vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"I laughed at this part:  *""The executive of the U.S. banking giant cited travels to countries such as France, Argentina, Israel and Ireland. The U.S. has become ""one of the most bureaucratic, confusing, litigious societies on the planet"" and ""it's hurting the average American that we don't have these right policies,"" he said.""*  Look - America is not ""the best country in the world.""  But compared to France, Argentina, Israel and Ireland I can say that we're doing OK.  France is the epitome of bureaucratic sclerosis.  Argentina has been in economic crisis mode for years.  As far as political dysfunction goes, Israel has its own problems with Zionist hardliners.  And as for Ireland, it takes more than making yourself a nexus for IP royalty collection.  A PO box is not a sustainable business model."
&gt;“If you were to disallow deductions for settlements, then that would create an incentive for companies to litigate the case all the way to a trial verdict,” Victor Fleischer, a tax law professor at the University of Colorado, said. “If the company had to pay a claim in that instance, it would be deductible. That’s not wise public policy either.”  Huh?  First of all, if the deduction were disallowed why would the payment of a claim at the end of a trial be deductible?  Second, part of the problem, which is unaddressed in the article, is that the companies paying these fines typically sign agreements that admit liability for the fine but deny all aspects of wrongdoing.  Thus, there is no precedent set and there are no guidelines to follow in the future.  As such, the result of a trial would actually be instructional to future participants in these markets.  Similarly, it might actually result in personal liability for the worst offenders in the organizations.
First:  great job on getting it together.  This is good for your family in any respect I can think of.  This is a life long process and skill, but it will pay off for you and yours if you work on it. Your problem is that you don't seem to know where you money goes.  You can't decide how whacky your expenses are until you know what they are.  Looking at just your committed expenses and ignore the other stuff might be the problem here.  You state that you feel you live modestly, but you need to be able to measure it completely to decide. I would suggest an online tool like mint.com (if you can get it in your country) because it will go back for 90 days and get transactions for you.  If you primarily work in cash, this isn't helpful, but based on your credit card debt I am hoping not.  (Although, a cash lifestyle would be good if you tend to overspend.) Take the time and sort your transactions into categories.  Don't setup a budget, just sort them out.  I like to limit the number of categories for clarity sake, especially to start. Don't get too crazy, and don't get too detailed at first.  If you buy a magazine at the grocery store, just call it groceries. Once you know what you spend, then you can setup a budget for the categories.  If somethings are important, create new categories.  If one category is a problem, then break it down and find the specific issue. The key is that you budget not be more than you earn but also representative of what you spend. Follow up with mint every other day or every weekend so the categorization is a quick and easy process.  Put it on your iPhone and do it at every lunch break.  Share the information with your spouse and talk about it often.
"I can't imagine how a company that has all the proof it needs of its existence and business dealings is able to be challenged in this way. Fact is, they were doing business first. The insurance company has no claim to make. (I'm not a lawyer, my observation there is based on what's right and logical...perhaps the law disagrees and if so, that law is as crooked as the judge who thinks the request for the insurance company's business dealings off ""frivolous"").  They may have messed up. That's because the evidence looks pretty ""open and shut"".   Too bad for them they're getting pushed around on the basis of ""I'm bigger"" I guess, huh? I don't see why this means they're on their own.  Edit: I didn't see the part about the dillusion suit. Definitely brought it on themselves, still being harassed; and insurance company has no right to shut them or their site down."
There would be multiple competing courts looking for people's business based upon who could best interpret laws and contracts. On the contrary, courts exist because people *do* want to be there. They are people who cannot come to an agreement on their own. If a person is a hardened criminal, they aren't going to want the court system at all. Those people are in the vast minority.  The notion of a market monopoly is a myth. The market by and large does not monopolize, and examples of monopoly don't last long.  In terms of the court system and justice, no, states do not work. Police often get away with actions that would be considered criminal for the rest of us, and politicians get the same treatment. The examples of police brutality going unpunished or political action being widely opposed and still being pushed through are too numerous to list.  Again, those who would loot and destroy are in the minority. If a person has the mindset that they want to harm person and property then they don't care about whether or not there is a state. They can only be stopped by force, and force can come from any entity with the legitimacy of using it. In that arena, there is nothing special about the state.  They wouldn't have any right to restrict your freedom except to the extent of stopping you from violating the person and property of others. They don't need a constitution for that.  &gt; Everything would just devolve into constant warfare between groups - until a single group outperformed the others of course and boom you've got a government again.  This is pure fiction. You have no evidence nor reason to actually support this. We're talking about reality, not conjecture. If you want to claim such nonsense then [you have to prove it.](https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over) You can't just throw out such propaganda and expect it to be taken as fact.
"&gt; Honest question without entrapment. Do you really believe this ""anti science"" rhetoric? You must see that a good bit of that comes from a liberal media pushing an agenda. What has he actually done that is oppositional to science? Yes. I've seen it in action. While there are lots of stories in the liberal media, the sources I'm following are the Science oriented news: Science, Scientific American, Science News. Simply look at the war on climate scientists via the NASA budget for its work on atmospheric science and the EPA budget (down 26%) for climate science for obvious examples [edit: As well as the 16% cut in the NOAA budget]. And all of this for a misguided notion that one should try to protect coal ... which is dying on its own (Nat Gas is cheaper and solar will be cheaper soon; both industries produce more jobs that coal ... and ""remember kids: coal kills""). &gt; NASA funding increased 800 million. NSF is up 100 million. Collectively agencies are up 14 million from 2015. Data here https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/fedfunds/2015/html/FFS2015_DST_003.html You have your information completely messed up. That said, the mainstream press also seems to be pretty incompetent at this too. The Fiscal Year for both NASA and the NSF starts Oct 1. The FY2017 budget was from Oct1, 2016 through Sept 30, 2017. Specifically the FY 2017 budget request for the NSF was submitted **Feb 9, 2016**. Any changes and funding of that budget under Trump's watch are minor. The budget request formed under Trump is the FY2018 budget ... and this budget (the NSF) request was submitted on May 23, 2017 down $841m (11%). [Here is the history of budget requests and actual expenditures for the NSF: https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/ ] Your NASA information was also bad.
Have you spent any time in Singapore? Yeah, they have a strong economy, but for people to exist in it they have to really push it to the limit. Entire families living in a 2 bedroom apartment, for example. IDK, it didn't seem like the ideal place for anyone who doesn't have a professional career or isn't making lots of money in finance and business. Also, the culture is sucky. No good culture for people who want a rooted feel to the community. In fact, not much community at all. I would never want to live there, only visit.
If this was the 20th century that would be a workable idea.   As you might have noticed this isn't the 20th century.  We have whole industries which used to hire hundreds of thousands of people being replaced by firms with 15 people providing better services. We need a basic income because we have an economy which is more productive than ever, depends on a strong middle class, if lets to its own devices will produce one person who owns everything.
Warren Buffet also isn't the CEO of a major company - or at least one that matters in this context. He is the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. That is a holding company that owns a handful of other companies.  It doesn't have customers, it doesn't sell a product. It owns companies that do those things, some of which directly rely on technology and need their CEO to have a strong understanding of technology.  The things is though, that each of those companies? They have their own CEO - not Warren Buffett.
You're a god damn idiot. Anyone who actually read a little about the debt knows it doesn't even matter. Our debt shows a strong economy and dollar. It shows value and investment worthy. Anyone can buy treasury bonds. You.. me... apple... you think our debt is at 20t because it's all we can get invested? Fuck no people are waiting in line to buy new treasury bonds. They're solid investments for people who don't want to worry about stock trading and know for a fact in 30 years they get their money and interest. But somehow you think the Jews were able to pool enough money to lend out 20t but not have the ability to increase the debt and lend out 5t a year and not 600b. Hah...
Just because he wasn't management doesn't mean he didn't maliciously break the law to bypass environmental laws.  They are after management also but will have a hell of a time extraditing VW executives from Germany where they are treated like royalty.   &gt; Robert Liang, 63, knew the German automaker was cheating and worked to cover it up, U.S. District Court Judge Sean Cox said during the sentencing hearing in Detroit.  &gt; He is one of two VW employees to plead guilty, although others charged in the case are in Germany and out of reach.
"&gt; So the fact that i was born here against my own free will automatically gives the government the right to seize the fruits of my labor? Yes, in the same way that being born to parents living in a clean house means you are going to make your bed, pick up your clothes, and mow the lawn... &gt; ""well just leave then!"" Well, yes. It is either that, or change the laws. &gt; Which is fucking stupid and in pretty sure I already gave you 1 way but I'll say it again cuz it's clear you're incapable of following along For someone who is so sure that they have ""*THE* answer"" you sure are defensive. It is quite possible that I have had a discussion over the SAME topic over the last 5 days with a *bunch* of people because so many people got butt hurt that I enjoy paying my taxes, and feel it is a patriotic duty because of all the good it does. &gt; federal sales tax So federal sales tax is your big secret? I would actually be fine with it, as long as it took into account those that are currently not paying income tax due to poverty or disability. &gt; That's why you see countries like Sweden with insane tax rates seeing limited growth and in a lot of cases on the verge of an economic collapse. I have lived in Europe for a number of years. I was in Germany last year, I will be in Spain next week. If you think that strong tax policy makes a country economically weak, then you have not actually lived in any of these countries, have you? Sweden is currently ranked 11th in the world for [GDP per capita](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita). Matter of fact, the only country in the top ten of that list that don't have a strong tax policy is Qatar - and that is only because of ridiculous oil money. Would like to see where they sit in two years.
It's not like we have a lot of options. We have to stop climate change. Natural gas will be increasingly important, and yes it's a fossil fuel, but not nearly as bad as coal or a oil.  Before looking for dealers look at Germany. If only they didn't substitute nuclear with renewables but substituted coal and oil with renewables, they'd have eliminated most fossil fuels.
Even worse than that, apparently JP M doesn't understand what Risk analysis and oversight are for.  If I had money with them, i'd take it out.  It's utter incompetence for a trading unit not to have strong risk management.
"&gt;we do have a lot if people saying ""Muslims are bad and boooh Islam.""   Because it's considered ""hate speech"". Don't dance around the topic.  &gt; To your WWII comment. This was the darkest time of German History ...  Which you need to avoid from ever happening again. By allowing free speech.  Yes, Germans (I have many relatives in Germany) are more open than ever, but if we continue with this ""hate speech"" nonsense, Germany will become like Sweden.  As you know, Sweden used to be the most open and free country the world. Now, a 78 years old Swedish lady is facing a lawsuit because she dared to say that Muslim urinate in the street.  **What makes you sure that Germany will not becomes today's Sweden?**"
Once you hit 22% equity against the original value of the home, they have to cancel the PMI. No other factors come into play. See this nice overview. Before that, at the 20% equity mark, it's a negotiating situation. If the value of the house goes down, that's a strong point in their favour. But you have excellent history, that's strong in your favour.
I think Buffet is a strong indication that the writing is on the wall for Walmart. It may take a few years, but the peak has happened. And Walmart doesn't have the executive culture to pull off anything that will gain ground against Amazon: Amazon's thing is to continually reinvest money into expansion and forgo tidy profits. Walmart is a cash cow to make the Waltons and gang a bundle of money for their debauchery.
So... Does that mean we're leading up to a huge economic boom where the majority of people have paid off a significant amount of their debt, so that they now have more available money and credit to spend, which would turn into a domino effect of more people buying pushing the economy up enough to encourage even more people to buy?
"Capitalism doesn't have an overall goal for society or the economy. It's simply a description of the behaviour of an economy given certain legal constraints, some market conditions, and the assumption that participants behave in their own interest. It's a descriptive system, as opposed to a proscriptive system such as communism - which, btw, might well agree with your ""should"" statement."
The history of the jews even outside Germany is not a very nice on. Nevertheless it does not excuse your views on Muslims, nor should or are the Muslims excluded when it comes to hate speech and crimes. This year alone there were several raids against the radical muslim communitys. The hat speech law is a very good instrument to not have racist group rally against Minority's  Muslim Jews or otherwise and to go back to the topic which Facebook has to respect as well. If someone broke the law you have to act and pull that comment which they currently not do nearly fast enough. My opinion stays. Your views are highly racial and not based on facts. You are part of the problem because bot everyone is as smart as you (im sincere here). A Moron heres your speech translates it to beat up all muslims because they are the terrorists and will do so. You talked about freedom tolerance and same rights for all. If you truly want that you have to forgive and not fight. ack with the same weapons. We have something in common regarding our views of the muslim population. They actually do have a big Problem with antisemitism and this Problem needs to be addressed. But as you said same rights for everyone, so we cannot talk shit about them either. In Germany at the moment the anti islam Problem has taken over and reached dangerous proportions. That is why i defend this group so much and cannot let half truths spread. I think we are both a bit tired of this conversation so here is my proposal! we say each other a final statement what we wish for the other to consider in the future. So i try:                 I really would want you to not succumb to simple prejudice. Please listen to the facts out there and look at the whole picture. You said and posted a lot of things which are well known to be right propaganda (the sweden thing is a 1a example) or half truths like the rise if crimes of germany which us overall true but the rise does not come from rape or violence from immigrants, but migration related topics, while the right wing attacks against muslims and refugees rose considerably.  As it stands i can only describe you as a jewish nazi which i really do not want to but have no choice considering your hardline views. Sorry that this was not too friendly.  i await your reply.
Finally, I think you can choose whether you want to have your health insurance in Switzerland or in Germany (unless your Swiss obligation to be insured is waived because of your part-time status). Some Swiss health insurers offer plans where they cooperate with German health insurers, so you can go to German doctors just like a German resident. Source: I have been a Grenzgänger from Germany into Switzerland off and on for over ten years now. I can't say anything about whether your German visa restricts you from working in Switzerland. You may want to ask about this at Expatriates.SE, but I'd much rather ask your local German authorities than random strangers on the internet."
Nothing Bernie has said is new stuff  It has been done and tried in socialist countries 20 years ago like Venezuela  What makes America the powerhouse of the world is that it doesn't have any of the things implemented, (like other countries that are not nearly as strong as the US) that Bernie wants to implement   He's also a hypocrite because he's a rich old man who owns three mansions
I would think a depressed housing market might be the BEST time to buy, is this not correct? There are foreclosures where banks are letting houses go for half of their standard value, and are offering some of the lowest interest rates ever. In a strong economy you could be looking at around 10% APR, I see this as a situation where it's a buy low sort of time.
"&gt;I think it already came in 2008. An arbitrary definition of GDP growth hardly means we aren't in a recession now.   I'm surprised you haven't been eaten alive by the armchair economists who treat an economics text book as gospel and not simply one way of interpreting a complex dynamic system which has existed long before the study of human commerce.  The economy isn't a simple device like a blender (put ice in, get crushed ice out). It's a complex dynamic system like the the human body. Just because someone feels sick but doesn't have any ""symptoms"" doesn't mean they aren't sick. What a lot of these economists are basically saying is that it appears  the economy doesn't have any of the known quantitative symptoms of being sick, so let's disregard the qualitative aspects that everyone is complaining about.   Add in all the market manipulation going on, such as massive quantitative easing, artificially low interest rates, and banks withholding millions of otherwise foreclosed homes from the market, and you can see that these economists are breathing their own exhaust."
"&gt; Are you trying to say that all the above will not help the economy and employment?  Well, let's go point by point on this one.  &gt; reducing regulation  You do know that monopolies and mega corporations are bad for consumers, right? Over time, bad for consumers --&gt; bad for economy --&gt; bad for companies/employment. That's basic stuff.  &gt; killing the PTT  Debatable at best. Depends on his ability to get a ""better deal"". From the fact that many countries have already tried to undercut on, this could cause more issues with trade, rather than fewer.  &gt; killing NAFTA  See above.  &gt; reducing immigration  Well, there's actually pretty strong evidence that increased immigration has a net positive impact on an economy. But you know, scary Mexicans or whatever.  &gt; investing in infrastructure  I guess this depends on the type and cost of infrastructure. If you're talking about a giant wall, plus the roads that would be required to be built just to get the equipment and materials out to the remote border locations in question, only to have a questionable at best impact on illegal immigration, the investment would be a gigantic waste. I'd be interested in seeing specifics about these alleged investments (estimated costs and timeframes, etc), because I have serious doubts about the legitimacy of this claim.  &gt; pulling out from wars (Syria)  When was the last time bombing a foreign country was used as a strategy for pulling out of a war? If he really were going to do such things, it would be great. But there's no evidence that that's happening anytime soon."
Yes siree Bob!!! and thats for a fucking Missile Defense that does absolutely fuck all.  Now if America pull out of the Iranian Nuclear deal and Iran goes Nuclear, Imagine a fanatical Muslim Turban head with a fucking ICBM.  We could get billions of $ poured into a Missile Defense that does absolutely fuck all.  What does this have to do with the Economy? . .drink your latte and don't put too much stress on that millennial neuron.
A technically strong stock or market is simply a stock or market which is up-trending and has been up-trending for a while. Just as a fundamentally strong stock is one with good fundamentals (a stock that is healthy and making higher profits year after year and continually improving), a technically strong stock has a healthy uptrend that continues to go up and up. Apple was technically strong until it hit $700 (its price stayed above the 200 day MA for a long period until after it hit $700, then broke down through the 200 day MA shortly after - the uptrend was over). I will usually buy stocks which are both fundamentally and technically strong, as a technically strong stock will generally stay technically strong longer if it also has strong and good fundamentals.
it always struck me as selfish, unearned moral superiority to sit here and mandate a minimum wage, you price teenagers and entry-level workers out of the market because people can't afford an army of $20 per hour workers. Its so ignorant of the narrow margins that these business have to face. It is also really short-sighted and money-obsessed to boil a job down to it's wages alone. Minimum wage destroys an ancient method of generating skilled workers: the apprentice system. Also, there is a really ugly moral side to this. Person A offers person B X amount to do Y... Why does the government have the right to say ""No! you can't pay them X because it is not X enough!"". Our economy and work is far more complex than minimum wage. it is an old idea that is nothing but a drain on our economy. TL;DR - I would have added three or more skilled workers to our economy in high school if I did not have to pay them minimum wage. I personally was priced out of hiring people because of it, so I hate it. Millennials need not wonder why no one can find a job."