">I have worked in civil engineering for 20 years O shit, you must be an expert on all things that have anything to do with infrastructure. ""Civil engineering"" is so fucking broad that you having 20 years experience ""in"" it means pretty much nothing. Additionally, who knows what you actually do in civil engineering. You could be a fucking secretary for all we both know. >what you describe would turn American sprawl into SE Asian slums over night. What exactly is it that I described? I didn't really give many particulars about anything yet you jump to an over-exaggeration and a piss poor argument. > India has more zoning laws than the US including a whole crap load of religious ones Source? Additionally, not all laws are created equal, but you should know that. Now, please kindly fuck off."


Not really. Most people, when left to their own devices (and when they know they can get away with it), will not get very much work done. This is why bosses and managers were a necessity in the first place. It's also why 99% of the population can't handle running their own business: they have no self discipline.


The problem with commodities is that they don't produce income. With a stock or bond, even if you never sold it to anyone or it wasn't publicly traded, you know you can collect the money the company makes or collect interest. That's a quantifiable income from the security. By computing the present value of that income (cf. http://blog.ometer.com/2007/08/26/money-math/) you can have at least a rough sense of the value of the stock or bond investment. Commodities, on the other hand, eat income (insurance and storage). Their value comes from their practical uses e.g. in manufacturing (which eventually results in income for someone); and from psychological factors. The psychological factors are inherently unpredictable. Demand due to practical uses should keep up with inflation, since in principle the prices on whatever products you make from the commodity would keep up with inflation. But even here there's a danger, because it may be that over time some popular uses for a given commodity become obsolete. For example this commodity used to be a bigger deal than now, I guess: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankincense. The reverse is also possible, that new uses for a commodity drive up demand and prices. To the extent that metals such as silver and gold bounce around wildly (much more so than inflation), I find it hard to believe the bouncing is mostly due to changes in uses of the metals. It seems far more likely that it's due to psychological factors and momentum traders. To me this makes metals a speculative investment, and identifying a bubble in metals is even harder than identifying one in income-producing assets that can more easily be valued. To identify a bubble you have to figure out what will go on in the minds of a horde of other people, and when. It seems safest for individual investors to just assume commodities are always in a bubble and stay away. The one arguable reason to own commodities is to treat them as a random bouncing number, which may enhance returns (as long as you rebalance) even if on average commodities don't make money over inflation. This is what people are saying when they suggest owning a small slice of commodities as part of an asset allocation. If you do this you have to be careful not to expect to make money on the commodities themselves, i.e. they are just something to sell some of (rebalance out of) whenever they've happened to go up a lot.


The College Board offers a calculator. (Targeted to US residents; not sure how the figures will differ for Canada and other countries.) Keep in mind that college costs typically increase faster than inflation. When I attended in 2001-2005, my college's tuition costs increases ranged from 4 to 6%.


I buy or sell a few shares whenever I have a small amount of money to transfer into out of my mutual funds. Since I'm not paying transaction fees, there is no reason not to, when that is what makes sense. If you are paying a fee for each transaction, of course it makes sense to try to wait until you have a larger amount to move so the overhead per share is lower.


"I'd argue that a significant amount of young people, even the majority, are fiscally conservative.....however they align with Democrats because they don't want to associate themselves with the social bigotry and intolerance of the GOP (and Tea Party). If only we could have a fiscally conservative party that just let people do what they wanted to do with their personal lives.....well, we do, but obviously libertarians aren't ""electable"" EDIT: I'm amazed that the fed spends 7 times more on people over 65 than children. Wow."


Most of the time, your tax only reduces by the current marginal rate - meaning you would only reduce your tax by 28% to 25% depending on which part of the bracket you're in. However, in the area around 100k, there are cases where reductions will have more of a marginal effect than that. You'll never reduce it more than 100%, but you can reduce it by 35-40% despite being in the 25% bracket. That is because of certain deductions and credits which phase out beginning around 80k-120k; things like the IRA deduction, the Child Tax Credit, Childcare Tax Credit, and similar. Since many of them phase out in this range, additional dollars cost you your marginal rate (25%) plus the percentage of the credits or deductions which phase out here, which might bring you up another 10% or so.


For most business purposes, Gmail/ Outlook should suffice. Just make sure your username sounds professional enough. Try and stick to FirstName+LastName @ Gmail/Outlook dot com, if that's available. You could also get yourself NameOfYourBusiness @ Gmail/ Outlook dot com If you want to come across as a well established business, and only if you've some cash to spare every year, getting yourself a domain name would be a good idea. But, if your business/ services aren't too popular, yet; I'd suggest you defer that expense.


I disagree and thankfully so does basic economics. If a business that is not successful shutters, then the needs that that business was fulfilling will be provided by a new business. The market usually finds a way. And no one is suggesting that random, arbitrary minimum wage increases are wise, simply that it makes no sense to have a minimum wage that doesn't mandate a livable salary.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-idUSKBN1A20BR) reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Now, opposition leaders are promising &quot;Zero Hour&quot; in Venezuela to demand a general election and stop the leftist Maduro&#039;s plan to create a controversial new legislative super-body called a Constituent Assembly in a July 30 vote. > In three questions at Sunday&#039;s event, opposition supporters voted overwhelmingly - by 98 percent - to reject the proposed new assembly, urge the military to defend the existing constitution, and support elections before Maduro&#039;s term ends, according to academics monitoring the vote for the opposition. > Sunday&#039;s nearly 7.2 million participation compared with 7.7 million opposition votes in the 2015 legislative elections that it won by a landslide and 7.3 million votes for the opposition in a 2013 presidential poll narrowly won by Maduro. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6o5y1b/the_trump_administration_is_preparing_sanctions/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~170171 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*: **opposition**^#1 **vote**^#2 **Maduro**^#3 **election**^#4 **Sunday**^#5"


You don't mention where you live, but in the US, zoning laws, building codes, and insurance rules, would make this difficult if not impossible. People do convert shipping containers into housing, but they have to be modified to conform with local rules for habitability. This makes them more expensive then say, a trailer or a mobile home.


"Last week someone actually did the ""You know the difference between involvement and commitment? It's like breakfast - the chicken is involved and the pig is committed."" I said (yes, out loud) ""Who *really* wants to be the pig in this scenario?"""


Especially now nowadays. A solid 40% of my graduating class is either unemployed or underemployed. We're happy to get whatever we can that pays a half-decent wage and will work damned hard to keep it because we know there are literally thousands of other equally talented people willing to do our jobs.


And then, in a few years, Tim Hortons will buy out Burger King, just like it did when Wendy's owned it. It's like that movie *Demolition Man* - only instead of all the restaurants being Taco Bell, they'll be Timmies. I hope hat means they'll improve their coffee.


Yeah let's see how many stores they have open in 2020. $11-15 an hour retail jobs are only going to accelerate what online retailers are doing to their bottom line now. They can't afford to make lower profits AND sell less product.


The idea behind a Roth IRA is taxes will go up in the future so you are best off paying less in taxes now than in the future, which is why Roth IRAs are contributed to with post-tax dollars whereas traditional IRAs are contributed to with pre-tax dollars. The theoritical advantage comes when you want to withdrawal your money. With the traditional IRA, when you withdrawal money, you pay ordinary income tax on all withdrawals. With a Roth IRA, all withdrawals (after the age of 59 1/2) are tax free, including any gains you may have made. To illistrate, with a very simple example, assume you make $50,000 and your IRA grows at 5% for 40 years. Traditional IRA - $5,000 Roth IRA - $3,750 ($5,000 after taxes) Traditional IRA - $604,000 Roth IRA - $453,000 Traditional IRA - $604,000 / 15 = $40,266 * 75% (25% tax) = $30,200 / year Roth IRA - $453,000 / 15 = $30,200/ year First, this was not a contrived example and I was surprised the numbers worked out this way. Second, as you can see with this example there is really no advantage either way unless you by into the theory of higher taxes in the future.


"Summarized article: Walt Disney Co. has agreed to acquire filmmaker George Lucas' Lucasfilm Ltd, including the ""Star Wars"" and ""Indiana Jones"" franchises, for $4.05 billion. Under the agreement, Disney will pay half of the purchase in cash and the rest by issuing 40 million shares of stock. In addition, the acquisition will give Disney ownership of special-effects company Industrial Light & Magic, sound company Skywalker Sound and video game publisher LucasArts. The current chief executive of Lucasfilm, Kathleen Kennedy, will become president of Disney's Lucasfilm unit. Disney also announced plans to release a seventh live-action ""Star Wars"" movie in 2015 with George Lucas as creative consultant. The acquisition must be approved by regulatory authorities before it can close. * For more summarized news, subscribe to the [/r/SkimThat](http://www.reddit.com/r/SkimThat) subreddit"


You linked to an article about 1 QUARTER in 2010 - >If companies pay their employees more for the same amount of output it will just drive up the cost of goods leaving us with the same shitty demand. >Also, how do you figure this? I figure this because it is the simplest economics. The cost of goods sold is based on 3 things 1 - raw materials 2 Labor, including associated costs such as payroll taxes and benefits, and 3 - overhead If #2 is increased with NO INCREASE IN OUTPUT the cost of those goods is going up.


We are 1 of only a handful of dentists in the USA currently licensed to place non-metal implants. Please call us today for a FREE CONSULTATION. Dental Zirconiumoxide Implants – METAL FREE We are proud to announce that we are now offering METAL FREE FDA approved Dental Implants.


Certainly, paying off the mortgage is better than doing nothing with the money. But it gets interesting when you consider keeping the mortgage and investing the money. If the mortgage rate is 5% and you expect >5% returns from stocks or some other investment, then it might make sense to seek those higher returns. If you expect the same 5% return from stocks, keeping the mortgage and investing the money can still be more tax-efficient. Assuming a marginal tax rate of 30%, the real cost of mortgage interest (in terms of post-tax money) is 3.5%*. If your investment results in long-term capital gains taxed at 15%, the real rate of growth of your post-tax money would be 4.25%. So in post-tax terms, your rate of gain is greater than your rate of loss. On the other hand, paying off the mortgage is safer than investing borrowed money, so doing so might be more appropriate for the risk-averse. * I'm oversimplifying a bit by assuming the deduction doesn't change your marginal tax rate.


Supplier of Quartz Powder in India http://quartzpowdermanufacturers.com/supplier-of-quartz-powder-in-india.php Supplier of Quartz Powder in India, Manufacturer of Quartz Powder in India - We are prominent company engaged in offering superior quality Quartz Powder. We provide Quartz powder in the form of snow white, milky white, super semi and semi white. Quartz powder is used for fiber glass, glass floats, insulator, sanitary ware, refractory, paint, television picture tube and semi-conductors.


Schwab High Yield Investor Checking does not charge for incoming wires.


As I stated in my comment on @JCotton's answer, the only way you benefit by putting your money in an IRA or other tax-deferred vehicle is if you expect to have a lower tax rate when you withdraw than when you put the money in. If you look at @JCotton's numbers and remember to pay taxes when you withdraw the money in 30 years, you will see that both situations - paying taxes now or 30 years from now - give you the exact same dollar amount if the tax rates are the same at both points in time. So if you put money in an IRA, you're betting on the fact that the government will not substantially raise interest rates by then, and/or that you will be in a lower tax bracket. To me, the only valid reasons to invest in an IRA or 401K are the following: However, you should also consider the major downside that the money is locked away and, at best, inconvenient to access when you need it. At worst, you have to pay taxes and penalties if you ever withdraw that money. If you are a financially responsible person, I think you're generally better off keeping your money outside of an IRA or 401K, with the exception of making sure to get all of your employer's matching contributions.


It's her car. Unlike what Ross said in the comments she can't sign it over to you--she doesn't own it yet. The best you'll be able to do is have her leave it to you in her will--but beware that you very well might need to refinance the loan at that point.


"You're probably best off going to a different store to fix the computer. Right now you don't have ""damages."" You could sue him but, there's no thing to sue for. If you sue for your original costs, you'd have to return the computer and probably only receive a portion of your original costs, less court filing fees. If you have someone else fix your computer you can sue him for the cost to fix your computer. You'll take him to small claims court, win or lose you probably won't get anything from him. If you win, you'll have a piece of paper (judgement) that says, ""Yep, that guy owes you money"" if you lose you won't even have that. You could report him to the BBB or some other business agency but that doesn't help you fix the computer."


"Eh, that doesn't really make for healthy negotiations. Consider the converse argument: ""a candidate should put their acceptable salary range on their resume."" Every hiring manager is going to offer you your lowest acceptable salary. You might have gotten more money had you not freely offered that information."


I thought windows 8 RT tablets were shifty too, especially when I was selling them, but then I got one. The Nokia 2520, and I couldn't be happier. Windows 8RT is for users who want a tablet to use as a tablet. Full Windows 8 tablets are tablets that replace laptops.


Looks like over 50% of the population owns stock that isn't uber rich. Having some money doesn't make you a bad guy or less deserving of earning money on stock. What exactly is the problem? It benefits the stock holders who are normal people Broke people don't own stock.


> You can't be both down on patents and vigorously defending your own dubious patent. I disagree. You could argue that Bezos is lying about wanting to change the patent system, but I see no contradiction with his statement. Besides, if Amazon stopped enforcing their patents, the system would be unaffected. Their goal here is to change the system.


>Fed Up was pretty great. Also Sugar Coated is one of my favorite food docs ever. Yeah, except while sugar is not great (particularly for teeth), it's alone isn't responsible for the health decline of the western population. You can take out sample of body fat from people and through lab work tell where it came from, and it's overwhelmingly not through carbohydrates but from dietary fat (whethery animal or plant).


You report each position separately. You do this on form 8949. 7 positions is nothing, it will take you 5 minutes. There's a tip on form 8949 that says this, though: For Part I (short term transactions): Note. You may aggregate all short-term transactions reported on Form(s) 1099-B showing basis was reported to the IRS and for which no adjustments or codes are required. Enter the total directly on Schedule D, line 1a; you are not required to report these transactions on Form 8949 (see instructions). For Part II (long term transactions): Note. You may aggregate all long-term transactions reported on Form(s) 1099-B showing basis was reported to the IRS and for which no adjustments or codes are required. Enter the total directly on Schedule D, line 8a; you are not required to report these transactions on Form 8949 (see instructions). If the 1099B in your case shows basis for each transaction as reported to the IRS - you're in luck, and don't have to type them all in separately.


Tesla is valued like a company that has self-driving car hardware already in every car they're selling right now, that they can switch on overnight once the software is ready. They're valued as a company that will create a driverless transportation service that those cars will be able to work under so that they can take over all of the Uber business, without having to pay for drivers. After that's up and running, Tesla can make as many cars as they can crank out and just set them loose on the transportation service, allowing every car they build to work around the clock to provide rides, giving the company a much more substantial long term profit on each car than simply selling the cars to individuals. That's the kind of company they're being valued like.


America and the rest of the West should stop looking backwards and forwards towards developing an advanced, service based economy. Really, if your job can be done by an immigrant with limited English skills or by an overseas worker in China, do you really deserve to have that job?


Hahahaha its not only the poor, the lower and lower-middle class represent millions of americans with an active role in the economy. Are you seriously gonna defend 50 Billonaires who have never struggled in life vs 50 million americans who struggle everyday? This kind of thinking is un-american no wonder you Trump supporters dont mind about Russia colluding with the current administration


I'm not gonna act like I invest in real estate, but I'm relatively well read on the subject and have family who invest as well. I think of a house like a stock, sort of. Say you get a mortgage, fix up the place, and rent it out for 1500. These renters will be covering the mortgage payments each month, plus possibly a little bit more. You're not making bank on the $100 profit each month on the rent after you pay the mortgage payment, you're making it on appreciation. Just like a stock, the appreciation isn't realized until you sell it. The fastest way to make money in real estate (depending on who you ask) is to buy a house below market value, fix it up a bit, rent it out while it appreciates, and hopefully sell high. There's 100's of other ways to make money in real estate, but that's the gist of how a lot of people do it. Hope this helps!


Due to the nature of the content why wouldn't you post it if it may be true?! We're talking about water here which unlike US dollars can not be created from nothing and is vital for life. If people get up and arms and it turns out to not be true, whats the harm? Now consider the opposite, the only way thats a valid approach is if you are a lobbyist.


No idea how he gets Zimbabwe as a reference point. But America certainly would look very different without Anglo-Saxon / European founding. Anyone know a country or foreign land that was colonized by a predominantly African indigenous people? EDIT: I've no idea how the guy gets Zimbabwe. It's in the SE of Africa and all the ports for slave trade were on the far West horn. I guess a lot of the slaves came from the interior of Africa, but to pick off Zimbabwe as a reference instead of Nigeria, Senegal... seems really crazy. Also apparently Brazil got 5 million slaves while North America got 500k slaves. I guess that would be a reference point from an economic standpoint, maybe. Impossible to say really because US has such different resources. Certainly the anglo-saxon rule of law was probably beneficial to America's founding. The whole issue seems to be speculative nonsense. I'm kind of mad at myself for wasting more than 5 minutes thinking about this. I just wondered where the hell Zimbabwe came about in all of this... what is this guy think...


Gartner, Forester, etc., data and analysis are not worth shit. I learned that from 20+ years as a financial analyst: my wild ass guess was no worse than their wild ass guess on anything but my wild ass guess was a lot cheaper. Its a pity so many investment decisions and strategic plans are based on the garbage cranked out by industry analysts.


I think you are running into multiple problems here: All these together look like a high risk to a bank, especially right now with companies being reluctant to hire full-time employees. Looking at it from their perspective, the last thing they need right now is another potential foreclosure on their books. BTW, if it is a consolation, I had to prove 2 years of continuous employment (used to be a freelancer) before the local credit union would consider giving me a mortgage. We missed out on a couple of good deals because of that, too.


"Others have already commented on the impact of anything which dissuades merchants from raising possible breaches, so I won't dwell on that. Maybe we need stronger legislation, maybe we don't, but it doesn't change today's answer. Often it works the other way around to what you might expect - rather than the merchant noticing and notifying Visa/MC/others, Visa/MC/others spot patterns of suspicious activity (example 1). I don't have any data on the relative numbers of who is being notified/notifying between merchants and payment processors, but at the point when your card is identified as compromised there's no reason to suppose that an individual merchant in the traditional sense has been compromised, let alone identified. In fact because there's a fast moving investigation it could even be a false alarm that led to your card getting cancelled. Conversely it could be a hugely complex multinational investigation which would be jeopardised. It's simply not safe to assume that simply ""brand X"" has been compromised, therefore everything ""brand X"" knows about you is also compromised: Furthermore there's no reason to assume the merchant has even admitted to, or discovered the root cause. MC/Visa/Banks, at the point at which they're cancelling cards simply can't say (at least not in a way that might expensively backfire involving lots of lawyers) because the standard of proof needed to go on record blaming someone is simply not yet met. So: yes it's common that you aren't told anything for all of the above reasons. And of course if you really want to find out more you may have some success with your local data protection legislation and formally make a subject access request (or local equivalent) to see what that brings back. Be sure to do it in writing, to the official address of both mastercard and your bank."


"I am admittedly not giving a scientific or mathematical analysis here, just giving my anecdotal take on what I've lived through. I don't know if my assessment of 'tripled' is even accurate, just that there's a palpable sense of things being a lot more expensive & it just seems to me that the cost of living has gone up quite a bit for average people from what it once was, especially considering most of us now have cable bills, internet costs and in my case several different cell phone bills for different members of the family. I realize these are not necessities but they are important things that most people are now expected to have. I didn't mean to imply that we've had ""insane"" inflation & I understand that these things are mathematically measured as both Core inflation and CPI and by these measures things have held pretty steady. It just seems to me that these sorts of indexes have not yet taken a lot of things into account regarding the realities of modern day living and their resultant expenses."


"Create a meaningful goal for yourself which would distract you from impulsively spending all your money and help you to direct it towards something more meaningful. Maybe you're curious about just how little money you can live off of in one year and you're up for a challenge. Maybe you want to take a whole year off from work. A trip around the world. Or create a financial independence account, the money that is put into this account should NEVER be touched, the idea is to live off of the interest that it throws off. I strongly suggest that you listen to the audio book ""PROSPERITY CONSCIOUSNESS"" by Fredric Lehrman. You can probably find a copy at your local library, or buy if off of amazon."


So while these companies are not a scam, 30% feels pretty darn high. How about you negotiate a much lower rate? 10% or 15%? Here is why: You will spend time and effort (which technically isn't free) to find the money. I bet you can find it if you look hard enough. But you could also just collect it and give this company a cut for their expertise. However if 30% bugs you (and it would bug me) then consider their reality. They spent money to find the funds and contact you. HOWEVER, that is a sunk cost. It is already spent. You can find it on your own and they get zip. Or you negotiate a lower percentage, they get enough to cover their costs and make some profit and you save a ton of time. Since they took the time to explain themselves here, they are either scammers trying to bully you into compliance, or they are legit. It is field that people might look down on, but it isn't criminal. I would look for the money if it were me, but I feel I have enough free time that it would be worth it.


"We played [baseball](http://hendrengroup.me) as kids when it was the most [popular game](http://hendrengroup.me/blog/baseball-the-small-and-big-kids-dream-game) in the world, way ahead of soccer, and basketball was still a poor third-placer. We played it in the school yard using a tennis ball and became the highlight of every school boy’s day. We knew and followed the basic rules of the game although we did not use mittens or masks. We played barefoot because we went to school barefoot. We were children and we had the time of our life. The rules of baseball are not really that complicated. Almost anyone who can run, swing a bat or throw a ball can join the fun. Later on, we kids found out that there was such a thing as softball, which was for girls but using a bigger ball that was thrown from the hip level instead of overhead. Watching real baseball and softball games during athletic meets gave us a better understanding and appreciation of the game. How we would have wanted to have all the uniform, gears and field to play with; but all we could afford was an old, balding tennis ball and a homemade 2in x 3in lumber for a bat and bases made of stones or wood scraps. Baseball, as officially required, has the following rules: **1. Basic features of the baseball game and field dimensions** Baseball is played on a diamond-shaped field with the base corner designated as the home base. A player with a bat, or a batter, tries to hit the ball as far away from any of the opposing fielding team in order to reach all three bases and finally make it back to the home base. If a player makes it to a base or two after he bats, he must wait for his own team-mates to hit the ball and give him the opening to move on around the bases. Strategy and team play are important in maximizing the team’s chance to score. Sometimes, a team may sacrifice a batter just for a player to steal a base or score a run. One point can spell the difference between winning and losing; and such brilliant plays come in handy. **2. Team composition** Each team has 9 players to fill up the following positions in the field when the opposing team is on the bat: pitcher, catcher, first base, second base, third base, short stop, right fielder, left fielder and centerfielder. Substitute players may also be included. **3. Batting regulations** The team on the bat is given three attempts to hit the ball thrown by a pitcher within the boundaries of the baseball field, marked by the two lines made by the home- base/first-base and the home-base/third-base. A missed ball is called a strike and three strikes puts batter out of the field. A team that gets three outs gets to field next while the other team bats. **4. Playing the ball** A flying ball that falls outside of the field boundaries is called a foul ball and gives a batter another chance to hit. Fouls are unlimited. A ball that is hit and falls inside the two lines is either caught in the air to put the batter out or, if it rolls on the ground, must be retrieved and often thrown to the first-base player who will tag the batter with the ball to put him out. Failing to tag the batter who steps on or touches the base puts the batter ""safe"" on first base or wherever the batter may be as other hitters move on around the diamond. A player who makes it safely back to home base scores a point. If it is a homerun, meaning the ball is hit out of the filed or steals straight home if the defending team fumbles the ball, two points are gained while a single point is given to a player who eventually goes round all the bases through one or more batters. **5. Other game features** When a batting team is struck out, it take the field and lets the other team bat and attempt to score. A foul ball which is caught will also count as an out. Multiple outs can be made, such as when bases are loaded (all three bases have batters) and the batter on the plate hits a good ball and makes it to first base and the ball is retrieved and thrown back before the player running to second base reaches it, then to home base before the player on third base scores a run and, finally, to third base to tag the player running to it. Three outs in one play! It is during such fast plays when the ball changes hands so rapidly and players are scampering for bases that the excitement runs high. It is cause for celebration for the scoring team and a big letdown for the other who must probably feel like they were hit on the head with a bat several times for losing the big opportunity to score big and ending up with nothing. **6. Who wins** The team that makes the most runs after nine innings or rounds wins the game. Sometimes though, the game will stop at the ""top of the 9th inning"" or before the other team is supposed to go to final bat if that team is already ahead in points as the lagging team will not be able to catch up anyway. Some of the most memorable games end at the ""bottom of the ninth"" when a team tries to catch up. We might have heard of the familiar radio voice saying, ""It’s the bottom of the ninth and bases are full and the New York Yankees are behind by four and Babe Ruth has the bat. The count is two strikes and three balls . . . the pitcher winds up and throws the ball. Ruth swings hard and the ball flies . . . out of the stadium for a homerun and a win!"" Or something to that effect. That imagined scene a dream every child and adult lover of baseball hopes to accomplish once in a lifetime. You want to see and hear the whole stadium explode with people jumping and shouting as you take your sweet time running through the bases, smiling, waving your cap and finally kissing the home base. When a great player makes a good play, everybody wins in baseball. You have to be the eternal child to enjoy it. And there are so many people out there who still enjoy it to this day."


So the same greedy Zillionaires who caused the majority of the problems are now telling us how we can pitch - work an extra 20 years - to ensure that their privileged positions will continue without too much disruption.


The largest problem and source of anxiety / ruin for homeowners during the housing market collapse was caused by the inability to refinance. Many people had bought homes which they were stretched to afford, by using variable-rate mortgages. These would typically offer a very attractive initial rate, with an annual cap on the potential increase of rate. Many of these people intended to refinance their variable-rate to a fixed rate once terms were more favorable. If their house won't appraise for the value needed to obtain a new loan, they are stuck in their current contract with potentially unfavorable rates in the later years (9.9% above prime was not unheard of.) Also, many people, especially those in areas of high inflation in the housing market, used a financial device known as a Balloon Mortgage, which essentially forced you to get a new loan after some number of years (2, 5, 10) when the entire note became due. Some of those loans offered payments less than Principal + Interest! So, say you move near Los Angeles and can't afford the $1.2M for the 3-bedroom ranch in which you wish to live. You might work out a deal with your mortgage broker/banker in which you agree contractually to only pay $500/month, with a balloon payment of $1.4M due in 5 years, which seemed like a good deal since you (and everyone else,) actually expect the house to be 'worth' $1.5M in 5 years. This type of thing was done all the time back in the day. Now, imagine the housing bubble bursts and your $1.2M home is suddenly only valued at, perhaps, $750k. You still owe $1.4M sometime in the next several years (maybe very soon, depending on timing,) and can only get approved financing for the current $750k value -- so you're basically anticipating becoming homeless and bankrupt within the same year. That is a source of much anxiety about being upside-down on a loan. See this question for an unfortunate example.


It comes across as if you don't know much about what he or the firm does. Does he work in wealth management? Someone looking for an assistant likely values organization and interpersonal skills over financial acumen.


If you want to work within that constraint, then I sincerely suggest you find a credit councilor. It may take you a while to dig out of debt, but with a little help from someone that knows the ropes, you can do it! Remember, even though you want to pay back those debts, many times the sky-rocketing interest rates work against you. Most of the good councilors know how to work the system to get these rates reduced, and sometimes even get the interest you've already accumulated reduced.


The link, in case you’re interested, was in the CS Monitor piece: http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2013/0319/A-lesson-from-Iraq-war-How-to-outsource-war-to-private-contractors Report link: http://psm.du.edu/articles_reports_statistics/data_and_statistics.html …which I provide just in case you want to read them, not to have the same conversation a second time. Interesting that there aren’t more hard feelings between those getting paid lots versus those not. I mean yes, you’re all there together, but if you and I are doing ostensibly the same (and possibly dangerous) work, you’re getting rich and I’m not….then again, there’s no conscription, in both cases you volunteered to be there. Strange also that taxpayers don’t care more about this, although….perhaps not. The amount of bullshit is just too overwhelming. Sounds like you could tell lets of stories about the women, though I’m not sure I want to hear them after a good lunch, and I’m pretty sure you don’t want to remember.


There is another drawback, and this is why I keep a low-limit card for online purchases and another for carrying in risky/unfamiliar situations (e.g. travelling) a small limit acts as as damage limitation in the event of theft. In theory you may not be liable if your card is stolen and used. In practice you may be out of pocket for a considerable amount of time, and trying to spend large sums on an overlimit card will soon trip it up (especially if those large sums are out of the ordinary)


>And how did this cause the MBS to get wiped out, was it a written clause or did they just collapse from the value dropping so hard? It was written into the debt instruments. MBS and CDOs are broken down into tranches with descending priority of claims to the collateral pool. When it comes time for payment, the top tranche gets paid out 100% before the one below it is entitled to a single cent, and so on and so forth. Here's an example of how one might be organized: Foo | Bar | text ---|---|---- Tranche | Size | Credit Rating Class A | 750MM | AAA Class B | 100MM | AA Class C | 60MM | A Class D | 50MM | BBB Class E | 40MM | Not Rated In this example, lets say that 5% of the loans defaulted, meaning that of the $1B, only $950MM was available to get paid out (assuming no over-collateralization, which most had, but that's besides the point here). The Class A would get the full 750 they're due, the Class B would get the full 100, and the Class C would get the full 60. At this point there is only 40MM left, so the Class D would get 40 of the 50 due (a 20% write-down), and Class E would get nothing, getting completely wiped out. >I dont know what subordination level means Subordination level basically just means how much debt it below it on the capital structure--how much needs to get completely wiped out before any particular tranche starts sharing in the losses. > Did defaults reaching 8% meaning that 8% of loan takers defaulted? Yeah more or less. Technically I think it's that 8% of the value of the mortgages defaulted, but I believe they were set up to be relatively the same size within each instrument, so there's not really much distinction between 8% of the loan takers and 8% of the aggregate value.


As an LLC you are required to have a separate bank account (so you can't have one account and mix personal and business finances together as you could if you were a sole trader) - but there's no requirement for it to be a business bank account. However, the terms and conditions of most high street bank personal current accounts specifically exclude business banking, so unless you could find one that would allow it, you'd have to open a business bank account.


Yes, all of that is possible with google sheets...


Im not sure if its normal/sensical/healthy, and that is kind of opinion based. But there is a reason for it. Certain rules and regulations passed recently are causing companies or institutions to shift to bonds from cash. Fidelity, for example, is completely converting its $100 billion dollar cash fund to short term bills. Its estimated that over $2 trillion that is now in cash may be converted to bills, and that will obviously put upward preasure on the price of them. The treasury is trying to issue more short term debt to balance out the demand. read more here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/money-funds-clamor-for-short-term-treasurys-1445300813


Assuming you are saying that the company issues 20,000 additional shares of its own stock and sells them for $8 each: The money from the sale is not income and not part of earnings. It is capital and appears on the balance sheet as part of shareholder's equity. With no other transactions, yes, the total of shares outstanding is increased by 20,000 to 100,000.


Roll it into another put with a lower strike and hope it keeps going down. At the very least it will defray the cost of the long position. Ps I think you're looking for the word hedge not lever.


"OK, fair enough, but you did say ""A large part of their barrier to entry is government."" in relation to general industry, in defense of your earlier statement that ""Monopolies can rarely exist without one or two things: Government support or limited geographic area."". My contention is that regulation can present a barrier to entry, but this is not nearly as large a barrier as size, and barriers due to size is the primary reason for monopolies or oligopolies in recent times. If you don't want to use the aircraft industry as an example, let's use Amazon itself. Amazon is cleaning everyone's clocks. Whatever you try and sell, if it is available on Amazon, a smaller player will not be able to compete with them except on the edges. Their market share continues to increase - they own 43% of all US online retail. Why doesn't someone just start up and compete with them? Why aren't there 10-12 different competitors to Amazon? Now clearly, Amazon got a head start - they were among the first to shift into the non-specialized internet retail market (Pets.com only sold pet food whereas Amazon now sells everything). There is no arguing that they do things very well, and have advanced the area of online sales. But they are now without competition, and will not have significant competition unless they stumble badly. And even then, they may not have competition (see: eBay, which now sucks, but still has no real competition). When I look at changing sectors in my general geographic area, I see massive up-sizing coupled with a lack of new entries into the sector. I'll give a few examples: * Auto dealers. I had a relative who owned a Pontiac dealership in the 70s. Just one. He did OK from it. Now, most of the dealerships are owned by people who own somewhere between 5 and 15 different dealerships. * Gas stations. I had a relative who owned a gas station. Again, just one. There were lots of these guys around. Now, most of the gas stations are owned by 2 or 3 conglomerates who own many dozens of stations. * Banks. Yes, regulation is in play here, but there used to be dozens of different banks in my region. Now there are maybe 2 regional banks and 3 national banks. Gone are the days when there was one bank that had 2-3 branches. Even credit unions are consolidating. * Hardware stores. We are down to Home Depot, Lowe's, and a regional chain that has 20-30 stores. No independent guys. * Grocery stores. My region has exactly two full-service grocery store chains, plus maybe 2 discount chains. When I was a kid, there were 10 different regional chains in the area. * Not the best example, but video stores. There used to be 10-12 different mom-and-pop stores, which consolidated into two (Blockbuster, Hollywood Video), which got crushed by Netflix. Smart TVs have allowed for there to be more players in the on-demand world, but the level of skill needed to enter this area cannot be more different between the initial mom-and-pop video store and the world of online content delivery. The list goes on and on. Consolidation is the name of the game, and when a market consolidates, the *average* person can no longer enter it. As it consolidates further, the *above-average* person can no longer enter it, and when it gets to a certain point, no one can enter it. That has harmed the economy because people have stopped ""playing the game"" because they know they can't win. They can't compete with the big boys. Now I don't know what to do about this, but my observation is that this has accelerated in the past 30 years. I think that technology has accelerated it, but I also think that tax code and lack of anti-trust enforcement has also accelerated it. I would put my bet on tax code as the #1 culprit - tax code has made it attractive for people to try and earn tens of millions of dollars per year - there is truth to the conservative claim that ""if the tax rates are too high, people will not work as hard"" - that's not necessarily a bad thing though. Markets are driven by demand, and at any point in time, they have a finite demand - a total size. If there is $15 million worth of demand for hardware in a region, that demand can either be satisfied by one massive global corporation, or by 15 $100k small businesses (or by 30 $50k small businesses). There can be an advantage to one massive global corporation - cheaper prices, higher quality - but there can also be a downside, which is eventually higher prices, less innovation, and even lower quality - plus the downside of the elimination of opportunity for the 30 people who would serve that demand if the massive corporation did not exist, opportunities which turned over every so often due to businesses closing due to retirement or even incompetence. I do not think that tax code stifles innovation though, because people innovate for passion, not for money. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded Apple when the top tax rate was 70%. They did it because they wanted to make computers, not because they wanted to make money. I think that a high tax rate would stifle the relentless pursuit of more dollars by using existing dollars to consolidate sectors."


Well, you certainly seem to have more sophisticated thoughts on this than I. So, if we have a model in which we're confident, what would we learn and what would be done with such information? Creative destruction is already a known thing. Would this end up being a primarily academic pursuit? I'd hate to think policy might be based on that.


I don't think that there is any good way a study can average this and bring a useful result: The core problem is that there are people that will spend more money than they should, if they become technically able to, and the credit card is just one of the tools they abuse for that (similar to re-financing with cash-outs, zero percent loans, etc.). On the other side, there are people who control and understand their spending, and again, the mechanism of payment is irrelevant for them. Studies measure some mix between the groups, and come up with irrelevant correlations that have no causality. If you think any tool or mechanics got you in financial trouble, think again: your spending habits and lack of understanding or care get you in financial trouble - nothing else. In a world where it is considered cool to 'don't understand math', it is no surprise that so many people can't control their finances.


"1) Yes in theory that is right - minus any state taxes as well. 2) They could since there is an unknown amount outside of the US - and probably it will be a percentage and not all. Most of these companies that make a difference are already international companies. 3) They would most likely still do it for any money kept offshore, and it doesn't prevent them from continuing to do it. Again, I didn't say this was a good solution. They are just hoping to ward off economic collapse a little longer by doing this, or perhaps hire more accountants to be able to look at their books to figure out how much they are hiding to punish them. There could be many ""motivations"" for doing this tax. But I doubt any of the motivations intend to stop it from continuing to happen after the tax. The problem is any company that takes advantage of it basically says ""yes, i broke the law - in this amount."" Thus, it might be a good way to get a list of companies to audit more thoroughly."


"> “It’s hard to explain simply why and how it works"". If that's the case, why would I give you money? There are plenty of forms of machine learning where the results can't be fully comprehended by humans - neural networks come to mind as a good popular example."


Sensible? China has a massive gender imbalance caused by families trying to ensure that their one child is a male to ensure the continuation of the family name as well as to take care of them when they are older. This is causing China's average age to rise incredibly fast as there are far fewer families than there would be without the policy.


"Glad my question got bumped. I took it as a sign to get a solid answer out of Schwab. First the rep gave me the same line that it was impossible to provide paperless statements for a 401(k) plan because of ""regulations"". I pressed the issue and got this from the rep: I just spoke with our dedicated small business plan team. They told me that there are regulations that state that a Qualified Plan, such as this, require to have a statement sent. It is a Schwab policy that we have decided to only allow paper statements for this account type. So to clarify, it is a Schwab business decision to have the statements available only by mail. Hope someone from Schwab with some authority sees this post and is pushed toward helping change their policy. I can't imagine what a colossal waste of paper, postage, and hassle it is for everyone involved."


There's actual value and value that comes from potential for growth. I would imagine that their fundamentals are stronger, they have more advertising revenue than 2 years ago but their vision for the future and potential value is lower. So it's up to you the investor in the market to decide where you value it and to either buy sell or sit out


our family of staff and guests have grown up together with the common goal of providing an environment that inspires trust and compassion for each other, as we take the time to focus on living a healthier life and finding inner peace.


What are you trying to learn? Is it not skills to set you up for a well paying career? You can spend 50k on a degree so you can teach for 35k/year vs 100k on a medical degree to work for 100k/year. ROI is your income from the job the degree qualifies you for.


But a textbook liquidity trap means prices fluctuate. We've seen nothing but steady increases in every single possible measurable standard. Liquidity traps occur when there is fear of deflation. There is no such fear. Deflation would be a welcome remedy to today's currency crisis. Your paycheck would be able to purchase more and we would see prices fall, making it easier for the average American to afford their food, gas and housing. Plus, lending is down not because banks are hoarding cash. If anything, banks are trying to lend out more than ever. Standards for borrowing have plummited. Anyone willing to sign a contract can get hundreds of thousands of dollars at the drop of a hat. Lending is down because consumer and business demand for more debt is down. I stopped reading Krugman years ago, but if he is seriously trying to sell a liquidity trap right now, he is horribly misleading people and his advocacy of the Fed's printing and lending policies as of late is just flat out dangerous to the global economy.


Good idea, but you can already imagine how that will turn out: Patents will be used in some pro-forma way, without intention of serious commercial use, to avoid using them. For trademarks, this already happens. After a merger, companies continue to formally use a brand/trademark of an acquired company that they have effectively terminated, in order to avoid other companies using that trademark (or a very similar one).


It depends on if it is a non-refundable deposit, retainer, etc. The remaining $1,500 is not included in that quarter's sales, because you have not yet received it and it is not guaranteed. The question is really if you should count the $500 toward the quarter where it is received, or during the quarter where you invoice. This deposit might be categorized as a liability until you invoice, and there is no sales tax to be calculated until the invoice for the total. I say 'might' because this can vary by state and the type of transaction or business. For example, if someone makes a cash down payment on a lease for a car, some states will require that sales tax be charged on this.


USANA for all generations. USANA vitamins are the most convenient ways to get your daily dose of nutrition. USANA's Health Pack 100 is a nutritional supplement pack that offer a comprehensive daily supplement regimen with a full daily dose of the USANA Essentials, providing you with optimal and balanced antioxidant activity - day and night. USANA is literally a worldwide organization. You can too become successful with USANA business.


Computers and digital cameras are great candidates for handing down because they can still be useful long after they have started looking dated to the initial buyer. Buying DVDs is unfortunately more convenient than renting in my hometown, but we make up for this by a liberal borrowing policy. And, perhaps most unusually, coupons -- the special discounts that mail-order retailers like to send when it's convenient for them to make a sale (or just arbitrarily, really). Those often have complicated terms so that they are only really interesting if exactly two articles are ordered, or the amount of the order exactly 80 EUR. A couple of persons in the family are the specialists of these discounts, and others can just tell them to watch for an interesting item. They'll place the order at the best time.


Obviously the best way to consolidate the real-estate loans is with a real-estate loan. Mortgages, being secured loans, provide much better interest rates. Also, interest can be deducted to some extent (depending on how the proceeds are used, but up to $100K of the mortgage can have deductible interest just for using the primary residence as a collateral). Last but not least, in many states mortgages on primary residence are non-recourse (again, may depend on the money use). That may prove useful if in the future your mother runs into troubles repaying it. So yes, your instincts are correct. How to convince your mother - that's between you and her.


OK, my fault for not doing more research. Wikipedia explains this well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Option_style#Difference_in_value Basically, there are some cases where it's advantageous to exercise an American option early. For non-gold currency options, this is only when the carrying cost (interest rate differential aka swap rate or rollover rate) is high. The slight probability that this may occur makes an American option worth slightly more.


There's only one hard constraint in there: >A population grown completely accustomed to a resource-intensive, globalized lifestyle relative to that enjoyed by almost any other country on Earth. We do have to live within the limits of real resources. Labor, energy, commodities, clean air, water, etc. Fortunately, we're not *at* the limits on those things right now and the rest of the problems are financial. Financial problems have financial solutions and those are always within our grasp *if* we [understand how the monetary system works](http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/soft-currency-economics/) and manage the poltiical coordination to get things done.


"Yes. I heard back from a couple brokerages that gave detailed responses. Specifically: In a Margin account, there are no SEC trade settlement rules, which means there is no risk of any free ride violations. The SEC has a FAQ page on free-riding, which states that it applies specifically to cash accounts. This led me to dig up the text on Regulation T which gives the ""free-riding"" rule in §220.8(c), which is titled ""90 day freeze"". §220.8 is the section on cash accounts. Nothing in the sections on margin accounts mentions such a settlement restriction. From the Wikipedia page on Free Riding, the margin agreement implicitly covers settlement. ""Buying Power"" doesn't seem to be a Regulation T thing, but it's something that the brokerages that I've seen use to state how much purchasing power a client has. Given the response from the brokerage, above, and my reading of Regulation T and the relevant Wikipedia page, proceeds from the sale of any security in a margin account are available immediately for reinvestment. Settlement is covered implicitly by margin; i.e. it doesn't detract from buying power. Additionally, I have personally been making these types of trades over the last year. In a sub-$25K margin account, proceeds are immediately available. The only thing I still have to look out for is running into the day-trading rules."


If you think there is no complication in your application and you can easily satisfy all criteria you can do the process yourself without using any agent and save few thousand dollars. I have done myself. Another cost Chris forgot to mention is the medical examination cost which is mandatory. If your certificates and docs are non-English translation fees are quite high as well. The immigration process is very bureaucratic and requires lot of supporting documents. As for living in Australia, Rent, Car and living expenses are high compared to US. But in Sydney and Melbourne you can rent near public transport, which isn't too bad (well not like Europe ). So having a car is not essential. Rent for a decent flat in these cities will be $300 - $350 p/w and you may have to pay 4-6 weeks as advance. You can get a lot of information from the dept. of immingration website.


"Didn't OP say that he meant 'credibility' as ""your past work that determines your status""? Which is the same as what you said. Also, Yes, the farmer can promise a million bushels of apples for a million deer. This is what Industries do,don't they?"


For the record, I would never believe any major media outlet when it comes to a complex economic evaluation. I hope you wouldn't either. The article mentions that people are sending less mail. Maybe you're not old enough to remember sending letters, but people used to do it a lot.


In day trading, you're trying to predict the immediate fluctuations of an essentially random system. In long-term investing, you're trying to assess the strength of a company over a period of time. You also have frequent opportunities to assess your position and either add to it or get out.


Fund your retirement accounts first. Even as an intern, it is still worthwhile to open a Roth IRA and start contributing to it. See my answer to a similar question: Best way to start investing, for a young person just starting their career?


If you would like to find data on a specific industry/market sector, a good option is IBISworld reports. You can find their site here. You can find reports on almost any major US sector. The reports include historical data as well as financial ratios. In college projects, they were very useful for getting benchmark data to compare an individual business against an industry as a whole.


Of course it is a dilution of existing shareholders. When you buy milk in the supermarket - don't you feel your wallet diluted a little? You give some $$$ you get milk in return. You give some shares, you get Watsapp in return. That's why such purchases must go through certain process of approval - board of directors (shareholders' representatives) must approve it, and in some cases (don't know if in this particular) - the whole body of the shareholders vote on the deal.


I dunno, I think what Alphabet is doing with their moonshot factory truly could be a game-changing corporate paradigm. Once something like Waymo becomes profitable and begin scaling, it could redefine the way CEO think about corporate goals and visions. Never mind longer shots like Calico. It's basically a homegrown venture capital firm on steroids, but with even more synergies. It's amazing stuff.


Financial health is typically assessed with 3 things. Balance Sheet Cash Flow Analysis Profit & Loss Statement That should give you a pretty solid view on where the business has been, where it is now, and where it is headed. You also want to see any specific contracts currently in-place. Things like leases for property or facilities or any long term customer contracts. I also often like to look at the last year's tax information. Pay attention to Retained Earnings, that'll tell you about the long term functioning of the business from a historical perspective. Source: Am M&A guy


I think the answer depends on whether you're trying to get out of debt and stay out, or if you just want this card paid off. That is, are you changing the way you deal with money and debt for good? If you just want this card paid off, and you're OK with going back into debt later, then @Mike Scott's advice is one way to go. I'd personally be nervous about leaving myself with no cash reserves at all. If you are planning to get out of debt and stay out, then you don't want to put yourself in a position where you're tempted to go back into debt as soon as you hit a speed bump. So, you need some cushion so that an emergency doesn't push you right back to the credit cards. If you've got a budget that you can live on, and that covers your usual expenses, and your job is relatively stable, then $1000 is probably enough of a cushion for most things. You can then pay off most of the credit card using the rest of your savings. If you're in an unstable job situation, then you'll want to keep more, if not all, of your savings as protection against the instability. Once the situation stabilizes, then throw the surplus savings at the debt. $1000 doesn't cover all possible emergencies, but it's generally a good tradeoff between prudence and paranoia.


">Frankly, the company probably won't know for several years, as large companies essentially have branch offices of the IRS in their headquarters, and their tax bills are the subject of lengthy negotiation. Thank you for providing a link I can take seriously but I don't see ""a billion dollars"" in here anywhere. NYT being wrong doesn't make GE's promotional material right."


I think that assuming that you're not looking to trade the fund, an index Mutual Fund is a better overall value than an ETF. The cost difference is negligible, and the ability to dollar-cost average future contributions with no transaction costs. You also have to be careful with ETFs; the spreads are wide on a low-volume fund and some ETFs are going more exotic things that can burn a novice investor. Track two similar funds (say Vanguard Total Stock Market: VTSMX and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF: VTI), you'll see that they track similarly. If you are a more sophisticated investor, ETFs give you the ability to use options to hedge against declines in value without having to incur capital gains from the sale of the fund. (ie. 20 years from now, can use puts to make up for short-term losses instead of selling shares to avoid losses) For most retail investors, I think you really need to justify using ETFs versus mutual funds. If anything, the limitations of mutual funds (no intra-day trading, no options, etc) discourage speculative behavior that is ultimately not in your best interest. EDIT: Since this answer was written, many brokers have begun offering a suite of ETFs with no transaction fees. That may push the cost equation over to support Index ETFs over Index Mutual Funds, particularly if it's a big ETF with narrow spreads..


I'll answer but avoiding discussion of M1, M2 etc, too pedantic. I don't believe you are asking about the lifetime of either coins or paper money. I think you are referencing the fractional reserve system, and how a good portion of the total money supply is created by the banks lending out their deposits in effect 'creating' money. My answer to you is that if all loans were simply paid off, no mortgages, no car loans, etc, the total money in the system would collapse to some reasonable fraction of what it is today, 10% or a bit less. This comes from the fact that the reserve requirement for most large banks is 10%. I'm referencing money, but not bills or coins. Think about what you make in a year. How much do you touch as paper money? For my wife and me, it's no more than a few percent. Most goes from a direct deposit to online payments. So this would be the subject of a different question altogether. Let me know if this addresses your question.


At the end of Dodgeball, Vince Vaughn's character is supposed to be in the final with his team, who beat expectations to get there. Instead he gets scared and hesitant about it all and ends up a nearby bar sitting on stool by himself. Then Lance Armstrong walks up just passing by to buy a bottle of water from the bar and notices Vaughn's character and tells him he's a big fan who has been following them on ESPN 8 the Ocho. He then asks why he wasn't in gear and ready for the final. Vaughn basically tells him he quit and doesn't have it in him. Lance then says, in a casual manner, I felt like that once, I had cancer that almost killed me, but I kept moving forward and won the Tour De France 5 times in a row. Of course this strikes a cord with Vaughn's character who realizes that he has no idea what real struggle is and he needs to man up like Lance did and head to the final, which he does. This is all so funny now because Lance Armstrong cheated his way to those championships and then lied to everyone about doing it. He became a symbol of hope, rode that symbol to infamy, all the while, he was lying, cheating, and misleading those around him. So advice from him at the end of the Dodgeball now seems fucking hilarious. Sorry for the extensive write up -- I'm on adderall.


"This might sound absurd, but Japan has a lot of debt held by itself. In other words, when people say a country is ""just printing money"" it's rarely true. It's often some kind of beyond being issued and sold to the public or to institutions. But in Japan's case they actually did ""print money"" and have done so for 30 years. Yet they've had a deflation almost every year since. This shows that expanding the money supply doesn't always result in inflation, it depends a lot on the country and its people and means of production. I guess Japan's move to cut the debt is a step into unknown territory, and we can't really know what will happen."


"In your shoes, I would pay off the mortgage with the after tax investments and be done. You have different goals than I do in that you want to keep the debt. So, I would start calling mortgage brokers and asking for someone who does ""manual underwriting"". Manual underwriting essentially means they use common sense and look at your situation for what it is instead of saying ""income=10K means disapprove mortgage"". It may be that your situation is different enough from mortgage guidelines that you can't now get a conforming mortgage (i.e. one that is readily re-sellable to another mortgage holder). If that is the case, you can look for a small bank or credit union that would be interested in adding your loan to their portfolio and not reselling it."


"1) there are 4 separate unions that represent USPS employees (American Postal Workers Union, National Letter Carriers Association, National Postal Mail Handlers Union, and the National Rural Letter Carriers Association) so careful saying ""the union"" here because it makes your argument incorrect. Which union are you talking about? 2) Democratic support is not a good gauge of union support these days. Conservative Democrats that like to cater to business interests vote against unions all the time."


"The third Friday of each month is an expiration for the monthly options on each stock. Stock with standardized options are in one of three ""cycles"" and have four open months at any give time. See http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/optioncycle.asp In addition some stocks have weekly options now. Those generally have less interest because they are necessarily short-term. Anything expiring on April 8 and 22 (Fridays this year but not third Fridays of the month) are weeklies. The monthly options are open for longer periods of time so they attract more interest over the time that they are open. They also potentially attract a different type of investor due to their length of term, although, as it gets close to their expiration date they may start to behave more like weeklies."


Freedom from government sanctions on your speech is different from reaction of private individuals to that same speech. You can call your mother a cunt at the dinner table if you choose, but do you think there might be some ramifications to that?


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/talkbusiness] [You could make $70,000 right out of college with a degree in marijuana studies](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/787m53/you_could_make_70000_right_out_of_college_with_a/) [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))* [](#bot)


"I think we're just at a point in society where everyone feels anonymous in public, and therefore many act like they're not affecting others with their behavior. Many would call it an entitlement society. I worked at Panera for a year in HS and made a vegetarian sandwich for someone. It had a sliver of roast beef the size of perhaps 1/4 of a dime, and yet, she freaked out and yelled at me. I removed the piece of lettuce it was stuck to and she demanded a new one. One of many ""dealing with the public"" stories I'm sure so many of us have now. Also the power afforded to everyone via lawyers gives more fuel to this fire. Always threaten to sue if they don't get what they want."


I'm not hating on anyone, just agreeing that it's pretty much all older people or all younger people and not many in between. Not any one person's fault, just where human nature got us. Although I think that they (the vocal majority of my generation) think that once the boomers retire, when the government finally gets filled with people from our generation, and once we take over the large corporations, that things will get better for us. Which is the reason for lashing out. I just think we have a s**t load of problems that need to be fixed, and it seems like all we ever do is patch them up because the long term fixes are too costly in the short term, and that this cycle won't ever change. But look on the bright side, every generation will have a group they can blame and a group to be afraid of, so nothing will be anyone's fault. At least until it finally is and someone ends up paying the piper. Hell, it's not like I've experienced the good times, this is what I grew up in, so I don't really know any better. My generation doesn't expect to stay with the same company for their entire lives because we don't think it's possible. We've learned to adapt, we've had to. The smarter of us know to learn from your generations' mistakes (like saving for retirement).


For this type of business a sole tradership would seem appropriate. You might then want to register as a limited company at a later date if you were growing significantly, taking on premises, seeking debt etc, as that would then shield you from liability.


It looks like you can. Take a look at these articles: http://www.googobits.com/articles/1747-taking-an-itemized-deduction-for-job-expenses.html http://www.bankrate.com/finance/money-guides/business-expenses-that-benefit-you.aspx http://www.hrblock.com/taxes/tax_tips/tax_planning/employment.html But of course, go to the source: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p529/ar02.html#en_US_publink100026912 From publication 529: You can deduct certain expenses as miscellaneous itemized deductions on Schedule A (Form 1040 or Form 1040NR). You can claim the amount of expenses that is more than 2% of your adjusted gross income. You figure your deduction on Schedule A by subtracting 2% of your adjusted gross income from the total amount of these expenses. Your adjusted gross income is the amount on Form 1040, line 38, or Form 1040NR, line 36. I hope that helps. Happy deducting!


I've definitely seen a similar conversation about this, I personally don't buy from eBay (Amazon for me). So I turned to the internet to see what I could find to offer you any additional information (albeit not my personal experience). I first read this article: CodeNerdz Article and was pretty horrified by the scamming that can happen by buyers. Then, this article by another regular user of eBay, Selling on eBay without PayPal : eBay Guides confirmed the trouble people have with PayPal & eBay. Payment Services permitted on eBay: Allpay.net, Canadian Tire Money, cash2india, CertaPay, Checkfree.com, hyperwallet.com, Moneybookers.com, Nochex.com, Ozpay.biz, Paymate.com.au, Propay.com, XOOM Have you looked into any or all of these?


> not because they can't, but they blow that money elsewhere for example on entertainment, electronic, or food they like as opposed to cooking, etc. so of course they can't. Yes I'm sure you are the authority on millenial spending habits.


"Finding statistics is exceedingly hard, because the majority of traders lose money. That is, not only they don't ""beat the markets"", not only they don't ""beat the benchmark"" (S&P 500 being used a lot as reference): they just lose money. Finding exact numbers, quality statistics and so on is very difficult. Finding recent ones, is almost impossible. With enormous effort I have found two references that might help make an idea. One is very recent, Forex ""centered"" and has been prepared by a large finance group for the the Europen Central Bank (ECB). It's available on their website, at an obscure download location. The document is stated to be confidential, but its download location has been disclosed to the public by CNBC. I can't post CNBC's link because I have just joined this Stack Exchange portal so I don't have enough reputation. You can find it by looking for their article about FXCM Forex broker debacle due to the Swiss Central Bank removing the EUR/CHF peg at 1.20. The second is a 2009-ish paper about Taiwanese retail traders profitability statistics published by Oxford University Press and talks about stocks. Both documents focus on retail traders. I strongly suggest you to immediately save those documents because they tend to disappear after a while. We had a fantastic and complete statistics report made by a group of German Banks in 2011... they pulled it off in 2012."


Well, did you move to go to University? For both of those prongs you would first need the skills to create wealth. Remote work really only works will in specific types of jobs. For example, customer service jobs can be done from home. But they typically don't pay a whole lot. Computer programming might be another one where remote work is possible. Maybe a few others depending on the work being done and the demands of the job. I would say that even today most companies would want you to come into work to do your job, whether it be a factory or an office. You would have to live within the range of your workplace. Flex time can be utilized but typically that means working from home part of the time but still coming in other days.


Organize a perfect, full service girl’s spa party with Princess & Tiaras Spa Celebrations. We offer a large selection of services that include: mini-manicures, mini-pedicures, mini-facials, makeup, hairstyle, and themed celebrations. Our girl’s spa parties are sure to make your little girl’s birthday sparkle.


> I don't think you quite understand how the software services model works. Most software co utilizes the Amazon model for growth until they reached a critical point either by market size or squeezing out other players. Uber is not a software company, regardless of what they claim. They are a taxi company that uses software for dispatch. They have zero innovation that allows for improved economies of scale. Amazon's approach and a generic software startup's approach do not necessarily overlap, but they do have similarities. > Your unit economic talks works only when bootstrapping and maybe debt financing. For companies that can grow using equity financing its certainly not the case. See: Tesla. That's completely false. If your product costs $10 but people will only buy it for $4, you will never make money regardless of how large you grow. In fact, the bigger you are, the more money you will ultimately lose. That's Uber's current conundrum. It doesn't resemble Tesla or Amazon's approaches whatsoever. If Uber raises prices sufficiently to achieve profitability, other entrants will continue to take market share and/or their customers will abandon them for the bus. Transportation is a commodity good, as evidenced by airlines and their utter lack of profitability over the decades.


I'd be fine with taxes going up if they got spent on things that I agree with. Like universal healthcare for example. But we both know this will not happen. If taxes go up they'll get spent on messing with Iran and North Korea and building a wall with Mexico. And you still haven't shown me any evidence that more taxes are a good thing. In the absence of any evidence either way, I'd rather have more money.


"Well done internet stranger -- you win, if that's what you were looking for. But for giggles: First, the article inferred that Paul was a quote ""strict buy-and-hold investor who rarely trades."" And second, if we're talking empirical evidence here then this whole post can be considered useless. Because by that logic, the same can be said about his entire portfolio - in which case, he may have simply bought all that gold the day before reporting his financials."


"they are entirely free to do whatever they want with the shares. In particular, they can sell them to whomever they choose No. Restrictions on who can sell when and to whom are a common thing with startups. ""Publicly traded"" companies are regulated in a much stricter way than private companies, so until the IPO the sales are limited to the OTC markets. But even that can be restricted by bylaws - for example ownership can only be limited to a group of investors approved by the board. As an employee - your grant was approved by the board, but when you come to sell, the buyer was not and the company may not agree to vet them. Bottom line is that it is not illegal to impose all kinds of restrictions on what the employees can do with their shares, as long as the shares are not listed on a public stock exchange (even after the company goes IPO with one class, other classes may remain restricted)."


Yeah it was a mix between the issuing agencies and the credit agencies. If the credit agencies didnt rate them as AAA then the financial institutions would just go to the other agency. So there was a conflict of interest in rating them higher. There was mismanagement on both sides of the fence and when the CDOs started to default it created a forced selling environment where people HAD to sell their CDOs/stocks at a steep discount to get enough liquidity to pay their own mortgages.


All we need is simple basic laws that bring secured and high employment levels. The rest will naturally fall into place. - No more H1B visas. - Outsourced work has to be taxed. - Can't outsource work that has to be continuously done. Only real temporary needed for a limited time can be outsourced. - When fired, paid for every year worked a set percentage of current salary. - All customer service, including talking to customers and handling their requests, must be done by humans and not machines/AI. - CEO pay cannot be more than a set multiple of the average worker. - Profit sharing with all employees by law. - etc...


I've heard that B&N also OWNS the property of the bookstore itself, so there are other benefits beyond selling books. Most other book stores simply rented the property, which means they HAD to make quote for sales. I love browsing book stores, but it's SO much more convenient, faster and cheaper to buy online, half.com or amazon are my gotos for when I know what book I want.


There was a house for sale at around $400k or $500k if my memory serves me posted to /r/Boston a little ways back that was from a poorer city in Massachusetts that was covered in bullet holes and was totally trashed inside. It had been spray painted and was missing a raised porch from one of the upper floors so this door just opened up to nothing.


I kind of answered this as well, but I'll re-word it Too expensive. Fiber cables are expensive to place, takes a lot of time, and nobody is willing to pay it; or at least not the people that COULD front the bill. (Being Comcast or TWC) Cities aren't willing to help much unfortunately. A great story of what happens when a city does help with these installation fees is Oldes, Alberta in Canada. The city helped install all the wires and now has one of (of not the fastest) Internet connection in the country.


They had to do something like this, they need to figure out more ways of making money. Linkedin does something like this for recruiters for on their site, its only sensical for Facebook to do the same. They now just need a way to profit from mobile..


An online store that is hub for the latest and fashionable street wear accessories and necklaces and that which would give you this stuff at an affordable price would be the best one. Just keep these basic things in mind and get ahead with the perfect things.


"There are only two ways to increase your savings: You are young, and both of these are likely to spontaneously happen - you will be promoted and get raises, and your loans will be paid off, removing the loan payment. It would seem that you need only to wait a year or so, and there will a lot more than $87 left over each month, and your savings will grow almost without any action from you. But somehow, that is not what happens in real life. As people get older they ""need"" more than they did before (larger home, more expensive ""things"", etc) and they never manage to get around to saving. So it's great that you are wondering how to do it. But you are not truly making it a priority. You mention that you also pay/spend for friends, the internet, play & joy, cloth, gifts, book, etc. And this armwavy entirely optional spending is the difference between 72.85 (such precision!) and 90% of your salary. In other words it is 17-18% or more than your rent. Think about that for a moment. Every month you spend more than your rent on friends, play, joy, books and good old etc. If you were to cut that in half, you could save 8 or 9% of your salary. Maybe after your next raise you can get that up to 10%. How can you cut that optional ""fun"" stuff in half? Well, I don't know, because I don't know what it is, and I suspect you don't either. So track it, for a month or two. Are you getting takeout food or coffee every day? Are you always the one who pays when you go out with friends? Do you eat in restaurants a lot? Do you always wear the latest fashions, buy $500 shoes, pay people to do your nails or dye your hair, buy a new phone every year, have the top end phone plan, top end cable plan, ... You have to know where that rent's-worth of money goes every month. Then you can figure out how to send some of it to savings instead. In some ways you are in a hard generation. Your parents didn't need to save for their retirement because they had you, and they know you will send money home for them. But you probably don't expect the same from the children you don't have yet, so you have to save for yourself. This is a challenge. If you were saving the money you send your parents, you'd be fine. Yet you don't want to reduce what you send, they need it. Still, people have faced bigger challenges and overcome them. Start by understanding where your fun money is going, then look at how to send some (aim for half) of that to savings instead. You won't regret it."


Hmmm... I guess if my choice is representation with a vote or representation without a vote, that vote might be worth some money. On the other hand, I'd prefer option C - operate independent of the union and negotiate directly with the employer and pay no dues. It seems like it should be up to each individual employee to decide whether to be represented by the union. Out of curiosity, once a union has been established, is it possible for another union to come in, collect signatures, and force a vote to switch representation? Is it possible for a vote to dissolve the union to happen? Why is hiring a worker who wishes to be employed without union representation considered union breaking. The members of the union have a right to vest their bargaining power in the union, but why should someone not already in the union be forced to join in order to accept employment?


Yes, you did. Scroll up. Your defense as to why you aren't racist, despite saying overly racist things, was that you have black friends. Your defense right now is that you have black, brown, and yellow friends. It's like you don't take inventory of the last stupid thing you said when moving on to the current stupid thing you want to say. Again, how long are you going to try to convince me that your ignorant racist point of view is correct before you either take a look in the mirror, or shut the fuck up and move on with your ignorant racist life?


This could be a case of the new chip card technology and dealing with slow reimbursement turnaround time. I recently visited a restaurant who was not using the chip technology, and it refused my card after several attempts. I found out from my bank it was because the restaurant was not set up for chip and I had not eaten there before....I know at the other end it takes far longer for the funds to get to the merchant; banks don't want to part with other people's money.


At its simplest level it's an application of basic statistics/probability: Suppose you have n independent and identically distributed assets with the return on asset i denoted R_i which has mean m and variance s^2 (same for all assets). You can easily weaken these assumptions but I make them to simplify the exposition [Square brackets show a numerical example with n=20, m=8%, s=2%] if you invest in one of these assets you expect to get a return of m [8%] with standard deviation s [2%] (so you expect with probability 95% (approx) to get a return between m-2*s and m+2*s. [between 4% and 12%] Now suppose you split your money equally among the n-assets. Your return is now R = (1/n)\Sum{i=1}^n R_i your expected return is E(R) = (1/n)\Sum{i=1}^n E(R_i) = (1/n)\Sum{i=1}^n m = m [8%] the variance of your return is Var(R) = Var( (1/n)\Sum{i=1}^n R_i ) = (1/n^2)\Sum{i=1}^n Var(R_i) = n * s^2 / n^2) = s^2/n So, the standard deviation is SD(R) = Sqrt(V(R)) = s/Sqrt(n) [2%/Sqrt(20) = 0.44%] Now, with 95% probability we get a return between E(R)-2*SD(R) and E(R)+2*SD(R) [between 7.12% and 8.88%]. This interval is smaller than when we invested in the single asset, so in effect with this portfolio we are achieving the same return m [8%] but with lower variance (risk) [0.44% instead of 2%]. This is the result of diversification. You can assume the assets are not independent (and most book expositions of this topic do indeed do that). In that case the calculation is modified because the variance of the portfolio now depends on the correlation between returns, as does the reduction in variance caused by the diversification. If assets are negatively correlated the result of the diversification will be more reduction in risk and vice versa. You can also assume the assets are not identically distributed and the above analysis does not change too much. You might look for some references on CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model) or portfolio theory but broadly these are based on what I have described above - finding the portfolio with minimum variance for a given return by investing proportionally in treasury bonds and risky assets.


This has been made clearly many times in this thread and others, and by myself. I refuse to go around in circles so I will not repeat myself after this: long term investors need to be able to liquidate their assets. Since long term investors by definition trade infrequently, short term speculators are NECESSARY to perform this function. Your argument at times has been that you don't need ULTRA short term speculators, and mine is that the ULTRA sort term speculators have not been shown to do anything negative to long term investors so banning them is reactionary. Short term speculators DO make money out of long term investors and that is by design - they are the very reason markets exist; otherwise people would stick to direct investment!


According to many sources **[Shopify](https://shopify.com/?ref=spurit)** is one of the most popular platform to start your business. If you have never tried something similar, then I personally recommend you to try as they have 14 days trial period. What I personally like in Shopify is the ability to add new apps for functionality increase. For instance, in case you are looking for pre-order function and you don't want to be involved in some techy things, then you can simply install this: * **[Pre-Order Manager](https://apps.shopify.com/pre-order/?ref=spurit)**. A preorder button with a beautiful title will show up on the out of stock product page and you will be able to easily control preorders. That's one of the examples about how it's easy to add something new to your Shopify Store. Also there are tons of themes available which allows you to customize your Store and make it unique. Of course there are some limitations in Shopify, but it's not a big problem and can be solved in many cases.


> taxation has caused unproductive investing practices It certainly can. It's well established that capital gains taxes do cause investors to leave capital in mediocre or even fairly-bad investments, as suffering, say, a potential 20% loss for business reasons can be preferable to creating a guaranteed, irreversible 37% loss due to state and federal LTCG taxes.


"In *[United States vs. O'Hagan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._O%27Hagan)* the Supreme Court established the precedent of interpreting SEC rule 10(b) using the ""misappropriation theory"". The theory establishes that: > misappropriating confidential information for securities trading purposes, in breach of a duty owed to the source of that information, gives rise to a duty to disclose or abstain. You're correct that from a legal perspective the rules are anything but clear outside of company insiders. However, your own admission is consistent with what anyone in the securities industry knows is true - if you trade on material non-public information, you risk being charged. I think most would conclude that it's unethical irrespective of the letter of the law. It damages the integrity and functioning of markets. Furthermore, if the law was clarified, I think it's highly unlikely it would state ""trading on material non-public information is permissible for anyone who is not a company insider"". Instead, I would expect it to be consistent with ""Trading on material non-public information is illegal. If in doubt, abstain."" And this is exactly what the government officials should be doing - abstaining."


Peer to peer lending isn't FDIC insured. You can lose all your investment with peer to peer lending, whereas you will not lose your deposited money in a savings account, even if it doesn't grow very fast.


Well, I think the first negotiation tip would be not to advertise that all you do is million dollar contracts. If everyone knows that's what you're going to settle on, nobody is going to be willing to offer any more than that.


- heavy sour cream - cheese - From gross corn fattened factory cow - greasy meat - From gross corn fattened factory cow - Carbo Bomb: Thick bleached white flour tortillas, white rice, beans(which are healthy if fresh) - Fried Doritos chip shell - Drink: High Fructose Corn Syrup Soda - Preservative filled salsa packs The healthiest thing about taco bell is not even healthy: - hyper GMO tomatoes & iceberg lettuce. Note: I'm not against it - it tastes good - but let's not kid ourselves here...


"In Orange County (southern California), one agent has blogged pretty extensively about using rental parity to determine when it is time to rent or buy. Rental parity is achieved when the cost of renting is equal to the cost of owning; in theory, if you buy when a home is selling above rental parity, you're overpaying, and you'd be better off renting. He has many posts on the subject; a few you might care to read would be this one, and this other one. You might get a better sense of how to calculate rental parity by looking at an example or two. There is also the NY Times calculator mentioned in other responses, and the Patrick.net calculator. Be aware, the calculators are garbage in, garbage out. In other words, you have to consider the input carefully. In particular, I found the defaults on the Patrick.net calculator were not realistic. So far as I am aware, the agent at OCHousingNews does not make his calculations public (though I have never actually asked). He's using a spreadsheet which I have never seen. That is another option, if you care to do this kind of analysis yourself. Search around, you can find a spreadsheet that someone has posted here and there. But keeping something like that updated is not trivial. In my experience, in practice, it's difficult to be totally rational and mathematical when it comes to many decisions, and as other respondents have noted, where you live is one of those decisions. Too, saying ""buy when rental parity is achieved"" is sort of like saying ""buy low, sell high,"" as though it were perfectly clear when stocks are at a bottom and/or a peak. In our case, we bought a house about 12 years ago, before rental parity was being discussed in the blogsphere. Looking back, we supposedly bought at the wrong time, according to that agent's rating system, but it turned out fine for us. Our house has appreciated, whereas the S&P 500 is basically where it was 12 years ago. Had we been thinking in terms of rental parity, we might not have bought at that time. Of course, your mileage may vary, and hindsight is always 20/20. I think the most helpful advice I can offer was something I got from a real estate agent around the time we were looking. He told me ""when you're looking at houses, be sure you like the floor plan and the location, because those two things are not easily changed."" That advice really helped us to see things more clearly."


As described by the other answers, there are pretty harmless explanations for that behaviour. You could be slightly worried because he gave you exceptionally good deals for both instruments, but that's neither here nor there. Maybe he simply prices all items way up to be able to give a great discount on either sale. You can't ever know; the actual price you pay in the end is what counts. What I would do: If I expect in advance (or if I notice during the negotiation) that I am put under pressure in this way, I usually try to do exactly the same, in reverse. That is, I take a minute to explain up front that I will not, under any circumstance, buy right now, but that this is a purely informational event. I will make sure not to have my money/card with me. Any high-end salesman worth his sale should have no problem with that at all. Money aside, you are shopping for something that will mean a lot to you. The salesman is not some peddler of arbitrary wares. Everybody understands that not only do you not want to pay too high a price, but also that you want to really get the item you want, and want to be happy with it for a long time. This is a tough decision, often, and if the salesman cannot, or does not want to respect that, then it would be a clear signal for me that dubious things are going on. In fact, you would probably be unhappier if you got the wrong item for a great price than if you got a great item for a slightly too-high price. That is something you should probably not tell the salesman ;), but can keep in mind. So getting the greatest deal of all times is probably not so high on your priority list.


SQL you can literally google to proficiency. You do not need a class. Just get access to an environment with some data, start with a Select * statement, and learn 1 syntax for where clauses, 2 joins, 3 subqueries. Its beyond basic.


Add a few more cells to your header that list the interest paid in in the next 3 to 4 years on your current mortgage. Use the cumulative interest function from your spreadsheet program. In the main body of your spreadsheet, add columns that summarize the total cost over 3-4 years for each loan. Add columns that list the interest cost, total cost of interest + refi cost, and the difference between that approach and the interest costs from your current loan. Add 6 columns total: a set for 3 years and a set for 4. Something like this: Repeat that 3 year block off to the right and plug in the 4 year numbers. You requested that we factor in a 3.5% penalty against the money that goes to the discount fee. You could do that by adding a column that calculates this, like Joe described in his answer. Add that 3.5% accrual into the total calculation above, which in turn will knock down the amount of savings for each refi loan. PS: How are you going to earn 3.5% over 48 months?


It is an issue of both utilization and average age of accounts. If your cards with $0 balances on them are: A) newer cards than the ones you are carrying balances on and you don't want them B) much lower limit cards than the ones you are carrying balances on then you can raise your score by closing them, as the utilization change won't be a large factor and you can raise the average age of your open accounts.