990s. And investors did exactly that. Up to $1.74bn has been invested in blockchain ventures to date, $796m of that since the beginning of 2016, according to data tracked by industry media company Coindesk. But as investment increased, so did the hype. Almost everything, from tracking tuna to managing medical records, has been touted as in line to benefit from the technology. Claims about blockchain’s potential range from the outrageous (the end of poverty) to the more mundane and operational (cost reduction in repo clearing and real-time settlement). Yet executives at blockchain-investing companies have rarely been able to explain what it was that blockchain would be enhancing in their businesses or why. “You’ll have to ask my tech associate,” has been the invariable answer. When asked what makes blockchain so exceptionally useful, the answers ranged in nature from “it’s a compression algorithm, and makes data storage cheaper” to “it enhances security and can’t be hacked”. Neither assertion is strictly accurate. But the confidence demonstrates the scale of mythmaking in the industry. By 2016 the unchallenged claims were so out of whack with reality that even Gartner, the information technology adviser that created the hype cycle curve, had put blockchain near the top of its “peak of inflated expectations” section. Has blockchain hype stood the test of time? Or does the next phase in the Gartner hype cycle — “the trough of disillusionment” — beckon? We are either there already or about to arrive.
Linear Title has been experiencing a number of exciting developments in the professional realm, including new integrations that will speed up the title process for clients and further push down Linear Title’s turn times. But Linear Title has also had a lot to celebrate in terms of its team’s personal lives as well—many Linear Title employees have welcomed new additions to their households lately!
I'll consent to this. I get it. But the shop itself is making about 80-100k a month in sales. I realize the wind could shift but as long as I recoup the initial 92k I wouldn't be out any monies. It would take almost a year since each harvest period is 66 days but I get what you mean
It sort of depends on what happens in the future. If the economy eventually comes back and the old norm returns, then it will certainly be Gen X who lost out the most, because as Badwolf stated, this is the time Gen X'ers should be taking the period the Millenials are in right now, and using it to maximize their wealth. That's a 10-20 year period, and so far from 2008-2012 it's been vaporized. That's up to 1/4 of their maximization period gone, and they can never really get that back. Millenials still have time.  On the flip side, if the economy DOESN'T return, then Millenials will be in a lot of trouble, what with the college debt they've incurred and no means of ever really finding a career. However, if that ends up being the case, I think we're going to all be in a lot of trouble anyway, so probably the Millenials' problems will end up paling in comparison to whatever else presents itself.
"Thank you for your reply.  &gt;innovation in tech  Does that mean in laymen terms:  inventing new tech or improve existing technology? Basically like inventing a car (if cars weren't invented yet) or BMW improving their models each year.   ---   I started to google innovation in tech. So much things I have absolutely no idea about just keeping moving around me in light-speed. What are some examples of technology that are vital to this new ""technology-race,"" I feel like is happening with the world. Is that a thing or am I delusional?"
Fact check: not true.  Their **median** net worth dropped 39 percent from 2007 to 2010 while their **mean** net worth, which is what the title of this post implies, went down 14.7 percent over the same period.  Other things worth noting: the 2007 net worth values were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U-RS) and were based on the interviews of 6492 families in 2010 and 4421 in 2007.   Here's the [source article from the Fed [PDF Warning]](http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2012/PDF/scf12.pdf).
Absolutely yes. Just because a lease provides an option for renewal does not mean that a tenant cannot try to re-negotiate for better terms. You should always negotiate the rent. And start this conversation as soon as possible. Offer to pay three months’ rent in advance (of course, if you have enough means).
&gt; Which of course explains why Biloxi is an economic powerhouse and no one has ever heard of New York City or San Francisco.  Lower taxes states like Texas are faring better economically compared to other states with high taxes.  &gt; **[No-Tax Texas Out-Competes High-Tax Arkansas](http://www.cato.org/blog/no-tax-texas-out-competes-high-tax-arkansas)**  &gt; By Daniel J. Mitchell  &gt; Writing in National Review, **Greg Kaza discusses how Texas has been growing faster and creating more jobs than Arkansas. Much of the credit, he writes, is due to the fact that Texas has no state income tax while Arkansas penalizes workers with a  tax rate of 7 percent:**  &gt; Employment growth in Texas has been significantly higher than in Arkansas during periods of economic expansion. The population in Dallas has nearly tripled in the post-WWII period, while the population in Little Rock has barely doubled in size. Per capita personal income in Texas is 94 percent of the U.S total. In Arkansas it’s 77 percent of the nation’s total, a level that has hardly budged since the 1970s.  &gt; The list of statistical disparities is long, and there’s a good reason why: While Arkansas and Texas share a common border, each taxes income and capital in radically different ways. **Arkansas has a top income-tax rate of 7 percent, the highest among the bordering states. Texas, however, does not impose an income tax. The imbalance is the same for capital gains: Arkansas taxes them. Texas does not. As a result, we can see a very basic economic principle at work: Talent and capital always will flow toward higher returns.**
"You can see how much of a percentage the S&amp;P 500 is of the GDP over the past 10 years in this handy graph:  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=oCZ  When the stock market was doing poorly (2009) it was only 0.06% of GDP. When it's doing well (now) it's 0.12% of the GDP.  It's also not useful to directly compare percentages like you're doing. Just because one averages 6% growth and one averages 3% growth, that doesn't mean that the 6% one will take over. It doesn't take much of a correction to wipe out decades of S&amp;P vs GDP growth.  You might also be interested in knowing that this ratio is similar to the ""Buffet Indicator"", how Warren Buffet decides if stocks are overvalued as a whole:  https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/04/market-cap-to-gdp-an-updated-look-at-the-buffett-valuation-indicator"
Also, cash doesn't necessarily mean cash in the bank, like you or I would think of. It means cash-convertible (usually bonds) that can be sold or turned into cash within three months period (but usually can be done within a few weeks).  But like you said, they are probably making more money by keeping it in their current investments. Plus, interest rates are at the lowest they will ever be, and GE is practically borrowing money for free.   Quite smart, actually.
Well this is where quite frankly from my layman's view, Cat is just trying to use the loopholes that the big IT firms use, goolgle etc....  They just weren't smart enough to transfer their intellectual property (blueprints etc) to Ireland and then claim that they owe every penny they make to the holder of their intellectual property in ireland etc....  it's all nutty, but honestly Cat just didn't do it right.
Simple.  Say in 2012 you were up 50% (brilliant) but then in 2013 you were down 50% (sorry). i.e. if you started with $1000, you were up to $1500, then down to $750. You lost $250 overall. If you were to compute the mean of the percentages using each method, then: Arithmetic mean: The average of +50% and -50% (really 150% and 50% of each period's initial value) is zero, not up or down. Geometric mean: 1.5 * .5 = .75, i.e. you are down 25% over 2 years, or about 13.4% per year. It should be clear the Geometric makes more sense in such a case.