vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Should voters care? What is the scenario in which this debt actually becomes a problem? It seems to me that the money from this debt is largely going into the pockets of US Citizens, so less debt would mean less prosperity for Americans. What are the arguments against this assumption?
See an advisor but with a healthy level of skepticism. Question why they make the recommendations they do.  If you have debt, no the interest rate.  If CAGR &gt; interest, invest instead of immediately paying off debt.  In reality, invest the most you can.   You're young and try to live your life like you would've without the inheritance.  The longer you let that money grow in an investment untouched (and honestly that amount of money is a huge gift/surprise at your age) the more you'll thank yourself in the end.  Max out a Roth IRA - your advisor can explain that to you.  Also, you can afford to invest super aggressively since you're so young.  You could also find a variable life insurance contract to act like a Roth and grow a death benefit to continue leaving a legacy in your family line.  Sorry for the advisory vomit.  I'm sorry for the loss that led to this inheritance, but that's a great opportunity and there are a ton of options and none of them are wrong.  Best of luck!
One of the attractions of used cars in Indianapolis and elsewhere is their value, which may not be reflected by their costs. While used cars may carry a price tag that’s half that of a brand new one, the drop is not necessarily relative to the quality but to the natural depreciation that all cars are subjected to.
Options reflect expectations about the underlying asset, and options are commonly priced using the Black-Scholes model:  N(d1) and N(d2) are probability functions, S is the spot (current) price of the asset, K is the strike price, r is the risk free rate, and T-t represents time to maturity.  Without getting into the mathematics, it suffices to say that higher volatility or expectation of volatility increases the perceived riskiness of the asset, so call options are priced lower  and put options are priced higher. Think about it intuitively. If the stock is more likely to go downwards, then there's an increased chance that the call option expires worthless, so call options must be priced lower to accommodate the relative change in expected value of the option.  Puts are priced similarly, but they move inversely with respect to call option prices due to Put-Call parity. So if call option prices are falling, then put option prices are rising (Note, however, that call prices falling does not cause put prices to rise. The inverse relationship exists because of changes in the underlying factors and how pricing works.) So the option action signifies that the market believes the stock is headed lower (in the given time frame). That does not mean it will go lower, and option traders assume risk whenever they take a particular position. Bottom line: gotta do your own homework! Best of luck.
While open interest usually correlates to volume, the mark of liquidity is the bid ask spread. Even when trading options with spreads as large as an ask 2x the bid, a more realistic price that traders are willing to accept lies somewhere in the middle. Any option can easily be exited at intrinsic value: underlying price - exercise price for calls, exercise price - underlying price for puts.  For illiquid options, this will be the best price obtained.  For longer term options, something closer to the theoretical price is still possible. If an underlying is extremely liquid, yet the options aren't quite then options traders will be much more ready to trade at the theoretical price. For exiting illiquid options, small, < 4 contracts, and infrequent, > 30 minute intervals, orders are more likely to be filled closer to the theoretical price; however, if one's sells are the only trades, traders on the other side will take note and accept ever lowering implied volatilities. With knowledge of what traders will accept, it is always more optimal to trade out of options rather than exercise because of the added costs and uncertainty involved with exercising and liquidating.
Options that are not worth exercising just expire. Options that are worth exercising are typically exercised automatically as they expire, resulting in a transfer of stock between the entity that issued the option and the entity that holds it. OCC options automatically exercise when they expire if the value of the option exceeds the transaction cost for the stock transfer (1/4 point to 3/4 point depending).
You have to sit down with HR for the school district. The options involved with with parents working for the same employer can be handled multiple ways. Unless you are a very small district, this situation has come up before. They will tell you what they allow, and then you have to determine which one saves you the most money. Also look into how the deductibles will work with the two policies. You also need to look at options for the two policies. For example if there are different levels of dental: you may not want to cover an orthodontist  on the single plan.
Ehm, the 2008 crisis was effectively a debt crisis. Debt levels are  higher now than in 2008 and default rates are on the rise. Furthermore the ability for monetary policy to absorb has been spent. What helped in 2008 was the high savings rate of China. Now even china is in a debt bubble.  Stocks are beyond expensive in a historical context, and the reason is, with money so cheap where else do you stand to get some return? This crash is coming... not sure when as market timing is impossible, but i would advise you to take a big crisis into account in your planning...,
Just for clarification, delta and probability of expiring in the money are not the same thing. What the guy meant was that delta is usually a close enough approximation to the probability. One way to think about it is to look at the probabilities and deltas of In the Money, Out of the Money, and At the Money options. In these cases, the delta and probabilities are about the same. In fact if you look at an options chain with delta and probabilities, you can see that they are all about the same. In other words, there is a linear relationship between delta and probability. Here are a couple links to other answers around the web: Hope this answer helps!
I find this pretty sketchy, personally.   From their investor opportunities page:  &gt; Wall Street, Social Medias and Real-estate investments aren’t working for many investors.  Stocks in the beleaguered social media sector keep heading down.  Shares of FaceBook, Angie’s List and Groupon, etc. have plunged as investors continue their retreat from the formerly red-hot sector. In this present day economy investors are looking for the next early stage Apple.  LifeSaver is the answer.  Reads as way too much of a sales pitch to invest. Also, I don't think there is actually any way to invest in the company outlined on that page.  I'm not saying this isn't a good idea for a product, I just would expect a medical device company to have a somewhat more professional website/investor relations page, and i'm slightly surprised to see you post this, especially with this title.
Oh you're right, there are still ways to travel lighter with kids....it's all relative...  But having ACTUALLY traveled light when I was younger I know what it means.  Now even after slimming down the suitcases, I still felt like I was bringing half the house to the tropics for 2 weeks.
Honestly, this whole story seems overblown. It sounded like he didn't know her husband... Because *he didn't know her husband*. Presidential calls to families of military deceased are a formality.  i feel like I'm being manipulated by the media on this one. Where's the story?
Humans also coped fine before the advent of computers. Does that mean we should revert back to how things were before they came about?   Anyway you haven't said why HFT is inherently bad. Well, you did make one point at the start but I think it's a weak one.  You said that HFT screws those without access to HFT? HFT system aren't free you know. I could say that me having instant access to stock markets through a computer screws over those who still rely in calling their broker to place an order. Does that mean that trading through computers should be banned? I know you'll probably argue the difference in the magnitude of the capital requirements and that almost everybody has access to a computer but not an HFT system, but where do you draw the line? Should bloomberg terminals be banned? They're out of reach for a lot of investors due to the cost.
I believe the best way to go about it is to approach a good friend or relative to borrow the money, interest free. Do discuss with them the repayment schedule. If you have any assets such as house / stocks, you can pledge them in exchange for $5000 cash. I believe the banks would be more than happy to lend to you. You could try one of these Peer to Peer lending sites where you could borrow money from other people instead of banks.
"i deleted my comment that this was a reply to so I'll repost it.  It was:   &gt;I don't know the answer, but I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.  You have to take into account the correlations of the securities across the three different markets.  It's definitely not as simple as dividing by three.  The reason why I don't think this is correct is because you can imagine an exchange in which there is only one other security, and the asset in question is perfectly correlated and therefore has a beta of 1.  You could then have a different exchange with thousands of securities where the asset has a beta of 0.3.  The  simple average method would produce a beta of .65, when it's probably true that the correct answer is closer to 0.3.  The solution is not generalizable so I don't think it can be right. It neglects the relative sizes of the exchanges and the correlation of the underlying assets with each other.  Which leads me to consider, perhaps the right thing to do is to calculate the returns across all three exchanges and the returns of the asset on all three exchanges, do a weighted average and use that variance/covariance to calculate the beta across all three exchanges.  I'm not sure what purpose, practically, such a beta would serve.  I think the correct answer is to take the beta of the asset with respect to the largest (most diversified) exchange.  Ultimately, using a basket of securities like the S&amp;P 500 is just a proxy for ""the market"", whatever that means.  It doesn't truly represent the realm of possibilities for the diversified investor, but it's close enough  tl,dr: I say pick one exchange and go with it"
I love how people still think we need to be working as much as we do right now as a society.   9-5, 5 days a week all year? Fuck, wake up people. I bet we worked less as hunter gatherers.   We have everything we need: access to water, shelter, food, technology. Why are we still working like we're slaves?  And I know some people like work and there are economic arguments for why we work this much. Doesn't change the fact that what is happening is ridiculous.
I would like to know what others think, but for now it looks like the market thinks they'll be able to compete in online content distribution, not solely hardware. The stock was priced at the upper end of its valuation range and it still went way up today. I myself am skeptical about their long-term profit potential given how much disruption is going to hit the streaming market over the next five years. Tough to know with high probability who the winners will be at this point other than probably Netflix and Amazon.
At what point do we begin crediting trump’s policies for things like this? Is there data to suggest this is because of any of his policies? I frankly really don’t like the guy but i give credit where credit is due and I’d like to know if he deserves credit or if this is still residual from Obama or the natural economic cycle.
"If someone gains access to these data, he could use social engineering approach to impersonate you - i.e. call the American Express and ask tell he he is you and he lost the access to the account and he needs the access to be reset and sent to certain email, and if they doubt it's you he would send them the statement data, even on company letterhead (which he would be able to fake since he has the data from the statements, and AE has no idea how the authentic letterhead looks like). He could also do the opposite trick - like calling your assistant or even yourself and saying something like ""I'm from American Express, calling about the transaction at this-and-this date and this-and-this time, this amount, please confirm you are {your name} and your address is {your address}, I need to confirm something"" - which would make it appear as he is really from AE since he knows all these details - and then ask you some detail he's missing ""for security"" - like your birth date or last digits of SSID or anything like that - and then use these details to impersonate you to AE.  So putting all this info together where it can be accessed by strangers does have risks. It may not work out if both you and AE personnel are vigilant and follow instructions to the letter, but we know it not always so."
The best answer to this question will depend on you and your wife. What is 'fair' for some may not be 'fair' for others. Some couples split expenses 50:50. Some split proportionately based on income. Some pool everything together. What works best for you will depend on your relative incomes, your financial goals, living standards, and most importantly, your personal beliefs. Here is a great question with various viewpoints: How to organize bank accounts with wife. It doesn't touch heavily on home ownership / pre-nuptial agreements, but might be a good starting point to getting you to think about your options. Consider providing another loan to your wife for additional investments in the home. It seems you are both comfortable with the realities of the pre-nuptial agreement; one of those realities seems to be that in the event of divorce you would lose access to the house. Loaning money has the benefit of allowing for the improvements to be done immediately, while clearly delineating what you have spent on the home from what she has spent on the home. However, this may not be 'fair', depending on how you both define the term. Have you discussed how expenses and savings would be split between you? Since there is no mortgage on the house, she has effectively contributed her pre-marital assets towards paying substantially all of your housing costs. It may be 'fair' for you to contribute to housing costs by at least splitting maintenance 50:50, or it may not be. Hopefully you talked about finances before you got married, and if not, now would be the best time to start. I personally would hate to have an 'uneasy' feeling about a relationship because I failed to openly communicate about finances.
According to your post, you bought seven shares of VBR at $119.28 each on August 23rd. You paid €711,35. Now, on August 25th, VBR is worth $120.83. So you have But you want to know what you have in EUR, not USD. So if I ask Google how much $845.81 is in EUR, it says €708,89. That's even lower than what you're seeing. It looks like USD has fallen in value relative to EUR. So while the stock price has increased in dollar terms, it has fallen in euro terms. As a result, the value that you would get in euros if you sold the stock has fallen from the price that you paid. Another way of thinking about this is that your price per share was €101,72 and is now €101,33. That's actually a small drop. When you buy and sell in a different currency that you don't actually want, you add the currency risk to your normal risk. Maybe that's what you want to do. Or maybe you would be better off sticking to euro-denominated investments. Usually you'd do dollar-denominated investments if some of your spending was in dollars. Then if the dollar goes up relative to the euro, your investment goes up with it. So you can cash out and make your purchases in dollars without adding extra money. If you make all your purchases in euros, I would normally recommend that you stick to euro-denominated investments. The underlying asset might be in the US, but your fund could still be in Europe and list in euros. That's not to say that you can't buy dollar-denominated investments with euros. Clearly you can. It's just that it adds currency risk to the other risks of the investment. Unless you deliberately want to bet that USD will rise relative to EUR, you might not want to do that. Note that USD may rise over the weekend and put you back in the black. For that matter, even if USD continues to fall relative to the EUR, the security might rise more than that.
= Did anyone take notes during the last 90 minutes of this meeting? 74 This is low-hanging fruit = Get this done quickly 75 We need a few quick wins = We’ve got to trick people into thinking we know what we’re doing by some successes we can point to and claim as ours 76 It’s a [Insert Company Name] killer = Did I get your attention yet with the Freddy Kreuger imagery associated with the company who’s currently eating our lunch? 77 I want to address the elephant in the room = I know you think I’m trying to cover up/gloss over something, so I might as well talk about it 78 This is the next big thing/new thing = Some of our 20-somethings have told me this is really cool 79 This time it’s different because… = Don’t wait for the explanation… simply run for the hills. 80 What are the best practices on this? = How can I cover my behind that we’re just doing stuff the way other good people have supposedly done this? 81 This is our deliverable = I know this sounds like something that comes in a body bag, but it makes our PowerPoint sound tougher than it actually is 82 We’ll loop you in when we need to = You’re not that important to know about all the details on this 83 We want this to move up and to the right = I failed high school algebra but someone said this means we’ll be making a lot of money if this happens 84 We’re going through a re-org = No one knows what the heck is going on at the moment 85 We’ve got to increase our mind-share with the customer = I think I would have been happier as a doctor doing lobotomies than in marketing as a career path 86 I don’t think you’re comparing apples to apples = Let me tell you how you should really think about this issue 87 Let’s peel back the onion on this = I want to sound thorough so this is a better way of telling you that than simply clearing my throat 88 You phoned it in = I was too busy checking my email during your presentation that I didn’t listen 89 I want you to run with this = I just threw you into the deep end of the pool and you’re on your own to figure it out
That's not to say that you can't buy dollar-denominated investments with euros. Clearly you can. It's just that it adds currency risk to the other risks of the investment. Unless you deliberately want to bet that USD will rise relative to EUR, you might not want to do that. Note that USD may rise over the weekend and put you back in the black. For that matter, even if USD continues to fall relative to the EUR, the security might rise more than that. I have no opinion on the value of VBR. I don't actually know what that is, as it doesn't matter for the points I was making. I'm not saying to sell it immediately. I'm saying that you might prefer euro-denominated investments when you buy in the future. Again, unless you are taking this particular risk deliberately.
"They deserve jail just for their stupidity. How dense or oblivious do you have to be to hold a position that high up and still not be aware of the potential consequences.  I worked finance for a public company as a lowly employee but I don't dare touch the stock or its options no matter what I know. And these are so called ""executives"". Jail them and burn these mofos assets."
"HR is clueless.  Clueless, while I can tell in 2 seconds that Susan is an idiot based on  ""*Susan: There are a lot of things to consider with that. One school of thought says that when you put corporate assets into the cloud, they are more secure because you know exactly what you have there. You have an exact inventory, you know exactly who has access to that data, and how it is controlled.*"""
That tends to be the case with a lot of things I am seeing. Any changes seem to create short term recession with projections of long-term growth.  I would normally see that as a problem, because the reaction to the recession could effect the outcome post recession, but the LFPR trending downward is not a good sign for the economy as a whole. Eventually that portion would leave most markets, or welfare would have to increase, on the current trajectory.   I think encouraging non-income producing assets for wealth generation is a flawed system, personally. Whether I am right or wrong, I do not know. I think the Government, and subsequently the fed, should encourage income-producing assets for the wealth affect, or in the very least, not something as crucial as housing to the health of the consumer base.
"The standard interpretation of ""can I afford to retire"" is ""can I live on just the income from my savings, never touching the principal."" To estimate that, you need to make reasonable guesses about the return you expect, the rate of inflation, your real costs -- remember to allow for medical emergencies, major house repairs, and the like when determining you average needs, not to mention taxes if this isn't all tax-sheltered! -- and then build in a safety factor. You said liquid assets, and that's correct; you don't want to be forced into a reverse mortgage by anything short of a disaster. An old rule of thumb was that -- properly invested -- you could expect about 4% real return after subtracting inflation. That may or may not still be correct, but it makes an easy starting point. If we take your number of $50k/year (today's dollars) and assume you've included all the tax and contingency amounts, that means your nest egg needs to be 50k/.04, or $1,250,000. (I'm figuring I need at least $1.8M liquid assets to retire.) The $1.5M you gave would, under this set of assumptions, allow drawing up to $60k/year, which gives you some hope that your holdings would mot just maintain themselves but grow, giving you additional buffer against emergencies later. Having said that: some folks have suggested that, given what the market is currently doing, it might be wiser to assume smaller average returns. Or you may make different assumptions about inflation, or want a larger emergency buffer. That's all judgement calls, based on your best guesses about the economy in general and your investments in particular. A good financial advisor (not a broker) will have access to better tools for exploring this, using techniques like monte-carlo simulation to try to estimate both best and worst cases, and can thus give you a somewhat more reliable answer than this rule-of-thumb approach. But that's still probabilities, not promises. Another way to test it: Find out how much an insurance company would want as the price of an open-ended inflation-adjusted $50k-a-year annuity.
"Soo... I guess you are out of arguments? FWIW, I would like to see the cost of medical services become so cheap that people don't need ""health care"".  I know Universal health care proponents hearts are in the right place, but the data is showing me a different story. I know I am a minority here and we will probably end up with universal health care, and that it won't work and we will see a bubble just like sub prime when they tried to provide greater access to housing, just like college tuition where we tried greater access to education. A lot of people will be hurt when this market crashes and I don't want that. Maybe then we will learn that market forces and competition aren't evil?  Or maybe It will just be blamed on rich people again. 'Till then I guess I'll just be your token heartless bad guy. But Really I am not. Good luck."