vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Try the following apps/services: Receipt Bank (paid service, gathers paper receipts, scans them and processes the data), I've tested it, and it recognizing receipts very well, taking picture is very quick and easy, then you can upload the expenses into your accounting software by a click or automatically (e.g. FreeAgent), however the service it's a bit expensive. They've apps for Android and iPhone. Expentory (app and cloud-based service for capturing expense receipts on the move),
"I currently use Mint for this, which I see that you have already disqualified but not why you have disqualified it.  Set ""budgets"" for how much you want to spend on what type of expense, and then be sure to assign expenses to a budget as they come in. Mint actually learns what expenses go to each budget and eventually does it automatically."
You can make your table more useful by adding more columns like this: This makes it really easy to keep track of categories of spending.  You just sum a column to get all of your restaurant spending.
You can buy an Amazon gift card for use later.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/business/dealbook/class-action-lawsuits-finance-banks.html) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; At a time when Dodd-Frank has come under attack, the arbitration initiative from the consumer finance agency - which operates independently from the Trump administration - is a provocative stand against the prevailing political tide in Washington.  &gt; Over decades, financial institutions, led by credit card companies, figured out a way to use the fine print of their contracts to force consumers into private arbitration, a secretive process where borrowers have to go up on their own against powerful companies with deep pockets.  &gt; The rule from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would apply only to the financial companies regulated by the agency and would not touch arbitration clauses buried in the fine print of nursing homes or employment contracts.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6mp8l2/us_agency_moves_to_allow_classaction_lawsuits/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~164865 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*: **arbitration**^#1 **rule**^#2 **consumer**^#3 **companies**^#4 **agency**^#5"
In planning to buy a house, and sort out how to handle the costs of some initial renovations, I've been considering using Lowes and Home Depot credit cards (hopefully this will count differently than the typical credit cards I think you're referring to): http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ContentView?pn=Credit_Center&langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053 http://www.lowes.com/cd_Credit+Card+Accounts+from+Lowes_781778798_ You should definitely read the fine print first, as the interest rates can shoot up after the first 6 months if you don't pay the balance in full on some of them. Also, Lowes has a project card that gives you the 6 month no interest (only a minimum payment), and you don't have to pay off the full balance at the end.  This one even has more reasonable rates, so this could be a good way to go.
"The most likely reason for this card is that Amazon has an arrangement with the issuer (I believe that that used to be Chase; may have changed since). Such an arrangement may allow Amazon to take the risk of chargebacks, etc. in return for the issuer handling the mechanics of billing. This is advantageous for Amazon, as otherwise they are subject to both their own procedures and those of the issuer. Amazon would rather take the entire risk than share it with someone else who charges for the privilege. Fees for processing credit cards can be as much as 5%, although 1-2% is more typical. Due to its size, Amazon may already have negotiated fees lower than 1%. But even so, any savings they make are to their benefit. Further, now they can get a share of the fees charged to other merchants. For example, if you buy a book from Barnes & Noble (an Amazon competitor) with the Amazon card, then Amazon gets some money in return, say 1% of the transaction. If the price is the same on Amazon and at Barnes & Noble, you can actually save money with the Amazon card. Amazon gives more ""cash back"" in the form of gift card balance for an Amazon purchase. So the card may mean that you buy from Amazon when you might otherwise have chosen someone else. If we again assume a 20% margin, they only need $200 of additional purchases to make $40 of profit. Someone who buys $1000 additional on the Amazon site makes them $200 of profit. They're over $160 ahead. Also note that Amazon is only giving you a gift card, which you have to use on Amazon. And it's difficult to spend exactly $50. As a practical matter, most people will buy, say, $60, with $10 of that money. So they sell you $48 of merchandise (their cost, assuming a 20% margin) for $10. They lost $38 on that transaction, but they've lured you into a long term relationship that may return more than that. And they didn't lose the $50 you gained. They only lost $38. Think about it as a marketing cost. Amazon is willing to pay $38 for a long term relationship with you.
I was listening to Marketplace this morning and this young social worker was talking about her life and how hard it is to start the family she wants since her student loans are $2100 a month. How the hell is that even possible? That's $25k a year with I'm assuming 10 years to pay it off. She borrowed nearly $200 grand to become a social worker?
Archaeology from this period in [ancient China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China#Ancient_China) and [India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India) also shows evidence of [money lending](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan) activity. &gt;==== &gt;[**Image**](https://i.imgur.com/IWCAqkG.jpg) [^(i)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Balance_sheet_Mesopotamia_Louvre_AO6036.jpg) --- ^Interesting: [^Banking ^in ^India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_India) ^| [^History ^of ^banking ^in ^China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking_in_China) ^| [^History ^of ^banking ^in ^Bangladesh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking_in_Bangladesh) ^| [^Banking ^in ^the ^United ^States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_the_United_States) ^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&amp;message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cjk5935) ^or[](#or) [^delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&amp;message=%2Bdelete+cjk5935)^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less.
East Side Lenders Payday Loans4 East Side Lenders | Payday LoansEast Side Lenders Knows that life can be unpredictable and sometimes, unexpected expenses can arise.  Whether you need money for a mechanic or you need to pay your mortgage you need to cover the cost and your next paycheck may be too far away to fit the bill.
I assume you are referring to the emoluments clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution)  That clause has never been applied to any president.  Even Washington and Jefferson enriched themselves off their personal businesses.  They even traded and received payments from foreign nations.  You can run a business as long as you charge a fair rate.  You cannot however accept gifts or titles.
"To the topic, and answering some of the questions below...  People ""drop out"" of the workforce in a number of different ways:  - Ideally, and most constructively, people go back to school. This might be line-cooks or fast-food workers pursuing a culinary or hospitality degree, or liberal-arts majors whose publishing job has evaporated going for a Law or MBA. If you have a desire to go back to school, a job-recession is a good time to do it.   - Often, it is something where one parent in a two-parent household decides to stay home with the kids, when they can no longer earn more than day-care or pre-school costs. If Mom's job prospects are paying $12/hour, minus taxes, and child-care costs $10/hour, it often makes sense for her to stay home, at least until the kids are in public school.   - Sometimes it's just genuine early-retirement. Some real-estate salesman in his 60s who was hoping to earn for a few more years sees the current glut of short-sales and foreclosures, and how hard he's going to have to work for every dollar, and decides he can live with Buick instead of Cadillac in his golden years.   - Some of it is ""semi-forced"" early-retirement, where bagging groceries doesn't pay any better than social security, so an older worker decides to make ends meet.  - The worst and ugliest component, and sadly a common one, is premature/unnecessary disability claims. Down job markets produce a spike in claims of permanent disability. They are not all entirely fraudulent, but inability to work due to vague-ish chronic pain, psychiatric problems, back/neck injuries from fender-benders, slip-and-falls, etc go up in recessions. There is a certain ""watching daytime TV with lots of lawyer commercials"" effect among the unemployed, and one way or another, people are vastly more likely to end up on government or insurance-based long-term disability during a bad economy."
The second, and far more real and damaging, way that banks lose money on a foreclosure is the loss of collateral value. A bank virtually never offers an unsecured ""signature loan"" for a house (certainly not at the advertised 3-4% interest rates). They want something to back up the loan, so if you disappear off the face of the earth they have a clear claim to something that can help them recover their money. Usually, that's the house itself; if you default, they get the house from you and sell it to recover their money. Now, a major cause of foreclosure is economic downturn, like the one we had in 2009 and are still recovering from. When the economy goes in the crapper, a lot of things we generally consider ""stores of value"" lose that value, because the value of the whatzit (any whatzit, really) is based on what someone else would pay to have it. When fewer people are looking to buy that whatzit, demand drops, bringing prices with it. Homes and real estate are one of the real big-ticket items subject to this loss of value; when the average Joe doesn't know whether he'll have a job tomorrow, he doesn't go house-hunting. This average Joe may even be looking to sell an extra parcel of land or an income property for cash, increasing supply, further decreasing prices. Economic downturn can often increase crime and decrease local government spending on upkeep of public lands (as well as homeowners' upkeep of their own property). By the ""broken window"" effect, this makes the neighborhood even less desirable in a vicious cycle. What made this current recession a double-whammy for mortgage lenders is that it was caused, in large part, by a housing bubble; cheap money for houses made housing prices balloon rapidly, and then when the money became more expensive (such as in sub-prime ARMs), a lot of those loans, which should never have been signed off on by either side, went belly-up.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/could-illinois-be-the-first-state-to-file-for-bankruptcy/) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; A financial crunch is spiraling into a serious problem for Illinois lawmakers, prompting some observers to wonder if the state might make history by becoming the first to go bankrupt.  &gt; At the moment, it&amp;#039;s impossible for a state to file for bankruptcy protection, which is only afforded to counties and municipalities like Detroit.  &gt; As for Illinois, Rauner on Thursday called state legislators to a 10-day special session starting next week to hammer out a budget deal and end an unprecedented impasse that could soon enter a third year.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6hq2wx/could_obamas_illinois_be_the_first_state_to_file/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~146184 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*: **state**^#1 **pension**^#2 **Illinois**^#3 **year**^#4 **bankruptcy**^#5"
"I love it - it was the policies under Bush (as much as one can squarely place blame on the president) that results in the crash that nearly destroyed him - the same president he claims he got elected... and yet here were are and he is claiming if Obama is re-elected that he might have to fire people because of his policies (as much as he claims we can squarely place blame on the president) would lead to another loss for his company, that is after they enjoyed this period of recovery that allows him to continue building his massive house o' opulence.   Wonderful business sense, ""Pay more in taxes?? FUCK those profits altogether! I'll shut down the company and HA HA! That'll show them! Because no one else will swoop in and pick up my massively profitable vacation scam business... you know why? Because taxes - that's why! And socialism! and communism!.... COMMULISM!"""
So? If the executives have mismanaged the company (and let's not pretend that's what's happening here -- Sears has been being systematically butchered for years at this point, so it's _worse_ than ineptitude), _why the fuck are the executives getting paid instead of existing obligations being at least partially funded_?  If I go to work at a car wash and do such a shit job that I run half a dozen vehicles through the wash with all the windows rolled down, I'm probably not only getting fired, but I'm likely going to be on the hook for damages. Executives pretty much get away with anything that isn't literally criminal in a lot of these cases, and the fact that Sears has been getting parted out for _years_ makes it obvious that they knew full well that it'd be coming to this.
I see this as the reason for the country (and world?) heading toward ever greater income inequality. More and more wealth accruing to capital as opposed to labor.  Ah, so we won't need as much money to live, that's hopeful.  Why don't we use these solutions to solve current high unemployment?   Don't believe that prices of goods will come down as quickly as people are fired from their jobs. That will only happen when people are forced to stop buying things and corporate inventories climb too high (recession/depression). This will be bad for business as well, as those inventories were created using high labor expense from prior times and now must be sold at heavy discount.
Because they found their scapegoat.  They will parade and flog him while all his former coworkers are able to hide in his shadow.  He will be the public spectacle to show that the government is being tough on banks and CEO's, while they do nothing about the revolving door between finance and government he waltzed back and forth through.
there was once a case were a women sued the company that fired her because to her eyes being a bartender and getting 60 pounds heavier wasnt a justification. The managers then proceeded to show everyone how her sales dropped 30% compared to when she was less heavy. She lost the case.  edit: a letter
I appreciate the reminder of demographic issues, but the argument is weak. There are structural issues like low wages, increasingly part time jobs, student debt, automation, Boomer asset selloffs/deleveraging, and energy headwinds.  Houses are not sold just because a large cohort shows up. It's when they have the money. And the last crash dug so deeply that we are poised for another recession sparked by shale peaking within 2 years, just when we climbed out of the hole.
"Gotta keep coming back don't ya. I replied to your false statement that Trump caused insurer dropout. You admitted you were wrong, then sent a opinion piece with no actual data - just feels. I told you the root cause was overcharging by hospitals. Then you tell me you agree, but is another topic. Then 2 fucking sentences later ""address the cost of care"". I fucking give up."
"True. My thinking is, the higher the rates are, the less people you'll have borrowing, the less chance of people defaulting, more people buying with flat cash, and of course cheaper housing prices.  Whereas with low interest rates, you'll have more people borrowing (thus, increasing the likelihood of more people defaulting), more people ""buying"" homes (technically not buying, technically just ""borrowing"" money and putting down mortgages), and more expensive housing prices.  Quite frankly, I think the way that the western world can solve its issue with unaffordable housing is by raising the interest rates to at least the double digits, like they once were (when housing was still cheap)."
Yep, I'm actually in chicago, own a condo and a single family, both working class.  I personally expect the problem to be high inflation, so long as your assets are productive you should be able to raise rates with inflation
&gt; The solution is a progressively higher tax on second, third and fourth properties. And an elimination of tax on first properties.  This has some flaw to it -- but someone else smarter than me will figure it out.   I'll try to think about one flaw..  If you tax 2nd and 3rd properties then possibly the renters market would go up to cover the cost of the tax that owners of multiple properties would have to pay.
We could always brake the state up into Northern Illinois, pretty much everything north of Peoria, Western Illinois, everything west of Decatur and north of Carbondale, Eastern Illinois, everything east of Decatur and north of Carbondale, and Southern Illinois, everything south of Carbondale. Then divide the debt by 1/4 and negotiate the pension obligations of each new state.
a) Talk to the financial aid counselors at your school. There's a very good chance they have at least a partial solution for you. Let them know your dependency status has changed (if it has). I declared myself to be financially independent from my parents (I really was) and qualified for more aide. b) How much austerity are you willing to endure? I once spent two years eating beans & rice twice a day (lots of protein and other nutrients) while I worked full-time and went back to school to pursue a second degree part-time. I also shunned all forms of recreation (not even a movie) to save money (and so I could focus on staying current with assignments). During another period in my life, I gave up cable, cell-phone, land-line (and used Skype only), and avoided unnecessary use of my car, so I could clear a debt. You'd be amazed at how much you can squeeze from a budget if you're willing to endure austerity temporarily. c) Consider going to school part-time, taking as few as one course at a time if allowed. It's a lot easier to pay for one or two courses than to pay for 4 or 5. It may take longer, but at least you won't lose your credits and it won't take forever.
"Debt cripples you, it weighs you down and keeps you from living your life the way you want. Debt prevents you from accomplishing your goals, limits your ability to ""Do"" what you want, ""Have"" what you want, and ""Be"" who you want to be, it constricts your opportunities, and constrains your charity. As you said, Graduated in May from school. Student loans are coming due here in January. Bought a new car recently. The added monthly expenses have me concerned that I am budgeting my money correctly. Awesome! Congratulations. You need to develop a plan to repay the student loans. Buying a (new) car before you have planned you budget may have been premature. I currently am spending around 45-50% of my monthly (net)income to cover all my expenses and living. The left over is pretty discretionary, but things like eating dinner outside the house and expenses that are abnormal would come out of this. My question is what percentage is a safe amount to be committing to expenses on a monthly basis? Great! Plan 40-50% for essentials, and decide to spend under 20-30% for lifestyle. Be frugal here and you could allocate 30-40% for financial priorities. Budget - create a budget divided into three broad categories, control your spending and your life. Goals - a Goal is a dream with a plan. Organize your goals into specific items with timelines, and steps to progress to your goals. You should have three classes of goals, what you want to ""Have"", what you want to ""Do"", and who you want to ""Be""; Ask yourself, what is important to you. Then establish a timeline to achieve each goal. You should place specific goals or steps into three time blocks, Near (under 3-6 months), medium (under 12 months), and Long (under 24 months). It is ok to have longer term plans, but establish steps to get to those goals, and place those steps under one of these three timeframes.
Still a tough sell when the banking sector is so underwater. IDBI reported that 20% of their loans were non performing. Think on that, 1 in 5 loans are probably going to default and need to be written off. While it's the extreme case, the NPL ratio for the public banks is about 10% which is an insane ratio.  This isn't an issue that's going to go away, the government says they want to consolidate but that just means you're forcing a bad bank to merge with a bank that's even worse off.
Indeed. So goes the theory that redistribution would lead to inflation (or run away inflation). But isn't that exactly what The Fed is trying to do? It could also or alternatively indicate that assets are way overvalued which would also be a bad situation. Which is it?
"**Put aside the politics?**  That's laughable for an article that is nothing BUT politics.  For starters the artificially false conflation of *everyone* as if their behavior were homogeneous, when in reality it is a full spectrum (there are many people with not only ZERO debt, but substantial assets, including very productive assets).  Ergo the argument that there is some egalitarian ""solution"" to this by treating everyone the same way... is in fact a POLITICAL assumption (and a very biased one at that)."
**Here's a sneak peek of /r/studentloandefaulters using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/studentloandefaulters/top/?sort=top&amp;t=year) of the year!** \#1: [The Generation Gap](http://i.imgur.com/uAmYADGh.jpg) | [7 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/studentloandefaulters/comments/57g0gm/the_generation_gap/) \#2: [Student loan debt in the US is being used as a form of economic terrorism designed to redistribute wealth, and to undermine and degrade American democracy.]
Article is typical monetarist bs. Like Trump.  IMO,  money and wealth are not equal, and all debt is not bad. Find out how Hamilton took the Revolutionary War debt,  and used it as  an asset to  issue credit from the  Bank of the US. The real question today is, where is the growth of the real  economy?
There could be worse ideas.  You could keep shoveling money at things that haven't worked.  It's not that far from Chicago; the shores of Lake Michigan (Michigan side, obviously) are already a top weekend getaway spot for Chicagoans.  I wish them luck -
I mean  a checkings/savings combo is fiscally responsible if you're putting a 3-6 month emergency fund in there. Hell, I'd argue that you'd be insanely bad with money not to keep an emergency fund if you got the cash to spare.  401(k),IRAs, and stocks are great investment vehicles, but having a portion of your funds be liquid is important.