vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
So if you have this plan where you are intending to put $500 on the card in a month, then lose track of something you did early in the month, and inadvertently spend $800, you are digging yourself deeper into the hole instead of climbing your way out. There is also a risk in terms of income loss. In the cash method, you no longer have the money to spend, and you are forced to make the hard decisions about where to allocate what you do have, making you much more likely to cut back on luxury items to preserve the necessities. In the card method, it is easy to say “eh, the card has room, I can catch up again later” and not realize the mess you are causing yourself until you are in way over your head. I personally have run all my bills through a credit card in the past so that I could have one single payment to make. Then I was unemployed for six months, and ended up moving before I found a new job. Everything in between, including the move, went on the card. Next thing I know I am carrying a balance of $15k where I used to always have it paid in full. It took roughly 10 years, including several years of working strictly in cash, to get that back under control. I currently have a card that is carrying a balance, and I am running select expenses (such as fuel and food) through it while I whittle the balance back down. Most of my main bills are still paid directly from cash, specifically so that I don’t fall back into the same trap I did before. Even so, there were several months in the past year where the balance was creeping up instead of down, because we were not paying that close of attention to our spending. Then my wife lost her job, and it forced us to closely evaluate where our money was going. We still run certain things through said card, but we are much stricter about it being only those select things, and the balance is trending down again. The main reason we are still channeling those expenses that way is because this is a cash back reward card, and we will be getting roughly $1000 back here in a couple more months.
"My opinion - this subreddit should be about discussing the industry. This venue should be for those already established in the field - those able and willing to contribute insightful perspectives and notions to the group. We should have dialogues on current events, case studies on previous events, how we were involved in said happenings, what our perspectives were etc. Even a place to share and critique write-ups on investment ideas.   For those that are ""dying to get into the field""..  For 90% of us, I can assure you, we were there. I sure as hell know I was. Finance, or at least investment banking, trading, etc. is one of, if not the most, competitive fields to enter into directly out of college. All of us had a lot of questions. All of us were worried and anxious. Those that succeeded, however, didn't spend time asking anonymous people on the internet if they had a shot. They went out, worked their asses off and did what they needed to do.  I'm 6 months into a full time investment banking gig in one of the most prestigious groups at perhaps the most highly regarded investment bank in the world. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't wonder how in the fucking fuck I got to be where I am at. But this shouldn't be the place to discuss it. There's so many other venues - r/financialcareers, wallstreetoasis, etc -  that cater to such concerns.   Though I don't post much (partly a side affect of working 120 hours a week) Reddit needs a place to discuss the happenings of the financial world. There are a lot of redditors that work in finance. The problem, however, is that there really isn't a place to discuss the field. At least for me, I tend to only visit the subreddit every now and then because I know it will be convoluted with career questions.  Make this subreddit a subreddit about what's happening in finance. Redirect posts about financial careers to the appropriate forum. It's that simple."
I disagree. 100k in the bay area is a fair wage for a full time career, my household income is higher than that and i still am not comfortable. The OT and benefits could be looked at but really this guy seems to have accrued the majority of OT available, or at least that is what the articles lead me to believe. 20 dollars an hour is laughable, nearly criminal in fact. Am i supposed to laud a giant private corporations business practices? I'm not even sure you are correct there either. I am pretty sure facebook pays their support pretty well, but i could be wrong in this specific case.  Wages and COL are a problem in this area. The janitor should be the rule, not the exception. We should be working to get everyone a fair wage instead of tearing each other down.  What seems to happen is that instead of funding our vital infrastructure( bart and California's 60 billion dollar backlog in highway maintenance) we focus on op-eds that castigate an edge case janitor who happened to work the system.
I can see the point of it but you also have to remember what kind of people are working here to begin with, they are often people with a high school education or equivalent with no additional training or education. That doesn't leave a lot of jobs open and pretty much regardless of where they work the market wage is going to be low because they are extremely interchangeable. That is to say this is the working poor, the people that the government targets quite a bit so they'll have a negative external impact on the rest of the economy as a whole.   So while it does cost you money per year really the more important question is if these people were employed elsewhere, or not employed, what would the cost be and if there is any difference to where the government is paying more then they should be taxed by that amount to pay for the externality.
I have stuck with this conversation, in spite of the put downs and snide remarks. I have jabbed a little too, but you can go back to most of my remarks and see that I have been more congenial. I have given you some leeway because of your age, and I am almost twice as old as you. So, you gave me your background. I will give you mine. I am closer to 50 then I would prefer. I left the house at 17, enlisted in the Navy, and spent the next 15 years serving in the military. I ended my career in a select community. I have been out for ten years this July. I am now owner of a company that does R&amp;D and works with the government. A lot of my knowledge about inventions, and how commercial works with government comes from my own personal experiences. I have seen the best, and worst, of government - as well as seen the same on the commercial side of the house. Anyone comes to this game with the presupposition that government can't get anything done as well as commercial quickly learns that is not true. Likeways, anyone comes thinking that commercial equals efficient learns *that* is not always true too. &gt; Take apple for instance where is all the government funding they recieved to be one of the most innovative companies in human history or microsoft? As I said previously, that you thought was a ""dumb"" comment - commercial is very good at taking existing systems and finding ways to make them efficient and better. Apple and Microsoft is the same.
The major drawback to borrowing to invest (i.e. using leverage) is that your return on investment must be high enough to overcome the cost of finance. The average return on the S&P 500 is about 9.8% (from CNBC) a typical unsecured personal loan will have an interest rate of around 18-36% APR (from NerdWallet). This means that on average you will be paying more interest than you are receiving in returns so are losing money on the margin investment. Sometimes the S&P falls and over those periods you would be paying out interest having lost money so will have a negative return! You may have better credit and so be able to get a lower rate but I don't know your loan terms currently. Secured loans, such as remortgaging your house, will have lower costs but come with more life changing risks. The above assumes that you are getting financing by directly borrowing money, however, it is also possible to trade on margin. This is where you post a proportion of the value that you wish to trade with as collateral against a loan to buy the security. This form of finance is normally used by day traders and other short term holders of stocks. Although the financing costs here are low (I am not charged an interest rate on intraday margin trading) there are very high costs if you exceed the term of the loan. An example is that I am charged a fee if I hold a position overnight and my profits and losses are crystallised at that time. If I am in a losing position at that time the crystallisation process and fee can result in not having enough margin to recover the position and the loss of a potentially profit making position. Additionally if the amount of collateral cash (margin) posted is insufficient to cover the expected losses as calculated by your broker they will initiate a margin call asking for more collateral money. If you do not (or cannot) post this extra margin your losing position will be cashed out and you will take as a loss the total loss at that time. Since the market can change very rapidly, such as in a flash crash, this can result in your losing more money than you had in the first place. As this is essentially a loan you can be bankrupted by this.
"I can see why you are feeling financial stress.  If I understand right you have put yourself in a very uncomfortable and unsustainable situation and one that should indeed be very stressful for a person of your age.  I feel a lot of stress just reading over your question. I'm going to be very frank.  Your financial situation suggests that you have very aggressively taken wealth from your future self in order to consume and to make inefficient investments.  Well, look in the mirror and say to yourself ""I am now my future self and it is time to pay for my past decisions.""  Don't take money out of your IRA.  That would be continuing the behavior as it is a very inefficient use of your resources that will lead to yet more extreme poverty down the line. Ok, you can't take back what you have done in the past.  What to do now?  Major life restructuring.  If I were you, I'd sell my house if I had one.  Move in with one of your kids if you have any nearby.  If not, move into the cheapest trailer you can find.  Take a second job.  Very seriously look to see if you can get a job that pays more for your primary job--I know you love your current job but you simply cannot continue as you are now.  Start eating really cheap food and buying clothes at thrift stores.  Throw everything you can at your debts, starting with the ones with the highest interest rate.  Plan now to continue working long after your peers have retired. Early in life is the time to be borrowing.  Middle age is when you should be finishing paying off any remaining debts and tucking away like crazy for retirement.  Now is not an OK time to be taking on additional debt to fund consumption. I know changing your life is going to be very uncomfortable, but I think you will find that there is more peace of mind in having some amount of financial security (which for you will require a LOT of changes) than in borrowing ever more to fund a lifestyle you cannot sustain."
Your statement makes it clear that you have no idea whatsoever how money circulates through the economy.  Pray tell, what percentage of U.S. GDP is consumer spending?   You completely failed to grasp the relevant parts of the hypothetical scenario.  The takeaway was that if 1 person has the same amount of income as several thousand people, the several thousand people will spend a vastly higher percentage of that same number. The rich don't have to spend their income. The poor and masses spend most of their income. To your comment about someone making $50k and spending $45k needing to improve their financial decision making... Well yea. But that's not the reality we have in America. I don't have the exact number handy, but you do realize that there are over 100 million people in this country who are not able to save $5,000 a year, correct?  I wasn't making any sort of statement on what I think the proper tax rate should be on the wealthy, I was just telling you (along with everyone else here) that the rich don't spend as much of their incomes as the rest of society. But since you asked, probably 43% on income north of $700,000.
The IRS does not send out assessment letters for $0. (6) Even if you are above the 15% bracket, there is likelihood it is still a no-tax situation (see 5 above). (7) Worst case scenario: you are making a million dollars per year and you omit your $26 capital gains from your return. The IRS will send you an assessment letter for about $10. You can then send them a separate check or money order to pay it. In all honesty I have omitted documented tax items, like taxable interest, that the IRS knows about many times and never gotten an assessment letter. Once I made a serious math error on my return and they sent me an assessment letter, which I just paid, end of story. And that was for a lot more than $26. The technical verbiage for something like this in IRS lingo is CP-2000, underreported income. As you can see from this official IRS web page, basically what they do is guess how much they think you owe and send you a bill. Then you pay it. If you do so in time, you don't even get a 0.5% interest penalty on your $6.75 owed or whatever it is. (8) Go hog wild. As long as you are risking an assessment on your $26, why not go hog wild and just let the IRS compute all your taxes for you? Make a copy of your income statements, then mail them to the IRS with a letter that says, ""Hi, I am Mr. Odinson, my SSN is XXX-XX-XXXX. My address is XYZ. I am unable to compute my taxes due to a confused state of mind. I am hereby requesting a tax assessment for the 2016 tax year."" Make sure you sign and date the letter. In all probability they will compute the full assessment and send you a bill (or refund)."
The short answer is that you can use student loans for living expenses. Joe provides a nice taxonomy of loans. I would just add that some loans are not only guaranteed, but also subsidized. Essentially the Government buys down the rate of the loan. The mechanics are that a financial aid package might consist of grants, work study (job), subsidized, and guaranteed loans. One can turn down one or more of the elements of the package. All will be limited in some form. The work study will have a maximum number of hours and generally has low pay. Many find better deals working in the businesses surrounding the college or starting their own services type business. The grants rarely cover the full cost of tuition and books. The loans will both be limited in amount. It mainly depends on what you qualify for, and generally speaking the lower the income the more aid one qualifies for. Now some students use all their grant, all their loan money and buy things that are not necessary. For example are you going to live in the $450/month dorm, or the new fancy apartments that are running $800/month? Are you going to use the student loan money to buy a car? Will it be a new BMW or a 8 year old Camary? I see this first hand as I live near a large university. The pubs are filled with college students, not working, but drinking and eating every night. Many of them drive very fancy cars. The most onerous example of this is students at the military academies. Attendees have their books and tuition completely paid for. They also receive a stipend, and more money can be earned over the summer. They also all qualify for a 35K student loan in their junior year. Just about every kid, takes this loan. Most of those use the money to buy a car. I know a young lady who did exactly that, and so did many of her friends. So kids with a starting pay of 45K also start life with a 35K. Buying a nice car in the military is especially silly as they cannot drive it while deployed and they are very likely to be deployed.
"You're not right about anything. Not a thing. First of all, your spelling and grammar sucks. You sound like you are completely stoned out of your mind with every word you write.  &gt;it could be night for me, other part of the globe u know.  You have made a number of statements showing that you live in the U.S. Sorry that won't work. You suggested I am more likely to make assumptions then linked to an article showing that smarter people are more likely to have confirmation bias. Thank you for the compliment.  Your argument about M2 is a poor argument. You keep saying increasing the money supply is good for the economy. Where do you think inflation comes from? Every country that tried printing massive amounts of money suffered serious consequences from it later. See the Roman Empire, Banana Republic, Byzantine, post World War I Germany which led to the rise of Adolf Hitler etc. Your argument that printing money and giving it graduates is deflationary also defies all logic.  &gt;see, im still smarter than you are.  You haven't proven that by any objective measure.  &gt;i know wut's going on, while you don't and instead argue with emotion and arrogance and willful ignorance and name calling.  You meant you know ""what's"" going on? In the future it might be better to break your sentences up a little. You crammed three (very poorly written) sentences into one. You should also take a grade school grammar class on the overuse of conjunctions such as ""and."" You used it four times in that sentence which dilutes its effectiveness. I'd ask you to elaborate but I am not interested in listening to one more of your nonsensical theses.  There is also no emotion in anything I've written. Just annoyance. No willful ignorance. Just an informed, unbiased position based solely off of facts. I strongly encourage you to do the same some day."
First of all, I didn't say anything about Bitcoin - nothing I said was even related to Bitcoin but rather the inherent value of the market beyond a cryptocurrency. This market is at the beginning stages right now, so of course you are going to have schemes and scammers, why wouldn't you? The established financial market as it stands today has been around for a while and still has schemes and scammers. Wherever there is money, specifically copious amounts of money, you will have people trying to game the system or pull the wool over other people's eyes. Sometimes in life, the sheep get slaughtered, so I am not really sure why certain people losing their ass in crypto could be considered different from people losing their ass in other financial instruments. You ever been to /r/wallstreetbets? Your basic view is more than likely developed from what you are reading in main stream outlets, which is why I encouraged you to go beyond what you are reading in the easily accessible, and often way behind and misinformed, news sources and go straight to the updated and credible sources, usually from the developers themselves. ICOs alone have proven themselves to be a new and revolutionary capital raising instrument. It makes sense that traditional and conservative finance communities would be opposed to it because it disrupts their ecosystem and gives not only very new companies, but non-accredited investors an opportunity to participate. When major VCs are able to look at ICOs, which are in direct competition to their industry and purpose, and say to themselves wow, what an innovative way to raise capital - that's a big deal. Regarding anonymity, the purpose of most cryptocurrencies and protocols isn't focused on that, it is usually a side effect of the decentralization of the ecosystem in general. Bitcoin isn't even a top coin for anonymity, which is again why I suggested you research the industry. Several projects are being launched and have been launched that will help revolutionize certain areas of the web, ranging from predictive markets with projects like Augur and Gnosis, to the Golem Network which taps into idle computer time for users that need additional computing power.
Honestly, with hindsight I think passing PPACA without at least some GOP support was a pretty big mistake, and seemed to the right to be a thumb in the eye that they still haven't let go of. Him saying ""we have the votes to do this, so we'll do this"" is how they justified ""we have the state legislatures to neuter this, so we'll neuter this"". If they had somehow, someway, gotten even a tiny bit of Republican buy-in, we'd be having the debate about fixing and not replacinng. I have no idea how that could've been done given the GOP players at the time, but pushing it through anyway has proven to be a pretty big problem in terms of politics, and not as helpful as it should be to citizens because of the political reprisal. &gt; &gt;2) Trump won on balls and showmanship. He lied often but never backed down. He made tons of nebulous promises without giving specifics. He stoked the ""us versus them"" climate and then he won. Doesn't that suggest to you that modern American politics are not about issues or compromise but mostly about fanning flames? Of course that's the way politics are working in this country nowadays... it's exactly that poisonous climate I'm so opposed to, and want to see diminished. Fighting fire with gasoline isn't going to help."
Am I the only one who thinks that AC is NOT a dump? I haven't spent too much time there and I do know there is a huge part of the city that are made up of crime filled slums but in regards to the beaches, boardwalk, etc. I've lived in NJ my entire life and went to the boardwalk the other day (for the very first time) because I keep hearing about how AC is falling apart, etc. I was SHOCKED. The bars were jam packed, the boardwalk had thousands upon thousands of people on it and the casino's didn't have an empty seat at 11am. What am I missing here?
What I am taking away from this comment and the reply to it is that a greater level of communication with the client to understand that what and how we support them so they have a greater level of respect for the work we do. Your work relies on the technology to function and as such we do make you money, because without us your crew can't work.   We have a number of clients who get that, but we also have a few that act extremely rudely to our staff when we are trying to help. The condescending attitude of how dare we not go faster, because they have important things to do gets tiring.   I would never see our doing our jobs as a favor to a client. We're in partnership in the business relationship.