vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
&gt; You fully support the free market. Yep &gt;What the fuck is the point of having a job(s!) which don't support you? Good question. I wouldn't work one and neither should anybody else. Thats how the market knows to raise wages or automate these jobs &gt;I support ending corporate welfare. Hey, we agree on something! &gt;I think this country has the means to support anyone willing to work as hard as her to make sure she and her kids have the very basics. Yet you failed to address my point. Ill make it easy for you. Do you think random worker should get more money because they have a kid? What about 2? 5? What if they have the kid after you already hired them for a lower wage? &gt;Define value for me usefulness of something. A piece of wood has a low value. A piece of wood I cut straight so its a board and can be used in construction has a higher value. A board in an area with few trees has a higher value. A board that is made from a superior wood has a higher value. The guy that collects wood has a low value. The guy that has the skills / tools to make wood into boards has a higher value. The guy that can transport boards to areas without wood has a value...etc &gt;Not everyone worships money or the 'free' market. ok? &gt;But try and imagine you have her life. Why? I wouldn't pump out kids when I make min wage. I wouldnt work the same dead end job for ever. I wouldnt make any of these awful choices. And if I did, I would expect anyone to be forced to help me. Charity is a thing, and one Im happy to participate in. &gt;No life is not fair She chose this life, whats not fair about consequences? &gt;slavery wasn't fair Yes, how does that apply here? &gt;If you think it's ok for this to be how it is, we have nothing to speak further about.
"Newspapers write a lot about the central bank stopping ""cheap money"" in the US. What is that exactly and what are the implications for the stock market? An interest rate is simply defined as the price of money.  So if money is cheap, it must mean there is a low interest rate compared to normal.  If milk is cheap, we're comparing it to past prices or prices at competitors' stores.  Same with money. I don't think its fair to say just because the supply of dollars rises that the value of dollars will go down.  Value or price is determined by supply and demand, not just supply.  Its possible for the demand for dollars to be stronger than the rising supply, which would drive the price higher.  A good example of this is to look at the value of the dollar recently.  The Fed has been printing $85 billion per month, yet the value of them is going up compared to foreign currencies, gold, and just about everything.  Why? Because the Fed has merely threatened to stop, but it hasn't stopped.  That alone was enough to increase demand above supply.  So if you want to know what will happen, take a look at what IS happening. When cheap money ends, the value of the dollar will go up, interest rates will go up.  This will be a drag on the economy.  It will be more difficult for companies to show profits and earnings should decline.  In addition, those who have grown accustom to the easy money and have over-leveraged themselves (ie REITs) could go bankrupt."
I think you would be better asking about what things COULD increase in value. Even the given example (houses) are not certain to increase in value. In fact, one of the key causal factors of this recession IMHO is that no one realized that partly because there have been few recent housing busts, and also the illusory effect of inflation that made it seem like houses always increase in value.  I once heard it described that rich people tend to get richer because they spend more of their money on things that are more likely to hold their value or appreciate (houses, art, etc.) as opposed to poor people who spend the majority of their money on consumables like rent, utilities, food, cars, etc.
"**Lewis F. Powell Jr.: Powell Memorandum**  On August 23, 1971, prior to accepting Nixon's nomination to the Supreme Court, Powell was commissioned by his neighbor, Eugene B. Sydnor Jr., a close friend and education director of the US Chamber of Commerce, to write a confidential memorandum titled ""Attack on the American Free Enterprise System,"" an anti-Communist, anti-New Deal blueprint for conservative business interests to retake America for the chamber. It was based in part on Powell's reaction to the work of activist Ralph Nader, whose 1965 exposé on General Motors, ""Unsafe at Any Speed,"" put a focus on the auto industry putting profit ahead of safety, which triggered the American consumer movement. Powell saw it as an undermining of Americans' faith in enterprise and another step in the slippery slope of socialism. His experiences as a corporate lawyer and a director on the board of Phillip Morris from 1964 until his appointment to the Supreme Court made him a champion of the tobacco industry who railed against the growing scientific evidence linking smoking to cancer deaths.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&amp;message=Excludeme&amp;subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/economy/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.23"
To be fair, the analyst is talking about the book value of the firm. Basically, the value of all the stuff it owns now. There are plenty of companies with negative book value that can justify a positive share price. Ford, for instance, had negative book value but positive future earnings.
I would lean towards taking the lump-sum too if that were my situation. However, the value of the sum offered is likely lower than the value of the pension plan would have paid out - otherwise how would it be any advantage to offer it?  So, uncertainty about receiving the benefits is reduced, but you're still likely taking a loss vs what was promised. It's better then the pension plan going completely insolvent and paying nothing, but no reason for celebration either.
"That's true; if they could demonstrate that it's damaging to Twitter's growth, they would likely be able to have an impact though it's not clear why they would need to take a stake in that case.  Companies are also a bit loathe to follow investor suggestions on principle -- as a CEO, the last thing you want is to be micromanaged by investors on every decision so going along would be a bad precedent.  I imagine a straight-up social campaign, without the investor angle, would almost be more likely to succeed.  I don't have a great sense for what the value of Trump's account is -- I just know it has a large positive value as I described and a large negative value as you described and I'm not sure of what the sum is but it's definitely not a ""low"" demand -- the value is probably a large number with an unknown sign :)  What I do know is that reports about Trump's tweets led my parents to ask me ""what is this tweet thing?"" and I imagine for a lot of people of their generation, the news coverage was their first introduction to Twitter."
Foreign policy being regime change in Iraq was the goal, the method was invasion to achieve this, and nation building to avoid the need for continuous military presence. Conflating military action with foreign policy objective, as you did when conflating government action with military action, are just ways of obscuring things by using more vague terms. We’re talking about outsourcing military functions.   There are many things the government does which are not wasteful and which private enterprise is not well suited for – but that’s another debate.   If you measure outsourcing of military functions by headcount or expense, the same point is made, which is the military (and associated) functions are outsourced and there’s no reason to think this won’t continue or increase. Really, I don’t even see this point as being controversial or debatable. The extent may vary but so does everything. It's a reality and it's not going away.
NapiGator SEO is NYC's Premium SEO Agency. Our enterprise grade SEO services have helped hundreds of small businesses from across the globe to grow their sales, traffic, and rankings. Unlike others companies who palm off your essential work to juniors to save costs, we firmly believe that your work should be delivered by a true expert, not an intern with no business knowledge. This is why we proudly stand behind our 'Experts Only' Policy, where only team members with over 10 years of experience work for clients campaigns. For more information on how we can grow your business exponentially, call us today.
According to Apple, usage of passwords on phones went from 50% to 80% when they brought out Touch ID.  It's a really cool and really useful feature, especially for people who had to enter long complex passwords frequently (e.g. enterprise users). When it's integrated into 3rd party apps it will make password managers like 1password, which are pretty much a necessity if you want your accounts to be secure these days, much more convenient to use.  For me personally, it's nice to be able to leave my phone around without my family going through my messages and photos.
What the fuck is up with these comments? Are you all uneducated middle Americans?   College is 100% worth it. Kids just need to have more knowledge about loans in general. And how college is an investment in yourself, so choose to study something of value.
"&gt;When you work, you are creating value.  This is incorrect.  Not all businesses add value to society - there's a reason capitalism function based on ""profit"" and ""loss"" signals.  Some businesses destroy value.  &gt;How do you think the concept of money came about?   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eP6iujgeWI  &gt;Why not? This is the reason that hedge fund managers and CEOs pay so little in taxes...most of their compensation is in stocks and bonds, taxed as investment income. If you were paid in gold, i'm sure you could claim the same.   Because investments are fundamentally different from money.  They each serve a purpose - money is a store of value, while investments are risk-taking strategies to increase value.  &gt;That's sillie: i'm emotionally invested in a gift economy. I accept a fiat paper standard.   You appear to be afraid of what would happen if people were allowed to voluntarily choose what money to use, without government interference.  Anyway, I've lost interest in this discussion.  Have a good day."
I'd value your business at about $70k. $20k inventory, $50k in yearly sales.   You have a good margin, but your growth went from 300% in 2016 to almost flat this year. What happened? How are you using the $25k in profit?
AFAIK money is a fiat currency. The penny is only worth what the US government says it it worth. If I choose to have my coin material made into pennies then I face an opportunity cost because I could of used that copper elsewhere. If a penny worth of copper is worth 1.8 cents and I choose to make it into a a coin with a value of 1 cent then my opportunity cost is .8 cents.  The whole point of a fiat currency is to take the actual material value of the money out of the equation. A gold coin back before fiat currencies was worth its weight in gold. This would be like saying that you are going to nominally change the value of your gold coin into a coin worth half of its weight. Its weight(value) is equal to 1 gold coin but its spending power is equal to 1/2 a gold coin.  Do you lose value? Of course not. Do you lose spending power? YES Fiat currency is all about spending power, the value is fictional.   When I make the spending power less than the value the purpose of a fiat currency breaks down.
What you just said doesn't make any sense. The prices of goods and services are set to suit our income levels. We make a choice about how we spend our income.   I don't think a road sweeper should be expected to pay 5 times more land value tax, just because the area they live is now a favourite with wealthy people, with golf courses and wine bars they can't afford to use and outrageous house prices. Land Value tax would just exacerbate the problems of real estate bubbles.
It was then we determined that with our large revel in within the textiles, recycling enterprise. We'd begin in our quest to help Africa and open our first cash 4 garments shop. At Recycle four Cash for clothes kent, we offer a friendly, rapid and reliable provider to every person seeking our offerings. We remember the fact that you may favor donating your garb to charity; HOWEVER, did you already know by the point the retail outlet of the charity pays its walking costs, handiest a small percent will go to the actual charity. Should you desire to donate the monies we pay you to the charity.
Hahaha wake the fuck up kid.   I'm going to hit you with some deep shit here, I started off as an Technical Analyst at one of the largest banks in the world and quit after a couple of years because the work was boring, I then went on to work as Mobile/Web Developer again for a large enterprise however I did some startup work and freelancing in between, and if there is one thing I learned then it is that you gotta put in the hours to be successful and that it doesn't matter what your job is. If you want to make it you can't be one of the 9 to 5 wankers you need to do more, if you're good you'll do it in the regular time but if you're working in a decent firm chances are that your competition is tough and the extra time is a must to have a lead and maintain it.
If you were to stick to your guns, then yes, that's what you'd need to do. In practice, that kind of a hit should get your attention, and you'd be wise to look at why your investment dropped 10% in a month. Value averaging, dollar-cost averaging, or any other investment strategy needs to be done with eyes open and ears to the ground.  At least with value averaging you need to look at your valuation each month!  From my own experience, dollar-cost averaging breeds laziness and I ended up not paying much attention to what I was investing in, and lost a fair bit of money. Bottom line is you still have to think about what you're doing, and adjust.
"The share price on its own has little relevance without looking at variations. In your case, if the stock went from 2.80 to 0.33, you should care only about the 88% drop in value, not what it means in pre-split dollar values. You are correct that you can ""un-split"" to give you an idea of what would have been the dollar value but that should not give you any more information than the variation of 88% would. As for your title question, you should read the chart as if no split occurred as for most intents and purposes it should not affect stock price other than the obvious split."
I'm not aware of the details of your situation, but in general, for you to fully realize the benefits from applying the principals of value investing shared by Graham and more recently Warren Buffett, you must invest on the level that requires use of the consolidation or equity method of accounting, e.g. > 20% ownership. Sure, the same principals used by Buffett can work on a smaller scale, but a small scale investor is best served by wealth accumulation, which can take many forms. Not the addition of instant equity via acquisitions to their consolidated financials. Lastly, to test what you have learned about value investing, and order execution, try the inverse. At least on paper. Short a stock with low value and a high P/E. TWTR may be a good example? Learn what it is like to have your resources at stake, and the anguish of market and security volatility. It would be a lot easier to wait it out as a long-term value investor from a beach house in Santa Barbara :)
"Open standards need to be put in place by the open source community (including business interests), codified into a self-hosted option as a first class citizen *by law*, with a final sugar coated offering of hosted options managed by private enterprise. They can use the open source model as much or as little as they want.  With the Equifax scandal, we have little option but to include a ""nerd friendly"" secure version of this software that's available on the government's dime. And by government I mean ""we the people"", not ""big government""."
Right.  Ultimately, this golden parachute is $200mil+ too large, but she was never likely to turn Yahoo around.  She did not succeed in turning around a failing enterprise.  Mistakes and mishaps in that scenario are always very glaring.  So, while she didn't do a great job, I think the narrative of her being the downfall of Yahoo is incorrect.  Ultimately, Yahoo needed a visionary type to turn it around.  Those are few and far between and often seem to need to be very connected to the company they are turning around.  Even with that type of person at the helm it would have been a long shot to turn Yahoo around.
In order to ensure great feasible effects, the organisation utilizes state-of-the-art search engine optimization tools and employ superior strategies. By having their skilled and custom search engine optimization services you may gain the preferred consequences. Your website will obtain top ranks in Google, Yahoo, Bing, MSN and lots of other important search engines like google and yahoo. By having such virtual advertising dubai services we are top seo companies in dubai, it is a really perfect option to do not forget which will get the productive outcomes. Your internet site turns into greater seen and grabs extra attention of the customers. The excessive visibility of a website leads to greater enterprise and excessive ROI as well.
The mechanisms are also heavily influenced by sociopaths who are enamored with the power that comes with wealth. Sadly those who have gained tremendous wealth and prosperity and want to give back by providing opportunity for others less fortunate are very much in the minority. Others are just selfish douchebags that believe in the commoditization of things like health care, for example, when they, themselves, benefit from having the best health care afforded to them under different terms.   On another note, it's difficult to regulate free enterprise. Despite my observations in the preceding paragraph, I actually appreciate both sides of this issue. If you've earned your money through your own blood, sweat, and tears, who am I to tell you what to do with your money?   With that said, there are no simple answers. I go back to those whose greed and selfish personas that are the real issue. Capitalism isn't without its flaws. But when you combine it with d-bag motivation, you create a monopoly on wealth supported by d-bag policies and practices: golden parachutes, imbalanced compensation models, corporate money in politics, and many other things that are explicitly designed to preserve the wealth for the wealthy.   In conclusion, this really isn't about an economic model as it is about the motivations of sociopathic d-bags who can't be bothered to think of anyone but themselves. These people give a bad name to others who are wealthy and get unfairly lopped into the stereotypes that are most commonly associated with those of great wealth and prosperity.
"To the same people commenting on the Laffer curve being not true on another post, here ya go.   This is how you don't collect taxes at exorbitant rates. Government is greedy and dumb, while private enterprise is greedy and smart. They will never get what they want because the people with the money are smarter than those writing the rules.   Go put Elon Musk alone in a room with Maxine Waters and he will own Inglewood, Hawthorne, Lawndale, and Lomita in an hour as she embezzles some off the books ""donation."" And, for the record, those communities would be a thousand times better for it.  George Steinbrenner DIED at the exact right time for his family to not have to pay 55% on the estate. They paid nothing. In New York State. The second bastion of high taxes, and they still got fleeced for 55% of one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world."
" Even if you were to try to make the case that water had some sort of baseline or average value with regards to supporting mankind and that *this* was ""intrinsic"", it would additionally be irrelevant, because the definition of supporting mankind is subjective. Do we just use just enough water to keep men and women alive across the world, without regards to health? Do we count children as half men? Do we count a non-active 50 year old female's water needs as highly as an active 16 year old male's? What about with regards to evaporation and condensation? We don't know the weather or climate changes in store, so in case of famine should we consider enough water to last 3 days, 3 weeks, or 3 years? No, I'm afraid the only way to really consider what is the value of water is to drop this silly notion of intrinsic value and realize that water is worth merely what someone is willing to pay for it. And so, my argument would go, is Bitcoin."
well I appreciate everything you're doing! and no not 100k+ more in the neighborhood of something like 30-40k. and that's if I have to buy everything needed at face value. more than likely ill be able to bargain for bulk purchases for inventory. if you don't mind ill message you about what I had in mind.
How would it be a monopoly if a monopoly is a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity,  When the United States began to enforce for fairer competition between businesses in the early 20th century, it focused on two kinds of monopolistic organizations: horizontal monopolies and vertical monopolies. In the steel business, for instance, a horizontal monopoly buys up a lot of steel mills, such that other competitors would be boxed out. A vertical monopoly buys up and down the supply chain—acquiring barges and trains and coal mines—essentially barring other companies from competing with it.  Amazon does not fit into any type of monopoly, It’s like an octopus spreading its tentacles across different markets.
"&gt; ignoring everything else that was happening around them and assuming that they were the only company/ecosystem that mattered  That *can* work if your ideas are good. Apple's designs are often considered innovative, and they have a [closed architecture](http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/c/closedar.htm) product design. Microsoft just does it poorly. Apple doesn't abandon their existing fan base too often (the FCP X conversion was actually quite bad) while Microsoft seems to ignore their previous achievements and designs. They look at what they can change without the connecting pieces for why it should be changed at all. Alienating those customers they ""won"" is their issue.  I am somewhat comparing *apples and oranges* here. Apple makes consumer products with very little enterprise support when compared to Microsoft, which is the opposite.  To be clear, I don't own any Apple products but do have a few Windows computers. However, I work in technology with both platforms regularly."