vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
If you are trying to save up every last dollar for tuition to finish the degree, but you have to pay loans now, call up the provider to ask about temporary delays on your student loan payments. Many have time-limited hardship allowances, and between the medical bills, low income, and returning to school, they may be willing to give you a few months break until you get back to school and the in-school provisions kick in. If you can only raise enough for one semester, then need to skip a semester to build up more funds, that happens, it's OK. Be strategic, and check on loan forbearance. Usually being out for one semester is allowed by student loan companies before you owe them payment, and if you re-enroll you don't have to start making payments yet. Make sure you talk to someone who knows what they are talking about, especially in terms of credit expiration. Policies vary, and sometimes an advisor is able to put in a special request to waive you through some of these issues. Academia is heavily, heavily reliant on developing a good relationship and clear communication with an advisor who is willing to work with you to achieve your goals. Written policies are sometimes very firm, and sometimes all you have to do is ask the right person and poof, suddenly the rules change. It's a weird system, but don't be afraid to explain your situation and ask what can be done. Don't assume a written policy is 100% ironclad - sometimes it is, but it often isn't. Being destitute is awful, and having to ask for help can feel terrible in it's own way, but doing what you have to do to have a better future can mean pushing through and being willing to ask for help. This can mean asking parents and close family if they can contribute to help you finish your degree, but this also means checking with your local community programs to see if you qualify for anything. Many communities have food pantries and related programs that will help you even if you don't qualify for something like SNAP (aka food stamps), because they know times can get hard for anyone and they want you to spend what little money you have on building a better life. Your university may even run a food pantry for students in need - use it.
"I'm not familiar with the Dupire model; I'll have to take a look at (it sounds cool though).  I think that all arbitrage-free models are ""incomplete"" in the sense that they don't say, ""This is a price that doesn't imply any arbitrage opportunities *anywhere*,"" but instead say, ""This is a price that doesn't imply any arbitrage opportunities within a specific set of securities.""  What set you're using will vary from one model to another, and I'd say (although other people might reasonably disagree) that taking a volatility structure as given is as much no-arbitrage as taking a term structure as given.  As a side note, I'd say that what (theoretically) distinguishes an equilibrium model is that you're supposed to *know* the parameters, not guess at them or observe them from the real world.  By that definition, a really complete CAPM or Black-Scholes would explain how to derive the correct beta or volatility from fundamental analysis.  Also, I've upvoted you elsewhere for some really good comments you made about intrinsic value."
"That's exactly what he's being accused of.  Also if you could explain in the show ""Who's the Boss?"", who was the actual boss?  Was it Angela or was it Tony? I say we examine the two choices in a semester-long course about it. 😄"
Ummm, yeah, if you'd like to explain to me how Google is performing poorly, that'd be great. I'd like to have that in a post by tomorrow.   Total revenue has jumped 51% from last year. Just taking a quick look at their financial statements their revenue has increased 1.9 billion from quarter before, to 14.1 billion. Their cash and cash converts are up about 2.5 billion from the quarter before. Finally, their total equity for the company is up about 3.5 billion from the quarter before.  Not bad. If you think this is a bad quarter, I'd love to see what their good quarters are.  What's weighing them down is the buying of Motorola for 13.5 billion. But think about it, they have revenues of that in just *one* quarter. And even more have enough cash to buy Motorola in *cash* 3 times over and still have some left over.
Look at my link. You are 100% correct, except for about four of the reviews. Those four each have someone with more than one friend and more than one review. Again, you could potentially (knowing the social graph) get a situation like this to occur with astroturfing, but it's far less likely.  That having been said, look at Monica A. Explain to me how she got filtered. She's the one gigantic red flag that shows that Yelp is intentionally stuffing this business.  I have a decent Yelp score (have a lot of reviews and friends) and have always wondered what would happen if I were to review this business. I won't, since I haven't used them, but I'd love to know whether my review would be Monica-ed.
"Gold is not debt, ""money"" is debt (whatever it is made of).  In the example above, everything could have been exactly the same, except using certificates written on sharks instead of on paper.   Now, sharks have value, paper has value, and gold has value. When you print money, the stuff you make it out of has some utility separate from its use as currency. But when you are using it as currency (regardless of what it is made from), it is a marker for debt.   You go to work for an hour, your boss gives you a marker that you can trade for a cheeseburger or some gasoline or a ferret or cantaloupes, or whatever you want. That marker is an IOU for the work you did. You give it to the cantaloupe store, and it becomes an IOU for the value of one cantaloupe. They give it to the store employees or the cantaloupe-grower or whatever, and so on.   It doesn't matter what that marker is made out of, its function is the same. If it were gold, you could melt it down and make a ring out of it. If it's paper, you could use it as a bookmark or a shopping list or to blow your nose, if it's a shark you scare people with it in the pool.  N.B., this is totally separate from the question of whether we should be using gold as a currency, which has to do with the fact that the gold supply is a lot more stable than the paper supply, and whether being able to easily print more money on demand is a good thing or a bad thing."
&gt; irrelevant to the point, again, that inefficient companies should go under.  Something I've agreed with in each and every post.  I personally see a collapse coming, in fact.  Nothing is going to save these old retail businesses - as I've said in each post.  My point is that _it makes me sad that so many people will suffer as a result._  I fail to understand why this is a controversial idea.  Can you explain?
This is more an /r/personalfinance question, but I'll give my 2 cents. No matter what, the fund you invest in is going to be subject to risk, so you could end up losing money. It would definitely be a gamble.   If you have other debt at higher APR than the loan, it could be beneficial to pay that off using extra loan proceeds.
The simple answer is absolutely.  With the parameters you quote, if you will pay off the loan in 82 months or less, you will be ahead taking the variable rate. You have put your finger on the important question as well. The higher initial interest is buying insurance against rates rising if you don't pay off the loan within 82 months.  I suspect the contract loan term is much longer than that, because otherwise a variable rate does not make sense.  You need to assess whether the insurance you are buying is worth the premium.  You can look at what the formula for the variable rate would set the rate at today. It is probably somewhat higher than the 3.79%.  That will tell you how much rates have to rise to make the variable rate go above 5.02%. Note that if the loan term is around 160 months (and it could well be 180 months, 15 years) you can afford the interest to rise to about 6.2% for the last half and you will still be dollars ahead.  It could even rise higher if you discount expenses in the future.  You could also hope that if inflation rises to make interest rates rise like that you will get cost of living raises that make this easy to pay.
What's the point of commenting on a down voted thread anyway? There is no agreed upon cut-off for Gen X. You could make an argument that anyone over 40 and under 60 is Gen X.   The point is that Gen X is not some hapless victim in this crisis. Many of the mid-level executives and managers responsible for mortgage fraud, derivatives fraud and all levels of financial abuse are members of Generation X.  What generation is the London Whale? How about Blythe Masters?  You Gen X'ers really got a sore spot, huh? Couldn't have had anything to do with you. Just hapless victims of generational warfare.  Don't worry. You get first dibs at taking the helm of the sinking ship. Just have to pry the Boomers cold dead hands off the wheel first.
Looking at your dates, I think I see a pattern.  It appears that your statement closing date is always 17 business days before the last business day of the month.  For example, if you start at May 31 and start counting backwards, skipping Saturdays, Sundays, and May 30 (Memorial Day), you'll see that May 5 is 17 business days before May 31.  I cannot explain why Bank of America would do this.  If you ask them, let us know what they say. If it bothers you, find another bank.  I do most of my banking (checking, savings, etc.) with a local credit union. Their statements end on the last day of the month, every month without fail. (Very nice, in my opinion.) I have two credit cards with nationally known banks, and although those statements end in the middle of the month, they are consistently on the same date every month. (One of them is on the 13th; the other date I can't recall right now.) You are right, a computer does the work, and your statement date should be able to fall on a weekend without trouble. Even when these were assembled by hand, the statement date could still be on a weekend, and they just wouldn't write it up until the following Monday.  You should be able to find another bank or credit union that does this.
In addition to what quid said, I think your risk tolerance should depend on how likely you are to need the funds in the near future. Say that you have $100k saved up and you want to decide how to invest it. Then you should ask yourself: The idea here is that if you invest say in stocks (high risk) then the value of your position could drop significantly and you'd potentially have to wait for a long time before it recovers. If you are forced to sell you could make a substantial loss. If you don't urgently need this cash, however, then you can feel relaxed and just wait for the market to reverse again. This is viewing risk through the lens of how likely it is that you'll have to wait a long time to get a substantial amount of your money back, which itself is a function of how likely it is for a substantial downturn to occur in a certain market.
I am with Joe.   Just doing some rough budgeting you should be able to swing 2-2.5K per month.  Here is how I got that: You gross 60K, 5k per month.  75% of rent ~1000, 75% of 600 for groceries 450, 75% of 400 for utilities 300, 500 student loan.  5000-1000-450-300-500=2750.  Deduct another 250 for gas, car repairs, clothes, hair cuts and you have 2500.  What else are you doing with your money? This is with no help from your partner.  I'd ask the same of him, what is he doing with all of his money?  He makes 66% of what you do, but is only responsible for 25% of the bills.  Combined you could be rocking this at like 5K per month.  This is with not working an extra job.   Being a victim is a choice, you can win with money.
"In general I don’t think you can blame the news stories. You can blame everyone’s preconceived notion that any sort of LBO or leveraged restructuring is the devil’s work. Every American is of course well-versed in the subject. From the Sealy example, you clearly have a journalist who has no idea what they are talking about. All you have is a cherry-picked summary of what took place. As such, the “finance scholars” jump in and explain how it’s all a giant scam. Bain LBO’d Sealy in 1997. As a part of that, it was saddled with ~$700m in debt. That of course is fodder for the ""finance scholars"" because they don't understand the benefits of debt and more generally how LBOs work, none of which are noted in the article. The article then notes that Sealy has recently encountered trouble. To the ""geniuses"" this is of course because of Romney's work and the ~$700m in debt. No one notices the fact that Bain unloaded this in 2004 for double what it paid for it. For those that did, the unloading was a textbook Bain scam. Bain unloaded this to KKR, perhaps the sharpest and most successful PE firm in history. Would KKR put $1.5b into this if it were a scam? According to the ""geniuses"", of course they would. How could Mitt Romney actually improve a business? No one looks at the fact that revenues were up considerably, margins had expanded tremendously, growth prospects were higher, and FCF yields were fantastic. This is why KKR bought the company, and this is what an LBO is supposed to be. I haven't done a ton of work on this case, it was before my time, but I would be very surprised if the growth wasn't accompanied by employee expansion as well. You also get the “I wish I had a way to just walk away from my debt” comment. I don’t even know where to begin explaining how asinine that is. Equity is subordinated to debt. That’s the definition of equity.
"As someone who founded and owns a bakery and employs about 20 people this is my advice:  1. Clean the toilets.  Show that you're willing to do whatever it is you're asking your people to do.  2. Solicit negative feedback often and then take steps to act on it.  If you don't act on it explain your reasons.  Make sure they're good reasons.  3. Deflect credit at every opportunity.  4. Hold people accountable.  Being nice to an employee who's not doing their work or doing it poorly is simultaneously being an asshole to the employees who are.  The compassionate thing is to make a quick, decisive break with incompetent or lazy people.  -Also, being wishy washy is incredibly expensive.  My largest mistake early on was not being able to say ""you're incompetent at this job and you're fired.""  Instead I gave a wishy washy ""we don't really need you anymore"" and they filed unemployment falsely.  It ended up increasing my unemployment insurance and thereby raised my payroll by 3% indefinitely."
"Your scenario depicts 2 ""in the money"" options, not ""at the money"". The former is when the share price is higher than the option strike, the second is when share price is right at strike. I agree this is a highly unlikely scenario, because everyone pricing options knows what everyone else in that stock is doing. Much about an option has everything to do with the remaining time to expiration. Depending on how much more the buyer believes the stock will go up before hitting the expiration date, that could make a big difference in which option they would buy. I agree with the others that if you're seeing this as ""real world"" then there must be something going on behind the scenes that someone else knows and you don't. I would tread with caution in such a situation and do my homework before making any move.   The other big factor that makes your question harder to answer more concisely is that you didn't tell us what the expiration dates on the options are. This makes a difference in how you evaluate them. We could probably be much more helpful to you if you could give us that information."
I guess you could figure it out based on your total income, and the total number of hours it takes to generate that income if you want to do it simply. Count you job, side work, soda can deposits, and saving earned directly by effort (coupons and deal shopping) But the real answer to the question is understanding Opportunity Cost and what you could be doing instead.  The problem with opportunity cost is the value system that judges the worth of the other opportunities is a deeply intrinsic factor that cannot be judged by anybody else.
"I'm going to take a very crude view of this: Suppose that you have an event that would cost $100,000 if it occurred. If there's a 10% chance that it'll happen to you and the insurance costs less than $10,000, you'll make a profit ""on average."" This is, of course, assuming that you could afford a $100,000 loss. If you can't, the actual loss could be much higher (or different). For example, if you couldn't afford surgery because you didn't have health insurance, it could be a lot more ""costly"" in a way that could be difficult to compare to the $100,000. Obviously, this is a very simplistic view of things. For example, making more than you paid on the premium typically isn't the only reason you'd buy insurance (even if you're high net worth). Just wanted to throw this out there for what it's worth though."
A decent night's rest is key to your prosperity in the event that you experience issues dozing, or getting up in the morning feeling un-invigorated, at that point it could be your old bedding that is making you fell along these lines. Another bed or Mattresses might be what you have to enable you to have a good sleep.
"Wow! You really really did not get it.  So, I will explain slllloooowwwwllly: Politifact confirms that, indeed, Trump reduced the debt more than any other president for this short period of time.  But, then, Politifact says ""but...."" so the claim about Trump is ""mostly false"".  Got it? Or do you need more elaborate and slower explanations?"
Could you explain that further? Maybe so a laymen could understand. Many people in other threads made a big deal out of those debts but here people seem to agree that its quite normal or even beneficial for a company with huge growth rates like netflix.
"It wasn't a small hole in your suggestion.  You were proposing a major law which already exists.   The only anti-intellecutalism that went on here was on your part.  You could have simple said ""yeah, you are right.  my bad.  So what do you think of ideas X,Y, and Z"" and then we could have had a discussion about it.  Instead you have some sort of character flaw where getting you to acknowledge the underpinning of your argument is flawed is like pulling teeth."
"Is there anyway to salvage my investment for short-term? No.  If by ""salvage"" you mean ""get back as much as you paid"", the only way to salvage it is to wait as long as you consider ""short-term"" and see if goes up again.  If by ""salvage"" you mean ""get some money back"", the only thing you can do to guarantee that is sell it now.  By doing so, you guarantee that you will get neither more nor less than it is worth right now.  Either way, there is nothing you can do other than sell the stock or hold it.  The stock price went down.  You can't make it go back up. Would it be better if I sell my stocks now and buy from other company? Or should I just wait for it's price to go up again? This depends on why you bought the stock, and what you think it will do in the future.  You said a family member persuaded you.  Does that family member still think the stock will go up again?  If so, do you still trust them? You didn't even say what stock it is in your question, so there's no way anyone here can tell you whether it's a good idea to sell it or not.  Even if you do say what stock it is, all anyone can do is guess.  If you want, you could look the stock up on Motley Fool or other sites to see if analysts believe it will rise.  There are lots of sources of information.  But all you can do with that information is decide to sell the stock or not. It may sound obvious, but you should sell if you think the stock will go lower, and hold it if you think it could still go back up.  No one can tell you which of those things is going to happen."
"You can charge a fee to accept checks, although I think the better solution might be to offer a small discount for early payment of your invoices.  As some people here have suggested, why not add a small bit to your fees to begin with to cover your inconvenience in the case they choose to pay by check?   I often will give clients a small discount of 1.5% for paying my invoices within 10 days, which does motivate some to pay sooner, depending on the client and the amount of the invoice.  If you've already added a small amount to your fees in the first place then providing the discount is good public relations that doesn't actually cost you anything. You can always add a ""convenience fee"" for accepting checks, but this is a more negative approach, as though you're penalizing the client for paying by check rather than electronically.  Some people do see it this way, despite any efforts you make to explain otherwise. As to your question about adding fees for accepting credit cards, be very careful!  There are sometimes state or local laws on this, and you could find yourself in trouble very quickly if you run afoul of one.  Here's a good article to read on the subject: Adding fees for accepting credit cards from CreditCards.com Site I hope this is helpful. Good luck!"
Lol. First you have taken many economics classes and now that I've had more it doesn't matter.  [Let me give you an academic source regarding why academic communities often lean a direction away from me.](https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/-politically-correct-university_100224248924.pdf) Take some time to read it. It's very long and dense and should explain my position fairly succinctly. One thing you might notice is that in academics, socialism teachers more likely to be Marxist than conservatives. Would you agree that the academic field believes Communism is better than Capitalism because of that?  You still have yet to argue anything regarding your first source. Is it a good source or have you abandoned it? If memory serves this started as a conversation about home ownership and we are now entrenched in minimum wages. No, the government should not manipulate the labor market of an economy because of perceived short-term improvements. It's a bad long-run policy. Sorry.
it depends on you, thats just the point, how risk averse you are determines how wide your risk premium needs to be to as you feel adequately compensate you for the risk you are taking. If I have some money i inherited from grandad and I want to make 15% on it then my required rate is 15% on top of the risk free rate. Thats what I require. Alternatively you could use a historic market rate to to determine the markets required return since on average that should be correct allowing you to sell your asset later to the average market participant. Thats easy for the equity investment. Because you have two different asset classes for your investments you could use different discount rates using the historic market risk premium in each asset's market or you can use the same discount rate for both which makes it easier to compare. In the second case I would discount using the equity required return since the equity investment you are not making is the opportunity cost of your real estate investment.   At the end of the day its a value judgment in my opinion and there isn't a right. Your understanding of the economics and from that what is important will inform what you use as a discount rate and that value judgment is kindha where an analyst adds value.
You are making an assumption that the house will appreciate in the short term, which there is no way you can know.  You will probably take a bath financially selling a house after one year into a mortgage even if you sell it for what you paid for it. If there is any chance you might relocate back it is definitely worth keeping it, otherwise I'd say cut your losses. The only upside might be if you could rent it out, keeping in mind that you generally need to rent for about double your mortgage payment to get positive cash flow. Letting it sit empty while you wait for it to appreciate is undoubtedly going to cost you big-time.