vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Gold is a commodity.  It has a tracked price and can be bought and sold as such.  In its physical form it represents something real of signifigant value that can be traded for currency or barted.  A single pound of gold is worth about 27000 dollars. It is very valuable and it is easily transported as opposed to a car which loses value while you transport it.  There are other metals that also hold value (Platinum, Silver, Copper, etc) as well as other commodities.  Platinum has a higher Value to weight ratio than gold but there is less of a global quantity and the demand is not as high.  A gold mine is an investement where you hope to take out more in gold than it cost to get it out.   Just like any other business.  High gold prices simply lower your break even point. TIPS protects you from inflation but does not protect you from devaluation.  It also only pays the inflation rate recoginized by the Treasury.  There are experts who believe that the fed has understated inflation.  If these are correct then TIPS is not protecting its investors from inflation as promised.   You can also think of treasury bonds as an investment in your government.  Your return will be effectively determined by how they run their business of governing.  If you believe that the government is doing the right things to help promote the economy then investing in their bonds will help them to be able to continue to do so.  And if consumers buy the bonds then the treasury does not have to buy any more of its own.
It wasn't that long ago that Tim Horton's was owned by Wendy's, another American fast food chain. The only reason Investment Canada would have to block a foreign takeover would be if it would risk Canadian jobs (which this one wouldn't) or risks putting an important Canadian resource in foreign hands (which this takeover also wouldn't).  Investment Canada has only blocked two foreign acquisitions of Canadian companies in the past 25 years.
Firstly, I think you need to separate your question into two parts: If you are Chinese, live in China and intend to stay in China for most of your life then the default answer to question 1 should be Renminbi.  Question 2 is not as important, you can hold USD in almost any country in the world. Any investment you hold has risk, which may include market risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, inflation risk etc. Holding USD will expose you to exchange rate fluctuations as well.  If the Renminbi rises in value against the dollar your returns in USD will be reduced by the same amount (remember that for currency fluctuations you have to multiply the percentages, see here for a good explanation). The first thing you probably want to do is find out exactly what the assets are in the 理财 you have invested in.  The fact that there is a 'risk level' (even if it is only 2) would suggest to me that the fund is investing in some combination of bonds and stocks which means that your returns are not guaranteed and could make a loss. Interest rates on deposit accounts are mandated by the government in China, and the current 12 month deposit rate on RMB is 3%.  To earn over 3%, GEB must be investing your assets in something else (I'm guessing bonds).  Bear in mind that 1.5 years is a very short amount of time in investments, so don't assume this return will continue!  I'm afraid I've only been studying Chinese for a year, so I can't really help you much with the link you've sent through - you may want to check if there is any guaranteed minimum return, which can be the case in more complex structured products. Ultimately you will need to pick an investment which you feel gives you the best combination of risk and return for your situation, there are a huge amount of options to choose between.  The 4-5% you are earning right now is not a huge risk premium on the 3% you could earn in China from a time deposit, but in the current environment you may struggle to beat it without taking on more risk.  Before considering that though - understand how much risk you already have with GEB.
Traveller's cheques. That's exactly what they were intended for. Their usage has dropped a lot since everyone can use ATMs in foreign countries, but they still exist.
There isn't any place you can put $300 and turn it into significant passive income. What you need to do instead is manage the active (work) income that you have so that your money goes farther, freeing income up for reducing debt and investing.  Investing $300 one time won't add up to much, but investing $100 a month will turn into wealth over time. Making a monthly budget is the key to managing your income.  In the process, you'll find out where your income is going, and you can be intentional about how much you want to spend on different things in your life.  You can allocate some of your income to paying down debt and investing, which is what you need to do to get ahead. For some general guidelines on what to do with your money first, read this question: Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing.  For more specifics on creating a budget, eliminating debt, and building wealth, I recommend the book The Total Money Makeover by Dave Ramsey.
Forget investing, you need to focus on managing your debt. I would keep the 6k in a checking or savings account because you need that money in case of an emergency. If you save up more than 10k, use the excess to pay down the principal on your debt. Worry about investing when you have a positive net worth.
After the deal, which is expected to close by early next year, Burger King and Tim Horton said their newly combined company would have about $23 billion in sales and more than 18,000 locations. The corporate headquarters will be in Canada, but Burger King will still be operated out of Miami.  So it can be considered an inversion.    Do you understand how companies avoid taxes in these deals?  The US taxes all your revenue at 35% and then gives you credit for foreign taxes paid.  In many other countries, they just tax you for domestic revenue, not world wide.   So previously, Burger King had to pay 35% tax on all revenue world wide, and then got back credits for taxes paid in say, Canada or England.   Now, they will pay 35% only on US income and the foreign tax in those countries it operates, which can be much less than 35%.
"The topic you are apparently describing is ""safe withdrawal rates"", more here. Please, note that the asset allocation is crucial decision with your rates. If you continue to keep a lot in cash, you cannot withdraw too much money ""to live and to travel"" because the expected return from cash is too low in the long run. In contrast, if you moved to more sensible decision like 30% bonds and 70% world portfolio -- the rates will me a lot different. As you are 30 years old, you could pessimist suppose to live next 100 years -- then your possible withdrawal rates would be much lower than let say over 50 years. Anyway besides deciding asset allocation, you need to estimate the time over which you need your assets. You have currently 24% in liquid cash and 12% in bonds but wait you use the word ""variety of funds"" with about 150k USD, what are they? Do you have any short-term bonds or TIPS as inflation hedge? Do you miss small and value? What is your sector allocation between small-med-large and value-blend-growth? If you are risk-averse, you could add some value small. Read the site, it does much better job than any question-answer site can do (the link above)."
It's a great town, worth a visit for sure. I'm glad you've visited other places in the USA, since NYC is not representative of the nation as a whole, in my opinion, and many foreign visitors to the USA only visit NYC (just as many foreign visitors to France only visit Paris.)
Andy Callif Bail Bonds offers fast, reliable bail services in Columbus, OH. Specializing in a variety of bonds, including felony, drug, DUI, immigration, and warrants, Andy Callif Bail Bonds has you covered for the service, rates, and solutions you've been searching for. Call today!
"If the single active member lives in California and works at home, then you likely need to register in CA and pay the annual $800 franchise tax.  California is quite aggressive about enforcing registration of LLCs. A foreign LLC needs to register if it is ""doing business"" in California.  Here is a blog post that covers it in some detail.  It looks like you meet at least one of the criteria for doing business in California, such as:"
"*While the politicians delay dealing with the stickier issues of immigration reform, surely they could get together on abolishing the limits on H1b visas for young educated foreign workers.*  Yes, surely they could get together on abolishing the limits on H1b visas for YOUNG educated foreign workers and thereby throw even more older tech workers out of work. As you can see from the first graph and table at http://econdataus.com/h1binfo.htm , the top 11 users of H1b visas in 2013 were companies heavily involved in outsourcing. And as you can see from the third graph and table at http://econdataus.com/h1binfo.htm , over 80 percent of initial H-1B hires are under 35.  Few of those high tech firms pushing to increase or abolish the limits on H1b visas even suggest that we need have any concern for U.S. workers. Perhaps workers and other citizens should reward those tech companies by giving them a taste of their own philosophy. Ignore any suggestion that we give any deference to tech products made in the U.S. and buy only foreign products. That will help build the foreign competition, giving those foreign workers places closer to home at which they can work. That may dry up the supply of cheap foreign labor and cause U.S. companies to treat their U.S. workers a little better. And, to paraphrase the pro-H1b philosophy, why should we buy a product made in the U.S. when a ""more qualified"" one is available from a foreign country?"
I think by definition there aren't, generally speaking, any indicators (as in chart indicators, I assume you mean)  for fundamental analysis. Off the top of my head I can't think of one chart indicator that I wouldn't call 'technical', even though a couple could possibly go either way and I'm sure someone will help prove me wrong. But the point I want to make is that to do fundamental analysis, it is most certainly more time consuming. Depending on what instrument you're investing in, you need to have a micro perspective (company specific details) and a macro perspective (about the industry it's in). If you're investing in sector ETFs or the like, you'd be more reliant on the macro analysis. If you're investing in commodities, you'll need to consider macro analysis in multiple countries who are big producers/consumers of the item. There's no cut and dried way to do it, however I personally opt for a macro analysis of sector ETFs and then use technical analysis to determine my entry and/or exit.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://voxeu.org/article/investing-roads-versus-schools) reduced by 94%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Although public investment in roads represents an important engine of growth for many developing countries, investing in schools would appear to be an even more pressing need for them.  &gt; For a prolonged time the economy enjoys faster growth by investing only in roads, and it takes about a generation for the output obtained by investing in schools to overtake that delivered by investing in roads.  &gt; On the one hand, it shrinks the delay with which output resulting from investing in schools overtakes that from investing in roads and results in very similar paths of public debt.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6tkm6v/is_it_better_to_invest_in_roads_or_schools/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~190257 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **schools**^#1 **investment**^#2 **public**^#3 **roads**^#4 **spend**^#5"
When I was about your age I had the same kind of situation. I asked my bank about possible options and one of them was a guaranteed reserve. You lock the money away for a certain amount of years and you get a guaranteed amount of interest on it. I don't know what the current rate is at the moment so you'll have to ask your bank. The good thing about premium bonds is that you can access the money quickly at any time so you could always get premium bonds until you decide what to do with it. If I were you though, I'd make sure my parents didn't have control over my money. Whatever option you choose, keep your money in your name.
Academic research into ADRs seems to suggest that pairs-trading ADRs and their underlying shares reveals that there certainly are arbitrage opportunities, but that in most (but not all cases) such opportunities are quickly taken care of by the market. (See this article for the mexican case, the introduction has a list of other articles you could read on the subject). In some cases parity doesn't seem to be reached, which may have to do with transaction costs, the risk of transacting in a foreign market, as well as administrative & legal concerns that can affect the direct holder of a foreign share but don't impact the ADR holder (since those risks and costs are borne by the institution, which presumably has a better idea of how to manage such risks and costs). It's also worth pointing out that there are almost always arbitrage opportunities that get snapped up quickly: the law of one price doesn't apply for very short time-frames, just that if you're not an expert in that particular domain of the market, it might as well be a law since you won't see the arbitrage opportunities fast enough. That is to say, there are always opportunities for arbitrage with ADRs but chances are YOU won't be able to take advantage of it (In the Mexican case, the price divergence seems to have an average half-life of ~3 days). Some price divergence might be expected: ADR holders shouldn't be expected to know as much about the foreign market as the typical foreign share holder, and that uncertainty may also cause some divergence. There does seem to be some opportunity for arbitrage doing what you suggest in markets where it is not legally possible to short shares, but that likely is the value added from being able to short a share that belongs to a market where you can't do that.
"Let me ELI5 it for you.  It's *illegal* for foreign governments to contribute to or otherwise attempt to affect our elections.  Why?  This is done to prevent undue foreign influence inside our government.  You don't want foreigners, who don't care about America, to be ""pulling strings.""  This law is really old and is considered a big deal to keep the elections clean.  It's also *illegal* for a US citizen to help a foreign government to influence our election.  So you can't collude to help them do the illegal thing.  So taking a meeting with Russian government officials in a attempt to get opposition research on a candidate is thus *illegal* because it's helping the foreign power affect our election.  Don Jr released emails where he admitted to doing this.  That make sense?  Also think about it on a practical level.  Were the Russian going to give the intel to Don Jr for free?  What deal was going to be struck for this compromising info?  Nobody knows, but you have to assume it's something of value."
"&gt; . A us ceo will pay more in income taxes than a 1000 factory workers.  From quick google searches, average auto worker make about $35-40 an hour,  meaning they pay about $20,000 a year in taxes.  $20,000 * 1,000 = $20million  Ford CEO reportedly gets about that in gross compensation, which he probably pays closer to the capital gains tax rate for (~20%).  Though I'm not sure why you are trying to start an argument here.  You said you were considering ""buying a car from a foreign manufacturer"" and I simply pointed out that the car in question was manufactured here in America."
"During Graham's career, gold and currency were the same thing because of the gold standard. Graham did not advise investing in currencies, only in bonds and stocks, the latter only for intelligent speculation. Graham died a couple of years after Nixon closed the gold window, ending the gold standard.  Gold may be thought of as a currency even today, as endowments and other investors use it as a store of value or for diversification of risks. However, currency or commodities investing does not seem Graham-like. How could you reliably estimate intrinsic value of a currency or commodity, so that you can have a Graham-like margin of safety after subtracting the intrinsic value from the market value?  Saying that gold is ""clearly underpriced in today's market"" is just hand-waving. A Graham analysis such as ""net net"" (valuing stocks by their current tangible assets net of all liabilities) is a quantitative analysis of accounting numbers audited by CPAs and offers a true margin of safety."
Huh. It appears it's only currencies in sterling that are fully exempt. https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/capital-gains-manual/cg12602   Government manuals are more detailed than .gov but still not perfect as it's HMRCs interpretation of legislation and has been overturned in the past.  There is also another (old) article here about foreign currency transactions. https://www.taxation.co.uk/articles/2010/10/27/21191/currency-gains  I have never come across forex capital gains in practice but I've learnt something today! Something to look out for in the UK as well I guess.
comments discuss investing in potato futures. Learn / ready about commodity trading or commodity futures. An investopedia article How To Invest In Commodities is a good start.  There are quite a few commodities offered for normal trade or as futures. Potatos may not be offered on quite a few exchanges. Found some here Investing in commodities is fraught with quite a bit of risk, some like you have already pointed out. Of course you can't eat all and have to sell.
You understand that the Fed is *supposed* to make overnight loans to banks, that one of its primary jobs is to be a lender of last resort?  And yes, some were foreign banks; foreign subsidies of US banks or counter-parties to large US banks.  Near-zero, yes for course we're talking about *overnight* loans.  The current commercial rate for overnight euro LIBOR is 0.26179%, in other words, 0.0026, near zero OMG conspiracy!
Actually, you're missing the key feature of CDOs.  Most CDOs use (much to our economic misery, ultimately) a system call tranching.  To simplify this idea, I'll make a two tranch example.  Suppose I buy mortgages covering a face value of $120,000,000.  Because they are subprime, if I just put them in a pool and finance them with bonds, the rating will be lousy and most investors will shun them (at least investors who are safety oriented).  What I do is divide them into two tranches.  One bond issue is for $100,000,000 and another for $20,000,000.  The idea is that any defaulting mortgage comes out of the latter bond issue.  I'll probably keep these bonds (the lower tranch).  Thus buyers of the first issue are safe unless defaults exceed $20,000,000.  Then the rating agencies rate the first issue AAA and it gets snapped up by investors.  In a strict sense it is overcollateralized, basically the entire $120,000,000 backs up the first bond issue. In reality, many CDOs had multiple tranches, with the lowest tranch being retained by the underwriters and the other tranches sold as bonds of various ratings.
Actually, that's impossible; such laws would (and do) constitute prior restraint of trade - no city council would enact such a law, as it's asking for a lawsuit, and is patently illegal and legally indefensible.  In the state of California, the state vehicle code says very specifically that municipalities may ONLY regulate food trucks (or any kind of otherwise legal mobile vendor) for purposes of public safety and health; they cannot legislate competition, or enact laws that favor one type of (established) business against another type of (new, usually) business.  This is why the past 8 lawsuits against municipalities, asking that time limits etc. be abolished, have all been won - either at first or in appeal (and in the case of LA, both) on behalf of the truck operators ... there is no way to argue that a 15 minute or 30 minute limit benefits public health/safety but a 2 hour limit does not.  Laws that say the trucks can't park too near an intersection as they may block drivers' view, that sort of thing is fine - it can easily be argued that such regulation benefits public safety. Same thing with the trucks around schools - as long as other types of large vehicles are also restricted.
If they are voting in reaction to what cities/ city folk are doing rather than for the good of their area then they deserve to die, I don't mean die as human beings but die as towns and municipalities.  And from where I'm sitting this seems to be exactly what they are doing.
In 1997, the late David Bowie famously worked with a financier to innovate on a bond issue to be paid back by the royalties on his back catalog, Bowie Bonds  Several contemporary musicians followed suit, but Madonna was not one of them.  At some point this may change and Madonna or the label that owns part of the catalog may issue bonds backed by royalties.   Madonna's catalog pre-2007 is owned by Warner Music which in 2011 was sold by Time-Warner to a private equity company Access Industries.   Madonna's post 2007 music including the latest 2015 release is in partnership with LiveNation, a publicly traded company LYV.
"It's a popular saying for a reason:  ""There's no such thing as bad debt. Only a bad price.""  This isn't the first time they've defaulted and reissued bonds and it won't be the last. Actually, I think this is number 4.   In any case, no one is forcing anyone to buy. I see no reason why Argentina shouldn't give it a shot. They just shouldn't be surprised when no one wants to even wipe their ass with them. Just because one issue is tied up in legal battles doesn't mean you have to stop raising capital. Seems SOP to me, I don't know."
"That oil is traded in USD makes for extra demand and thus a stronger dollar with more purchasing power. It's not really economics that are the issue though - many might argue a weakened dollar might help the US economy (cheaper exports).  The real issue is power. These gold backed securities make it so that certain countries can get around US sanctions.  Not to mention that controlling the currency that oil is traded in means the US can devalue their currency to gain an advantage in the event of a shortage.  Also, because petroleum is traded in dollars, this means treasury bonds are a natural place to store wealth for oil producers. High demand for these bonds makes it cheap for the US government to borrow and easier to make interest payments thus making T-Bonds a ""safe"" asset."