It depends on the finances involved, but particularly if you're not billing anything right now and may have no revenue this year, it's probably a good idea to bill his company. This is in part because some deductions or other tax treatments are only allowed if you have revenue and/or income. The biggest example I can think of is the Solo 401k - you can only contribute up to your self employed income. If you're planning to contribute to one (and you should, they're amazingly powerful tools for saving for retirement and for reducing your tax burden), you will have to have some revenue in order to have something to pay yourself with. I don't believe you have to charge him, though, if it makes more tax sense not to (for example, if his business is operating at a loss and cannot benefit from expensing it, but you'd then have to pay taxes on your own income from it).


I don't think the location of the funds is any of your concern. You're buying a CDI, which is: Australian financial instruments The US has no jurisdiction over you, being you an Australian, so unless you own a US-based asset (i.e.: a real-estate in the US, or a US brokerage account), US tax laws shouldn't matter to you.


They make money off you by increasing the spread you buy and sell your stocks through them. So for example, if the normal spread for a stock was $10.00 for a buy and $10.02 for a sell, they might have a spread of $9.98 for the buy and $10.02 for the sell. So for an order of 1000 shares (approx. $10000) they would make $0.02 per share which would equal $20.00.


He's comfortably middle class, but not wealthy. The Tesla was purchased in a multi-owner shared arrangement, and the solar panels were installed by a company that supplies the capital for the panels with a long-term agreement to supply power to the homeowner and takes care of the more complex business agreements to feed back power to the grid. The situation on paper looks like a long term break even - but we'll have to see. Overall, even if he's paying a bit more in electric cost, the arrangement gives a lot of stability in exchange. To me it's clear that going electric car + renewable electric is a long-term good on the principle of becoming nationally independent from geopolitical enganglements, but also more towards becoming individually independent in terms of being isolated from instability in gas prices, utility prices, and even in times of natural disaster.


"Their definition of a brand ""disappearing"" is extremely weak. It just has to meet one of these criteria: * a rapid fall-off in sales and steep losses; * disclosures by the parent of the brand that it might go out of business; * rapidly rising costs that are extremely unlikely to be recouped through higher prices; * companies that are sold; * companies that go into bankruptcy; * companies that have lost the great majority of their customers; or * operations with rapidly withering market share. By that definition a brand like MySpace has ""disappeared"" in each of the last four years. In fact, they just put Myspace on their list last year and marked it as one of the companies they correctly predicted because it was sold."


"I doubt it's a scam. It would be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to pay someone money using PayPal and end up getting more than you paid back. PayPal doesn't have the concept of ""pulling"" money without the owner of the account signing up for a subscription. Otherwise the owner must ""push"" the payment to the recipient. So, it is very likely that someone simply mistyped an email address which happens to be an alias of yours (since the periods are optional in gmail addresses). As for what to do, I think you've already done the right thing by contacting both PayPal and the sender."


"Keep in mind this is an opinion piece. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) would have indemnified Argentina from virtually all of these suits. FISA lets sovereigns opt out of its protections, which Argentina did. Argentina waived immunity from suit in New York state or federal court and its immunity from the attachment of its assets within the US to satisfy a judgement. In this particular case, it also agreed this issuance of debt would ""rank *pari passu* [with its other debt obligations] and ***without any preference among themselves***"" (emphasis added) (1994 Bondholder Agreement). This is the clause the court used when deciding whether Argentina could pay some bondholders and not others. It is fairly unambiguous that bondholders are all on equal footing. It also added that these debt obligations would rank at least equally with Argentina's other unsecured debt. This was not a coincidence. By issuing in New York and subjecting itself to New York/US law, Argentina was able to obtain a *much* more favorable borrowing rate. Argentina was the drafter of the debt agreement where it promised to treat all borrowers the same, and it was the party who waived its immunities inherent under US law. It benefited greatly from the substantially lower borrowing costs it enjoyed by doing so. Because Argentina waived its sovereign immunities, the court looked to the language in the contract. It states the debt will all be treated the same, and will be subject to NY/US law. It is hard to say it is ""unfair"" for a New York court to enforce a contract Argentina wrote and then subjected itself to New York jurisdiction/law. NOTE: Three US government agencies sided with Argentina (Justice, State, Treasury), claiming FSIA should at least partially apply regardless of waiver. They made mostly policy arguments about how sovereigns should enjoy at least partial immunity. Argentina's debt contract was very liberal with its waiver of sovereign immunity, so it is not surprising the court looked to the actual contract when deciding what rights bondholders have."


"This reminds me of what Digg did when they tried to force ads on to users and displaced part of the social aspect of Digg. The users left in droves. I'm sure they were thinking ""surely all these eyeballs must be worth a fortune!"" They in fact were not. Social websites will likely never be big business. As soon as they try to fully monetize it all falls apart. They all think they can get the same ARPU as Google. They can't. There is one Google. There is only one company that arrived first at the full-scale realization that during a search is the best possible time to place an ad. When the primary interaction sought is social then every ad simply gets in the way. And that friction builds as the company tries harder and harder to inject the ads between the user and the social. Having said that, Facebook can do fine. They will likely make enough money to keep the servers running. They'll just likely never see Google level ARPU."


Let me start out by saying I know your pain. One of the most important things to do is have the basics in stock in your larder. They are the sorts of things that keep well, and you can make great simple meals from them whenever, without having to worry about them going off in a matter of days. A simple inventory like this - http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2006/12/06/the-well-stocked-kitchen-staple-foods-you-should-always-have-on-hand/ - can make a big difference. (This list is good, but check the comments for additional suggestions. There are a few extras that commenters reckon you should have and I think they are right - I certainly have more than just what's on that list.) And remember - frozen veg may or may not be as nutritious as fresh, but they are better than nothing.


Sure. But this wasn't the big secret you think. What's happening now is a result of (finally) a tougher line on corruption in Brazil. Remember Brazil is a country about 50 years behind the most developed countries in the world; the countries with the lowest corruption rates.


"> A better solution would be in invest in education and training so that you reduce the number of unskilled, low wage workers When everybody's ""skilled"", the bar for skilled workers go up. Used to be if you have a college degree you're set for a good job after graduation. Now everybody and their grandma has college degrees and they're just starting to find out that a large portion of those are essentially worthless when it comes to getting them well-paying jobs."


Bleh, most designers overwork what is a simple task. Wordpress, a theme and some tweaking cost almost nothing. I worked at a design shop they would charge a few grand a few landing pages that didn't convert. They were nice quality, clean code but were crap for interacting with a customer.


">All you have to do is survey the main cast of characters in finance and politics to assess the generational culpability. Dimon, Blankfein, Geithner - all Gen X. **Ummm, excuse me? But you're so full of SHIT it's coming out your ears.** [Baby Boom: ~1946.. ~1964](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom_in_the_United_States#Definition_of_the_boom_years) [Generation X: ~1964/65..~1982](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X#Date_range) **And as to your specific ""cast of characters"":** * [Jamie Dimon, born **1956**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Dimon) -- BOOMER. * [Lloyd Blankfein, born **1954**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Blankfein) -- BOOMER * [Timothy Geithner, born **1961**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Geithner) -- BOOMER Shall we go on? * [Bill Clinton, born **1946**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jefferson_%22Bill%22_Clinton) -- BOOMER * [George W. Bush, born **1946**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_w_bush) -- BOOMER * [Barack Obama, born **1961**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama) -- BOOMER and of course... * [Ben Bernanke, born **1953**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Bernanke) -- BOOMER Heck, let's even throw in... * [Paul Krugman, born **1953**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman) -- BOOMER * [Larry Summers, born **1954**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Summers) -- BOOMER ...and the list goes ON and ON (and the culprits are ALL Baby Boomers). --- You're right... Gen X wasn't ""raped"" -- Gen X was ""molested and abused in every way possible"" by it's older Baby Boomer siblings (who were EVER only concerned with ""getting off"" themselves -- hence they appropriately were called the ""me, Me, ME"" generation their entire live). And of course, nothing in that generation has changed -- they are STILL in charge, and are now ""molesting and abusing"" the NEXT generations -- their own children & grandchildren in Gen Y (and the still literal children of Gen Z, many of whom have yet to even be born)."


">eroding the 40-hour work week Ha. Ha. Ha. I made a Reddit post about the transformation from 9-5 into 9-6 once, and the responses basically indicate that the 40-hour work-week has been thoroughly eroded and mostly eliminated for a while. Nowadays, either you ""get"" 32 hours/week at the low end so your employer can avoid giving you benefits, or you work more than 40 hours/week. We need labor unions back."


"I appreciate your perspective, but I think it's fairly obvious that the ""made with 100% chicken"" thing is intended to hornswaggle, in some small way, consumers who aren't carefully evaluating food labels. There ain't no such thing as a crazy 50% chicken/turkey hybrid bird that could have contributed its meat to your chicken nuggets. If a thing is made with any chicken at all, then at some level it is ""made with 100% chicken."" Clearly we know the food manufacturer would prefer to say ""made with 100% chicken"" rather than ""made with chicken"" because while both are legal and both completely technically accurate, the former is the one that is used. The fact that they want to use it means that they are probably hoping people misinterpret the 100% to mean something it doesn't, because the 100% actually stands for nothing. The alternative to 100% is a logical impossibility."


f you want to start any web design franchise, your search ends with the eMerchant. You only have to get the clients from your region and the expert service will be provided by us. You will always get our sales and marketing support. You can make an adept use of our brand name to extend your franchise business.


This was my exact thought when I first heard. It just sounds like inflation to me & I don't understand the logic. If everyone on average gets say...a ~3% boost on their score, why wouldn't banks just adjust their standards by 3%?


Yes. However, I have little experience with that either, I have never finished anything of note. I know that I would be steamrolled by even writers of fanfiction. I compare my pretensions to a professional writer to that of a teen in his bedroom becoming a successful rockstar.


I saw lots of them out in NM a handful of years back. They looked great on paper, but I'm not sure they'd really hold up. Especially in some areas with more extreme weather. Plus, I'm a pig and like my electricity.


You must be rich. My condo was $98K. I paid about $2200 in mortgage interest last year. I opted to take the standard deduction instead. I make $80K a year and I cant even benefit from this deduction. It is really frustrating. I'm 30 with no kids and unmarried because I can't afford anything. Maybe when I'm 40 I can think about starting a family. If I'm lucky.


You would be surprised at how little coordination there is in some large companies. I remember when the Walmart store that I used to work at sent a company in to install these new electric hand dryers in the restrooms. Then, two weeks later, they started a complete remodel on the restrooms, ripping out the hand dryers that had just been installed. Clearly, someone knew that hand dryers were going to be installed, and someone knew that the restrooms were going to be renovated. But I imagine that the two parties never spoke to each other.


Depends. New York offices likely Target ivy league, but I was in the Midwest and not Chicago, so they were more focused on the prestigious schools in their market. The higher name the firm, and the more desirable the location, the more likely they target who you mention. For the remaining firms, they most often have relationships with local programs that they use to recruit and hire. How those relationships build can be name recognition like the ivy leagues, or on other factors


"I think you're thinking that ""in debt"" doesn't just mean ""owes a debt"" but somehow means ""owes more debt in total than the assets"". That condition, owing money without offsetting assets, is ""having a negative net worth"". If you have a mortgage then you have a debt and you are in debt. You may have a positive net worth, if you have equity in the house and your car and such like, and have cash in the bank. You may have a negative net worth if you owe more than you own. But either way you are technically in debt. Knowing that, it's not surprising that 75% of Americans are in debt. It's surprising that 25% are not. They have no credit card, no car loan, no mortgage, no line of credit, no student loans. Is it because they've paid all that off? Or because they are deadly poor and own nothing and can't be lent anything? You can't just say it's bad to have debt. It's bad to have too much debt, to have a negative net worth, to be in the habit of borrowing to finance a lifestyle you can't actually afford, and so on. But it's perfectly normal to have a debt or two. That's how our system mostly works."


Kids Electric Car is a leading supplier and exporter of ride on cars for children with a wide range of kid’s electric ride-on toy cars with 4v, 6v, 12v and 24v electric cars. We have been supplying high quality, durable and latest model licensed ride on car for kids since 2005. Our aim is to provide wholesalers with safe and long-lasting cars for children to enjoy. http://www.rideoncar.cn/products/ride-on-cars


I get paid a 50 cents more at my second job than my day job, and at the end of the week my take home pay from the latter is $20 higher. Thats a bullshit argument. $5 per hour is a lot of money, especially considering that a lot of people have been living paycheck to paycheck throughout Obamas never ending recovery. What makes a postman's hours $5 more valuable than a FedEx employee? By every measure, FedEx is a more productive and efficient entity than the US Postal Service. So why is the postman worth more? I'll tell you exactly why. The FedEx employee's compensation is needs based. FedEx does a certain amount of business, which requires a certain amount of labor, which commands a certain price in the labor market. FedEx does not pay more for labor than it has to, because FedEx must be an efficient organization to meet its customers price expectations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service The Postman's compensation is arbitrary, set by government officials with no direct accountability to customers. Because they know jack shit about logistics, Congress has mandated that the Postal Service offer services to the public at uniform price and quality. As such, it has continuously failed to manage its budget properly, to the tune of $5 to $10 billion dollar deficiets every year with a total mail volume that has declined 29% between 1998 and 2008. Why does the Postal Service exist? Because it makes your congressman feel good, and he's more than willing to burn your money on the pyre of his sentimentality and false morilization over the massive, arbitrarily created vested interest postal employees have in losing their above average pay hack jobs than for any dedication you percieve he has to the welfare of his constituents. If you want me to run down why I believe our government is not acting in our own personal best interests, the postal service is the perfect place to start.


"I am but one man but here's my ""use-case"": I setup my Alexa Dot in the kitchen/living room area and use it most for: - Asking it to play whatever I feel like listening to without fumbling over my phone with chicken hands - Asking it to set a variety of timers for whatever might be baking/cooking etc. - Keeping track of my grocery list as I inevitably run out of something mid-meal prep. - I often ask it do do simple math I can't be bothered with, or unit conversions Of course, there are most certainly other solutions to this but it just seemed like a simple one to some of my ""problems"". It's a nicety, of course not a necessity... I just like it. *Disclaimer* I'm extremely lazy and MOST of the time if I have to pause what I'm doing/drop what I'm holding, to reach for my cellphone or a paper list, I just wont. But like you said, to each their own!"


For the variegated requirements of our respected clients, we are engaged in providing Domestic RO Membrane in India that comprises several thin layers or sheets of film that are bonded together and rolled in a spiral configuration around a plastic tube. Our offered products are utilized in RO systems to remove dust particles and other impurities from water. Domestic RO Membrane in India Our entire range of Domestic RO Membrane is precisely designed in accordance with market norms. Along with that, these are highly acknowledged in the market for its perfect design, hassle free performance, less maintenance and durability.


> CO2 emissions have very little to do with temperature increases. Ocean acidification is bogus. Wow, I don't think I've seen anyone abandon their argument under serious challenge and present a new position either so quickly or blatantly.


Money aside, if there is career growth I say yes. I moved out to Maryland years ago for my first job as well, some of the suburbs are pretty nice. Learn how to cook the basics. That is where you will save money.


You can limit the value of your checking account tied to paypal by not putting money in that account. In fact, you should always limit the balance in your checking account to what you plan to spend, plus a reasonable buffer. Anything you have above and being that should be in separate accounts (both to minimize exposure as well as maximize your interest earned).


There were several incidences of cash shortages in the Danish system recently. On particular saturdays when the streets were bloated with shoppers, you could see the queues for the ATMs stretching for 40-50 yards, and people shaking their heads about why their cards didnt work in the shops. They have a separate national system to visa called Dankort which everyone is very proud of. But it is curiously prone to failures from time to time. Large cash transactions (over 10,000 DKK) are monitored and questioned verbally when withdrawn or deposited in banks. Interesting also how Danish banks are the most heavily leveraged in Europe...


And on the last sentence, it doesn't matter when or where the money was earned (money is fungible, so there's generally not even any way to tell), but you do have to have sufficient earned income (that's basically money you earn from working, not from dividends and interest or selling stock and the like) in the contribution year to cover the IRA contribution.


Some highly pessimistic things worth noting to go alongside all the stability and tax break upside that homes generally provide: Negative equity is no joke and basically the only thing that bankrupts the middle classes consistently en masse. The UK is at the end of a huge housing bull run where rents are extremely cheap relative to buying (often in the 1% range within the M25), Brexit is looming and interest rates could well sky rocket with inflation. Borrowing ~500k to buy a highly illiquid asset you might have to fire sale in case of emergency/job loss etc for 300k in a few years when lots of (relatively) cheap rental housing is available to rent risk free, could be argued to be a highly lopsided and dangerous bet vs the alternatives. Locking in 'preferential' mortgage rates can be a huge trap: low interest rates generally increase asset values. If/when they rise, assets fall in value as the demand shrinks, making you highly exposed to huge losses if you need to sell before it is paid off. In the case of housing this can be exceptionally vicious as the liquidity dramatically dries up during falls, meaning fire sales become much more severe than they are for more liquid assets like stock. Weirdly and unlike most products, people tend to buy the very best house they can get leverage for, rather than work out what they need/want and finding the best value equivalent. If a bank will lend you £20 a day to buy lunch, and you can just afford to pay it, do you hunt out the very best £20 lunch you can every day, or do you make some solid compromises so you can save money for other things etc? You seem to be hunting very close to the absolute peak amount you can spend on these numbers. Related to above, at that level of mortgage/salary you have very little margin for error if either of you lose jobs etc. Houses are much more expensive to maintain/trade than most people think. You spend ~2-5% every time you buy and sell, and you can easily spend 2-20k+ a year depending what happens just keeping the thing watertight, paid for, liveable and staying up. You need to factor this in and be pessimistic when you do. Most people don't factor in these costs to the apparent 'index' rise in house values and what they expect to sell for in x years. In reality no buy and hold investor can ever realise even close to the quoted house price returns as they are basically stocks you have to pay 5% each time you buy or sell and then 1-20% percent a year to own - they have to rise dramatically over time for you to even break even after all the costs. In general you should buy homes to make memories, not money, and to buy them at prices that don't cause you sleepless nights in case of disasters.


The details of the DJIA methodology is outlined in the official methodology document on their website. In addition, you will need their index mathematics document, which gives the nitty-gritty details of any type of adjustments that must be made. Between the two you should have the complete picture in as fine a detail as you want, including exactly what is done in response to various corporate actions like splits and structural changes.


Nope. Both the Nexus 4 and the Motorola Moto E do not have a consumer replaceable battery, unfortunately. While this did concern me in regard to my Nexus 4, obviously it wasn't an issue as my stupid butter fingers rendered the phone inoperable before battery life was reduced to a point where I needed to replace it. With the Moto E, since it was only $129 I suppose I don't mind that I'll most likely just replace the phone after several years regardless of the battery.


While it may not be your preferred outcome, and doesn't eliminate the income, in the event you find yourself in the path described here you have a way to defer gains to the future. but I would then want to buy another house as a rental If you sell this house and buy another investment property (within strict time windows: 45 days to written contract and closed in 180 days), you can transfer your basis and defer your gains via what is called a 1031 like-kind exchange


> So, why are you against Trump? I've answered almost all your questions up until this point. How about you answer my two? 1) [Did President Trump say he thought Medicare Part-D should use its market share to negotiate drug prices, enter a room with executives from the pharmaceutical industry, and then come out saying he now opposed Medicare doing so](http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-trump-drug-costs-20170202-story.html)? Yes or no? 2) Has President Trump created, championed, or even backed any policy that would require the United States to take active steps to prepare for the upcoming problems caused by global warming? Yes or no?


The cost of the popcorn is simply the hidden extension of the price the consumer pays for the movie ticket. Similar to the tips in the restaurant. And movie theaters do not compete by lowering the unit price. Instead to maintain the revenue per customer they try to offer more value - bigger screen, better sound, more comfortable seats, etc. That is why the price of the popcorn just like the price of the ticket itself does not go down in the competitive market.


Your best bet would be to find an independent Property and Casualty Insurance agent and buy through him/her. Insurance agents make a commission, yes - BUT - the cost to consumer is THE SAME whether you buy through an agent or through directly through the company. Any P&C agent would be happy to run your numbers for you and tell you what the cheapest deal is. Just make sure you find someone who writes for several different large insurers. Obviously, some P&C Insurance agents are slick salesy types, which can get annoying, but if you find someone nice, he or she can help you out at no cost to you (they are paid by the insurance company they place the business with). If you are straightforward with the agent about exactly what your needs, they can get you quotes quickly and save you a lot of time and hassle.


Well, China *will* slow at some point. Even if it's still growing briskly (4-5%) that drop will shrink global demand for resources. But $30-40/bbl? I don't know about that. I think there's an implied floor to prices now, thanks to some of the places we're getting oil from. It's simply too expensive. I know that the oil sands here in Canada are uneconomical below ~$60/bbl. Such low prices, then, would squeeze supply. I could see us riding $70-90/bbl for a few years though.


"Note: I am making a USA-assumption here; keep in mind this answer doesn't necessarily apply to all countries (or even states in the USA). You asked two questions: I'm looking to buy a property. I do not want to take a risk on this property. Its sole purpose is to provide me with a place to live. How would I go about hedging against increasing interest rates, to counter the increasing mortgage costs? To counter increasing interest rates, obtaining a fixed interest rate on a mortgage is the answer, if that's available. As far as costs for a mortgage, that depends, as mortgages are tied to the value of the property/home. If you want a place to live, a piece of property, and want to hedge against possible rising interest rates, a fixed mortgage would work for these goals. Ideally I'd like to not lose money on my property, seeing as I will be borrowing 95% of the property's value. So, I'd like to hedge against interest rates and falling property prices in order to have a risk neutral position on my property. Now we have a different issue. For instance, if someone had opened a fixed mortgage on a home for $500,000, and the housing value plummeted 50% (or more), the person may still have a fixed interest rate protecting the person from higher rates, but that doesn't protect the property value. In addition to that, if the person needed to move for a job, that person would face a difficult choice: move and sell at a loss, or move and rent and face some complications. Renting is generally a good idea for people who (1) have not determined if they'll be in an area for more than 5-10 years, (2) want the flexibility to move if their living costs rises (which may be an issue if they lose wages), (3) don't want to pay property taxes (varies by state), homeowner's insurance, or maintenance costs, (4) enjoy regular negotiation (something which renters can do before re-signing a lease or looking for a new place to live). Again, other conditions can apply to people who favor renting, such as someone might enjoy living in one room out of a house rather than a full apartment or a person who likes a ""change of scenes"" and moves from one apartment to another for a fresh perspective, but these are smaller exceptions. But with renting, you have nothing to re-sell and no financial asset so far as a property is concerned (thus why some real estate agents refer to it as ""throwing away money"" which isn't necessarily true, but one should be aware that the money they invest in renting doesn't go into an asset that can be re-sold)."


"The usual rule of thumb is that you should start considering refinance when you can lower the effective interest rate by 1% or more. If you're now paying 4.7% this would mean you should be looking for loans at 3.7% or better to find something that's really worth considering. One exception is if the bank is willing to do an ""in-place refinance"", with no closing costs and no points. Sometimes banks will offer this as a way of retaining customers who would otherwise be tempted to refinance elsewhere. You should still shop around before accepting this kind of offer, to make sure it really is your best option. Most banks offer calculators on their websites that will let you compare your current mortgage to a hypothetical new one. Feed the numbers in, and it can tell you what the difference in payment size will be, how long you need to keep the house before the savings have paid for the closing costs, and what the actual savings will be if you sell the house in any given year (or total savings if you don't sell until after the mortgage is paid off). Remember that In addition to closing costs there are amortization effects. In the early stages of a standard mortgage your money is mostly paying interest; the amount paying down the principal increases over the life of the loan. That's another of the reasons you need to run the calculator; refinancing resets that clock."


Before we were married my wife financed a car at a terrible rate. I think it was around 20%. When trying to refinance it the remaining loan was much larger than the value of the car, so no one was interested in refinancing. I was able to do a balance transfer to a credit card around 10%. This did take on a bit of risk, which almost came up when the car was totaled in an accident. Fortunately the remaining balance was now less than the value of the car, otherwise I would have been stuck with a credit card payment and no vehicle.


Can you isolate the market impact to just the Fed's quantitative easing? Can you rule out the future economic predictions of low growth and that there are reasons why the Fed has kept rates low and is trying its best to stimulate the economy? Just something to consider here. The key is to understand what is the greater picture here as well as the question of which stock market index are you looking at that has done so badly. Some stocks may be down and others may be up so it isn't necessarily bad for all equally.


"If I had to guess (since you provided little information about your loan repayment), I'd guess that you're on the ""Extended"" repayment plan for your $72k loan, and the ""Standard"" plan for your $30k loan. In general, there are 4 main kinds of student loan repayment plans This holds true for federal loans (Direct/Stafford/PLUS). Private loans may not have all of these options, or they may have more. Running your numbers, I get 300 payments of $500/mo at 6.8% interest for a $72,000 loan, and 120 payments of $345/mo at 6.8% interest for a $30,000 loan. Now, to address your issue of interest vs principal, you should notice that each month you pay, the interest payment is slightly lower, and the principal slightly higher. And if you make bi-weekly payments, you'll see that change a LITTLE bit more quickly (slightly smaller balance accruing interest for 14 days of the month) and you'll also pay slightly less over time."


but we were in middle of bashing them... you cant come in here and say they were just cleaning up house. Dont you know the ratings agencies in concert with all of american's poor encourages them to buy too much house via the CRA, that forced banks to rate mortgage backed securities as triple AAA. Sorry for that rant but a lot of the same people in here bitching about the rating industry will claim the markets didnt have anything to do with the recession it was all the government and the poor.


If a high mileage car has been thoroughly maintained with a credible service history, there is no reason to discard the vehicle because of a hypothetical future expense. Considering the low value of the vehicle, it would be prudent to also lower the cost of the repairs. U.S. car dealerships have a well-known reputation for charging significantly higher repair rates than independent repair shops. Lower the cost of the repairs: brakes can be done at independent shops for half what the dealer quoted. Sears can install a set of 4 tires on an '04 Accord for $331 out the door. It makes no financial sense to purchase costly repairs for a low-cost automobile when economical alternatives are available.


I don't see how this is an example of throwing more money at the problem. I see this as an issue of taking for-profit health insurance providers out of the equation, and making the U.S. government (i.e. the taxpayer) the sole payer for health care services in the United States. Just like almost every other developed nation does it.


Saw a user in another thread that thought his wealthy grandparents stayed rich because they didn't eat out a lot and kept a budget for basic expenses. It definitely wasn't their generational wealth and vast real estate holdings.


"Although is not online, I use a standalone version from http://jstock.sourceforge.net It got drag-n-drop boxes, to let me design my own indicators. However, it only contain technical analysis information, not fundamental analysis information. It does come with tutorial http://jstock.sourceforge.net/help_stock_indicator_editor.html#indicator-example, on how to to build an indicator, to screen ""Stock which Its Price Hits Their 14 Days Maximum"""


Your situation may be different if your employer contracts with a different company to manage these benefits (or manages them themselves), but I'll give you my experience. My employer contracts with WageWorks. I log on to the WageWorks site, select commuter options from a predefined list, e.g. public transit passes, gas debit cards, parking passes, etc. and the cost of my choices is automatically deducted from my paycheck each month, up to the limit. WageWorks either sends me whatever I purchased in the mail or reloads the card automatically, and the process continues each month. In my case, I couldn't use this to purchase a ticket for someone else, but I could choose the subway option for myself and let another person use it.


หนังโป๊ ไม่ใช่ว่าในประเทศ ในสังคมใดๆ จะมีการเผยแพร่ตามความต้องการใดๆ ก็ได้ แต่ละประเทศนั้น ย่อมมีกฎหมายที่ปกป้อง ปกปิด และห้ามปราบกันอยู่ เพราะสังคมในแต่ละประเทศนั้น ไม่ได้ยอมรับเรื่องนี้โดยกว้างขวาง และหลากหลาย บางประเทศที่ปกครองด้วยระบบต่างๆ หรือแม้แต่ศาสนา ที่ไม่เหมือนกัน ทำให้เรื่องประเภท หนังโป๊ อิโรติก ไม่ถูกยอมรับกันมากนัก แต่เชื่อเถอะว่า ในทุกประเทศนั้น ย่อมต้องการแพร่ขยายเผ่าพันธุ์ของมนุษยชาติทั้งนั้น ไม่ว่าจะเป็นการปกครองระบบ หรือศาสนาใดๆ ก็ตาม นั่นเพื่อการดำรงอยู่ของมวลมนุษยชาติ การจะมองว่าเป็นเรื่องที่อนาจาร ก็จะดูพูดได้ไม่เต็มปากซะทีเดียว เมื่อในบางประเทศ ซึ่งเรียกได้เต็มปากเลยว่า เป็นประเทศที่พัฒนาแล้ว กับใช้เรื่องหนังโป๊ ต่างๆเหล่านี้ เป็นการศึกษา เผยแพร่ไปในทางสร้างสรรค์ ไม่ว่าจะเป็นการคุมกำเนิด กับบางครอบครัวที่มีลูกมาก จนเลี้ยงไม่ไหว ประชากรบางประเทศ เพิ่มมากขึ้นสวนทางกับเศรษฐกิจและขนาดของประเทศ รวมไปถึงคุณภาพของประชากร ที่ด้อยลง สิ่งต่างๆเหล่านี้ ควรศึกษาไว้เพื่อที่จะแก้ปัญหาต่างๆ ไม่ใช่แค่คิดว่ามันเป็นแค่เรื่องลามกอนาจารทั่วไป ถ้าจะมองเหล่านั้น มันก็เปรียบเสมือนการเรียนวิชา สุขศึกษาทั่วไปนี่เอง เพราะเรื่องเหล่านี้ ต้องเป็นที่แพร่หลาย ทั้งการให้ความรู้เรื่องคุมกำเนิด รวมไปถึงโรคติดต่อต่างๆ ที่ถูกแฝงมากับเพศสัมพันธ์ต่างๆ ซึ่งแน่นอนว่า สิ่งต่างๆเหล่านี้ เมื่อมันเกิดขึ้น และระบาด หากไม่มีความรู้เท่าทัน กับสิ่งที่มันจะเกิดขึ้นนั้น ย่อมยากที่จะรักษา อะไรที่ควรป้องกันได้ก็ควรที่จะป้องกันการเกิดปัญหาไว้ก่อน หนังโป๊ บางเรื่องอาจจะเห็นได้ชัด มีการป้องการโรคติดต่อต่างๆ ทางเพศสัมพันธ์ โดยการใส่ถุงยางอนามัย แทบจะน้อยมากที่เราจะไม่เห็น เพราะการผลิตอุตสาหกรรมหนังเหล่านี้นั้น ผู้ผลิตบางที่ก็แฝงแง่คิดให้เห็น และให้คนตระหนักถึงความสำคัญ ทั้งการติดต่อทางเพศสัมพันธ์ หรือว่าจะเป็นการป้องกันการคุมกำเนิด ที่เราไม่ได้ตั้งใจให้มีขึ้นมา ซึ้งจะเห็นได้เยอะจากสังคมปัจจุบันในบางประเทศ ที่ไม่มีการให้ความรู้และการยอมรับในสังคมมากนัก จึงมีการเกิดของประชากรก่อนวัยอันควรเป็นจำนวนมาก ดังนั้น เราน่าจะให้ความสำคัญกับสิ่งเหล่านี้ แฝงในหนัง มากกว่าจะใช้เพื่อกระตุ้นทางเพศเท่านั้นเอง ใช่ว่าเรื่องเหล่านี้จะถูกยอมรับไปเสียหมด บางสังคมนั้นยังหัวโบราณกัน และในบางประเทศก็ไม่ได้ถูกได้ยอมรับให้เผยแพร่หนังโป๊ ได้ทั่วไป ซึ่งยิ่งกฎหมายประเทศไหนที่มีความผิดรุนแรง ผู้ผลิตหรือเผยแพร่ ก็ได้รับโทษหนักกันด้วยเช่นกัน ใช่ว่าจะโทษแต่ ผู้ผลิตหรือผู้เผยแพร่อย่างเดียว องค์ประกอบหลายๆอย่าง มันก็มิได้ถูกมองว่าหนังโป๊ เป็นสิ่งที่ผิด หรือเลวร้าย มันอยู่ที่มุมมอง กับการใช้สติปัญญาในการเสพสื่อเหล่านี้ คนที่ดูเพื่อเป็นประโยชน์ ไม่ได้เกิดโทษต่อผู้อื่น ก็ไม่เป็นไร แต่สังคมมักจะเหมารวม ว่าคนเหล่านั้นผิด โดยที่ไม่ศึกษาข้อมูลต่างๆอะไรเลย http://www.24hrseed.com/


Today Richard Steggall runs Urban FT, Inc., that is acknowledged as the superior and one among the fastest developing providers of Digital Banking solutions to around 80 Community and Regional Banks as well as Credit Unions in the United States, and plenty of international brands. He is one of the members of the Young Entrepreneur Council.


Their argument is that what Amazon is doing may have monopolistic effects, allowing them to charge more for shittier food thanks to reduced competition. I don't agree in this case, but it is true that monopolies are anti-competitive in nature which hinders innovation and hurts customers. That's why antitrust regulation exists, to allow competition.


This is more anecdata in support of an interesting point: most of the wealthy are no smarter than rhe average dumbass, and just as susceptible to hysterical demagoguery. If Obama had raised taxes on the wealthy - Congress made that inpossible - the rates would have gone up to where they were under Clinton, or during the mid-Reagan years, both times during which the wealthy did very well indeed. Also, it could be that most jewelry store customers were nouveau riche barely hanging on anyway, or just inept wealth funded by home-equity loans and Ponzi debt. Many of those poseurs were hitting the day of reckoning around 2008-2009, due to the evaporation of bubble housing wealth; Obama would have made a nice scapegoat for their own financial ineptitude.


"normally getting seated next to a particular guest at a particular dinner isn't described as ""privilege"", and it's not idiosyncratic to call that ""luck"" edit: i don't mean to be pedantic. rather, you seem to really be trying to whitewash, minimize, and explain away the luck. another example: ""made his path to success easier"" as if that path was guaranteed, but more difficult, absent his luck. i don't think he himself would agree with that."


Please built out our sales process, develop sales enablement materials, lead generation techniques, and account/target lists and we'll *maybe throw a few percent commission your way for the trouble*. businesses like this also tend to suffer from the classic dogwood problem Edit: dog food problem


If I do not have anyone in my car I am not getting paid. If I am not getting paid I am not working. It really is that simple. When you deliver packages you are getting paid to drive in between all points involved. FedEx drivers aren't insured on their way to work.


"It's actually quite refreshing to see someone lay part of their biases on the table when we would otherwise have to infer from their statements. One of the reasons I like blogs is because once I've mostly figured someone out I don't have to wonder about figuring out the biases of the authors. -Someone who holds positions that seem to be rather correlated to those of a ""small l"" libertarian."


> An aging population with a massive segment of the population preparing to retire and begin collecting social security for an average of 13 years each (benefits begin at 65, average life expectancy is 78). Population is growing through immigration, this is a non-issue. >Staggering levels of national debt that is only growing due to continued budget deficits. As it stands now, the national debt stands at over 100% of annual GDP, and that figure is only growing as the deficit remains huge. As long as we can make the interest payments with a little more we're fine. Truth be told it wouldn't be that hard, just re-allocate funds from other areas and increase revenue. Military being the most obvious cut, redo the entire tax system to raise revenue, which would only require political will. <Pfft... only> Infrastructure is just a resource allocation problem. >A population grown completely accustomed to a resource-intensive, globalized lifestyle relative to that enjoyed by almost any other country on Earth. This would require a shift in culture. Not as hard as you'd think, but it would take a good long time. >And finally, the combination of the game of economic dominoes unfolding in Europe and a slowing Chinese economy. There is a way out for this, again, political will will be required.


$230k. $230k. $230k. And that's just per person. Funny how conservatives attack the Dems for 'wasteful' spending on such frivolities such as social welfare and public health but approve this wasteful use of state funds to deliver a program of minimal overall benefit to The Wisconsin economy.


Specialization. Individual companies can specialize in e.g. engine design and manufacturing, or wing design and manufacturing, or composites. By outsourcing to specialist companies, Boeing aimed to capture their knowledge. The alternative is for Boeing to be a specialist in *all* the fields necessary to build an airplane. This is difficult from a purely technical point of view, and it reduces economies of scale.


Fidelity, Charles Schwab, TDA, and just about every make online brokerage gives you massive amounts of free trades each year and when you sign up. Pretty much the same as 100+ free trades /yr over a 10 year period. Also, you get commission-free trade for the most popular ETFs, which is much more important. Lastly, if you care about free trades, you're probably investing poorly. Non-professionals shouldn't be making that many non-ETF trades in a year. Professional traders wouldn't blink over a tiny $5-10 commission fee.


You can withdraw from CPP as early as 60. However, by doing so, you will permanently reduce the payments. The reduction is calculated based on average life expectancies. If you live for an average amount of time, that means you'll receive approximately the same total amount (after inflation adjustments) whether you start pulling from CPP at 60, 65, or even delay your pension later. People may have pensions through systems other than CPP. This is often true for big business or government work. They may work differently. People who retire at 55 with a pension are not getting their pension through CPP. A person retiring at 55 would need to wait at least five years to draw from the CPP, and ten years before he or she was eligible for a full pension through CPP. Canada also offers Old Age Security (OAS). This is only available once you are 65 years old or older, though this is changing. Starting in 2023, this will gradually change to 67 years or older. See this page for more details. As always, it's worth pointing out that the CPP and OAS will almost certainly not cover your full retirement expenses and you will need supplementary funds.


I mean, I was a bartender for years in college, and on most Saturdays I'd work from 12PM-4AM in a giant crowd of sweaty, drunk and sticky 18-24 year olds. Friends of mine worked in warehouses, factories, construction, retail, you name it; the thing is, our presence and physical effort was a business necessity. I think the disconnect between our viewpoints is that you see the remote work option as a service solely benefiting the employee, which the employer has to bear at some hardship. My thought is that the option is mutually beneficial, and requiring 100% personal presence in the absence of a business case is an outdated ideology. Consider this: fewer on-site employees means fewer sites -- this translates to millions saved in rent, utilities, insurance, maintenance/administrative staff and IT infrastructure, etc. It also, as the article mentions, *vastly* expands the pool of available talent by removing geographical requirements. Not only that, the option to work from home is in and of itself a feature which lubes the ol' recruiting pipe, as I alluded to earlier. The overarching logic is that there should be a quantifiable advantage attached to a decision like this, and this advantage was, again, as the article mentions, discovered by IBM's own internal research efforts which supported remote work. It doesn't make a lot of sense strategically, but I haven't worked for IBM for years, so I couldn't tell you what internal issues they might be struggling with.


My grandfather owned a small business, and I asked him that very question. His answer was that year-end closeout is very time-consuming, both before and after EOY (end of year), and that they didn't want to do all that around Christmas and New Year.


Kodari Securities (KOSEC) has a unique approach towards investing. Kodari Securities understands that investing in the stock market requires a clear strategy. As an investor you need to compare different shares and understand how to buy and sell in the market. The stock market has no magic formulae’s to buying shares. An investor has to have the ability to equip themselves with knowledge. Kodari Securities is aware that the more knowledge an investor has, the higher their success rate.


Fund rebalancing typically refers to changing the investment mix to stay within the guidelines of the mutual fund objective. For example, lets say a fund is supposed to have at least 20% in bonds. Because of a dramatic increase in stock price and decrease in bond values it finds itself with only 19.9% in bonds at the end of the trading day. The fund manager would sell sufficient equities to reduce its equity holdings and buy more bonds. Rebalancing is not always preferential because it could cause capital gain distribution, typically once per year, without selling the fund. And really any trading within the fun could do the same. In the case you cite the verbiage is confusing. Often times I wonder if the author knows less then the reader. It might also be a bit of a rush to get the article out, and the author did not write correctly. I agree that the ETFs cited are suitable for short term traders. However, that is because, traditionaly, the market has increased in value over the long term. If you bet it will go down over the long term, you are almost certain to lose money. Like you, I cannot figure out how rebalancing makes this suitable only for short term traders. If the ETFs distribute capital gains events much more frequently then once per year, that is worth mentioning, but does not provide a case for short versus long term traders. Secondly, I don't think these funds are doing true rebalancing. They might change investments daily for the most likely profitable outcome, but that really isn't rebalancing. It seems the author is confused.


"We have a local bank that changed to a bill pay service. The money is held as ""processing"" when the check is supposed to be cut and shows as cleared on the date the check is supposed to be received. Because our business checking is with the same bank, we discovered recently that the although the check shows cleared from our account, the recipient has not received the paper check yet - and may not for 2-3 days. We discovered this because the payroll checks we write this way (to ourselves) never arrive on the due date but clear the business account. It appears to be a new way for banks to ride the ""float"" and draw interest on the money. It happens with every check processed through the bill pay system and not with electronic transfers."


You can pay with a cashiers check or personal check. You can even pay cash, or combine payment methods. However, in the USA if you give the dealership $10,000 or more in actual cash, they will be required to fill out a form 8300 with the IRS.


Perhaps look into how prohibition worked out for distillers and brewers. It doesn't take something as arcane as outright prohibition to ruin an industry. Onerous rules and regulations will do it as well. Either way Romney or Obama are going to do the exact same things, and this guy is just a useful partisan idiot.


"Jesus christ. ""We need to consume more or the GROWTH will come to a dramatic halt."" What about fine? What about things being big enough? What about focusing on something other then unhinged growth? Economists may often be better then most people at understanding the big picture, but man sometimes just staring at the numbers makes you so blind."


"A bit strange but okay. The way I would think about this is again that you need to determine for what purpose you're computing this, in much the same way you would if you were to build out the model. The IPO valuation is not going to be relevant to the accretion/dilution analysis unless you're trying to determine whether the transaction was net accretive at exit. But that's a weird analysis to do. For longer holding periods like that you're more likely to look at IRR, not EPS. EPS is something investors look at over the short to medium term to get a sense of whether the company is making good acquisition decisions. And to do that short-to-medium term analysis, they look at earnings. Damodaran would say this is a shitty way of looking at things and that you should probably be looking at some measure of ROIC instead, and I tend to agree, but I don't get paid to think like an investor, I get paid to sell shit to them (if only in indirect fashion). The short answer to your question is that no, you should not incorporate what you are calling liquidation value when determining accretion/dilution, but only because the market typically computes accretion/dilution on a 3-year basis tops. I've never put together a book or seen a press release in my admittedly short time in finance that says ""the transaction is estimated to be X% accretive within 4 years"" - that just seems like an absurd timeline. Final point is just that from an accounting perspective, a gain on a sale of an asset is not going to get booked in either EBITDA or OCF, so just mechanically there's no way for the IPO value to flow into your accretion/dilution analysis there, even if you are looking at EBITDA/shares. You could figure the gain on sale into some kind of adjusted EBITDA/shares version of EPS, but this is neither something I've ever seen nor something that really makes sense in the context of using EPS as a standardized metric across the market. Typically we take OUT non-recurring shit in EPS, we don't add it in. Adding something like this in would be much more appropriate to measuring the success of an acquisition/investing vehicle like a private equity fund, not a standalone operating company that reports operational earnings in addition to cash flow from investing. And as I suggest above, that's an analysis for which the IRR metric is more ideally situated. And just a semantic thing - we typically wouldn't call the exit value a ""liquidation value"". That term is usually reserved for dissolution of a corporate entity and selling off its physical or intangible assets in piecemeal fashion (i.e. not accounting for operational synergies across the business). IPO value is actually just going to be a measure of market value of equity."


"It becomes ""yours"" when it leaves the trust. Until that point the Trust owns the shares attributable to your account. There are some different arrangements out there, in the cases of some of the smaller 401(k) providers, where the assets are held in annuity products, or even individual annuities in the case of 403(b) plans. To further answer the question, the trust and trustee own and hold the account before you take a distribution. In a lot of cases the 401(k) recordkeeper has a trust company that they use to serve as the custodian (person or entity who retains the assets). In some plans you have an individual Trustee or a Corporate Trustee. Those setups are not good for that person or company because they are ultimately responsible for backing the assets in the plan, and as you can imagine, leaving that responsibility to one person is not safe for that individual. Hope that helps, glad to answer any other questions you have!"


I'll be blunt.


Both are incorrect. What it says is if your fund value is 25,000 in first year; then this will earn 19.4% compound for 5 years. This is same as 142.5 absolute. The money invested in second year, will only earn for 4 years, compound interest of 19.4%. so on ... The 25000 invested last year only 19.4 for a year. The other aspect you are missing is when you pay 25,000; 4% goes towards charges. So you are only investing 24,000. Plus there is an amount towards life cover. Depending on age, around 1000 for one lacs. This means the investment is only 23000 or 23500. Generally it is not advised to buy ULIP. It is cheaper to buy term insurance plus mutual fund.


Lol. First you have taken many economics classes and now that I've had more it doesn't matter. [Let me give you an academic source regarding why academic communities often lean a direction away from me.](https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/-politically-correct-university_100224248924.pdf) Take some time to read it. It's very long and dense and should explain my position fairly succinctly. One thing you might notice is that in academics, socialism teachers more likely to be Marxist than conservatives. Would you agree that the academic field believes Communism is better than Capitalism because of that? You still have yet to argue anything regarding your first source. Is it a good source or have you abandoned it? If memory serves this started as a conversation about home ownership and we are now entrenched in minimum wages. No, the government should not manipulate the labor market of an economy because of perceived short-term improvements. It's a bad long-run policy. Sorry.


I can't tell if he's running something similar to a pyramid scheme >Everyone would work under the same Spartan conditions that Brito embraced. (In New York, Brito shares a large table with his head of sales and his finance chief.) “We always say the leaner the business, the more money we will have at the end of the year to share,” he said in a speech at Stanford in 2008. “I don’t have a company car. I don’t care. I can buy my own car. I don’t need the company to give me beer. I can buy my own beer.” That part is awesome though


The most obvious one these days is unexpected and extended unemployment. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, you are asking for trouble in this economy.


"> Honestly this all scans with the same naivety as the communists saying WELL IT HASN'T BEEN TRIED PROPERLY YET. No, it has the intellectual rigor of saying that if you want to claim something then you have to prove it, not parrot some propaganda that has been repeated endlessly without any proof. > Why not the east india company for example - got a royal charter to literally do whatever the hell it wanted. Doesn't get more free market than that. Royal charter. Free market. You can only have one. This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about. You can't attack the market for a fucking government-granted problem. No, that is not free market. And even if it were, it wouldn't come close to the deaths caused by states. Again, you bear the burden of proof here, not me. > Ultimately i find this philosophy unnecessarily reductionist, it lacks the nuance and resource flexibility to deal with shocks to the system such as external invasion or environmental catastrophe In what way? People don't suddenly cease to have resources to deal with these things just because their resources are not forcibly centralized. That doesn't follow. > what protection do you have from these private courts if someone is polluting your water supply? Your air? What defines 'your air' and 'your water'? The protection would be upholding private property rights, which is what would determine what ""your air"" and ""your water"" are. You resolve it by showing that they are polluting and that you have damages. The general population isn't going to respect a biased court that doesn't support the rights of private property against pollution. It's akin to asking what we'd do if a murderer went to his brother who supports a right to murder: you wouldn't use that court. Again, people overwhelmingly want protections against pollution and murder so there would be a market demand for courts that protect against these things. > I mean these are all hypothetical worst case scenarios Then compare them to the real life worst case scenarios of governments. It won't do to use some fictitious, worst-case example that isn't based upon reason and evidence against the not-so-bad examples of government. Make an apples-to-apples comparison and tell me what evidence or reason you have to believe that hundreds of millions of people would have died in a century without governments. “Anarchists did not try to carry out genocide against the Armenians in Turkey; they did not deliberately starve millions of Ukrainians; they did not create a system of death camps to kill Jews, gypsies, and Slavs in Europe; they did not fire-bomb scores of large German and Japanese cities and drop nuclear bombs on two of them; they did not carry out a ‘Great Leap Forward’ that killed scores of millions of Chinese; they did not attempt to kill everybody with any appreciable education in Cambodia; they did not launch one aggressive war after another; they did not implement trade sanctions that killed perhaps 500,000 Iraqi children. In debates between anarchists and statists, the burden of proof clearly should rest on those who place their trust in the state. Anarchy’s mayhem is wholly conjectural; the state’s mayhem is undeniably, factually horrendous.” - Robert Higgs"


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/need-proof-that-tax-cuts-promote-economic-growth-look-to-the-states/article/2638023) reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A new report released this week by the Tax Foundation - along with assessment of states&#039; fiscal health, economic performance, and population changes - confirm that states with lower taxes and reasonable levels of government spending have stronger economies and are more attractive for businesses and individuals. > The State Business Tax Climate Index is an annual ranking of state tax systems and how well they are structured to promote economic growth. > Big-government, high-tax, reckless-spending states such as Vermont, California, New York, and New Jersey find themselves at or near the bottom of tax climate and fiscal health rankings, as well as the bottom in economic outlook. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/78j193/need_proof_that_tax_cuts_promote_economic_growth/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~234422 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **State**^#1 **tax**^#2 **new**^#3 **economic**^#4 **fiscal**^#5"


> The value is that you have higher credentials that are tangible to a business. This is exactly what I am saying it does not do. What tangible benefits do you have form the business' perspective coming out of an MBA program? You don't learn shit in BSchool. It exists to allow the attendee to build their network and resume. Thats basically the entire value prop


Why the fuck would someone ever, in a million years, go to a place like BWW to watch a sporting event? I'm trying really hard and failing to come up with a reason for it. I know sports bars are a thing, and plenty apparently do okay, but BWW is setup such that you may or may not be able to see a screen and the sit down service means you can't really just park yourself there for a 3+ hour game. It seems like they have a sports bar theme, but you can't legit use it like a sports bar.


IMHO your thinking is spot on. More than likely, you are years away from retirement, like 22 if you retire somewhat early. Until you get close keep it in aggressive growth. Contribute as much as you can and you probably end up with 3 million in today's dollars. Okay so what if you were retiring in a year or two from now, and you have 3M, and have managed your debt well. You have no loans including no mortgage and an nice emergency fund. How much would you need to live? 60 or 70K year would provide roughly the equivalent of 100K salary (no social security tax, no commute, and no need to save for retirement) and you would not have a mortgage. So what you decide to do is move 250K and move it to bonds so you have enough to live off of for the next 3.5 years or so. That is less than 10% of your nest egg. You have 3.5 years to go through some roller coaster time of the market and you can always cherry pick when to replenish the bond fund. Having a 50% allocation for bonds is not very wise. The 80% probably good for people who have little or no savings like less than 250k and retired. I think you are a very bright individual and have some really good money sense.


Late to the party, but it's just improving your cost basis in a defined risk trade even further. If you want to put up less risk capital but want to test the waters, this can be one way to do it. Another could be buying cheap OTM butterflies or financing a further otm option with the basis reduction from the debit spread if you want to gamble a bit further and venture into 15-20 delta positions. Usually, I am doing debit spreads with a buying atm and selling a couple strikes further otm or at least at the most liquid strikes, but if it's a high flier, it can be disappointing, but a good trade. If you're more of a contrarian in where you buy your calls/puts, it's absolutely a good way to lessen your risk on a calculated bet.


"Yes. Bonds perform very well in a recession. In fact the safer the bond, the better it would do in a recession. Think of markets having four seasons: High growth and low inflation - ""growing economy"" High growth and high inflation - ""overheating economy"" Low growth and high inflation - ""stagflation"" Low growth and low inflation - ""recession"" Bonds are the best investment in a recession. qplum's flagship strategy had a very high allocation to bonds in the financial crisis. That's why in backtest it shows much better returns."


I remember reading that [he was responsible for siri](http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-forstall-apple-maps-2012-9) and that launch also didn't go so well. I guess Apple figured that 0 for 2 is better than 0 for 3 so better to get rid of his ass now before he fucks up again. And from other reports, people are cheering his departure ( [it's said that Forstall's coworkers were so excited to show him the door that they volunteered to split up his workload](http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3574022/apple-scott-forstall-ios-6-maps-apology-letter)) so don't see how this is a bad move, other than Google or Samsung might pick him up, which I guess might be bad news for the apple crowd.


The rate itself is too small and the difference is small as well ... The cost of switching, even one visit to the Bank B, would cost you around $50 just to open an account you would have to visit once ... Think of changing if there are other benefits [like utility payments online, or integrated brokrage accounts etc] if they are same, just stick with it.


Sounds like a case of false causality. If somebody is taking the time to sign up at opt out sites, then that same person is probably making other smart decisions with their credit, causing scores to rise. Optoutprescreen.com does not help your score, the other actions taken might. People seeing different results can probably be tied to the timeframe they signed up. People who signed up then took care of their credit vs. people whose credit was already good and then signed up. A 10 pt bounce one way or the other is not significant.


There is a tax treaty between Canada and the US that recognizes RRSPs as retirement accounts. You won't be taxed on the gains in your RRSP like you would be if it was in a TFSA. So you don't really have to do anything (except fill out a form for the IRS every year). The problem that usually arises is if you want to buy something else. I don't know of any Canadian brokerage that will sell products to a US resident. It's a question of where they're licensed. However the SEC has issued an exemption so you can try to argue with your broker to get a trade done. Link to SEC order With such a small amount in the account you may be paying fees or have it invested in funds with higher fees. You will have to do the math on whether or not you should just withdraw the money and invest in cheaper funds and accounts in the US. When you withdraw the money Canada will withhold a flat rate of 25% or in some circumstances 15%. For more info go to Serbinski (a cross border tax specialist).


Unless you are getting better than a 2.95% return on that money market account. Pay cash. That's the purely logical way to make the decision. However if it were me I'd pay cash anyway just because I like the idea of not owing money and having the hassle of dealing with a payment every month.


I mean if he signed a non-compete clause as a part of the contract, he's boned. I still think it's silly on Sony's part though because they fired him because the commercials didn't do anything for sales and he wasn't directly endorsing Nintendo nor does he have a contract with Nintendo. They're just really trying to throw off any momentum the WII U is about to gain because Sony knows it has the potential to kill the PS3 and they sure don't want to rush another console on to the market.


Stock dilution is legal because, in theory, the issuance of new shares shouldn't affect actual shareholder value. The other answers have explained fairly well why this is so. In practice, however, the issuance of new shares can destroy shareholder value. This normally happens when the issuing company: In these cases, the issuance of more shares merely reduces each shareholder's stake in the company without building proportional shareholder value.


I few years ago my company in the Washington DC area allowed employees to contribute their own pre-tax funds. The system at the time wasn't sophisticated enough to prevent what you are suggesting. The money each month was put on a special credit card that could only be used at certain types of locations. You could load it onto the Metro smart trip card, and use it for many months. Many people did this, even though the IRS says you shouldn't. But eventually the program for the federal employees changed, their employer provided funds were put directly onto their Smart Trip card. In fact there were two buckets on the card: one to pay for commuting, and the other to pay for parking. There was no way to transfer money between buckets. The first day of the new month all the excess funds were automatically removed from the card;and the new funds were put onto the card. If your employer has a similar program it may work the same way. HR will know.


I find myself doing well until I compare myself to someone else I think is doing well or better. I just bought a car on credit for the first time in 16 years. As a household we are making more than we ever have. With the exception of the car, we have no debt. If I don't listen to the news, I am happy. It's when I start listening to how dire things are, or when I start second-guessing my decisions, or when I wonder whether I will lose my job (for no other reason that anything is possible), that I begin to feel like the world is going to end. So, avoid Reddit and TV, stick to reading early 19th century novels, and we'll all be fine.


Stop trying to make money with your emergency fund. It's purpose is to sit there idly waiting for a bad day. A day when you need that cash (liquid) not in a bank or a line-of-credit. The few dollars you might make trying to chase interest/investments with your emergency fund aren't worth it if a true emergency came up and you couldn't get to your cash in time. Once you have a fully funded EF then start investing heavily. That's your future game plan. Not the EF.


"It sounds like you are describing ""seller-financed"" mortgages (also sometimes called ""self-financed"", where ""self"" is the seller). In essence the buyer and seller enter into a legal contract (a promissory note) that specifies the payment schedule, interest rate, etc. The nature of the agreement is similar to the kind of mortgage agreement you'd get from the bank, but no bank is involved; it's just an agreeement directly between the buyer and seller. If you search for ""seller-financed mortgage"" or ""self-financed mortgage"" you can find a good deal more info about this kind of arrangement. Here is a useful article from Investopedia, here is one from Forbes, and here is one from Nolo. Broadly speaking, the advantages and disadvantages of seller financing are two sides of the same coin: by doing the agreement yourself without bank involvement, you can cut out procedural red tape, delays, and requirements that a bank might insist on --- but in so doing you may expose yourself to risks that those procedures are designed to shield you from. Most obviously, as the seller, you receive only the down payment up front (not the entire purchase price, as you would if the buyer got a bank loan), and if the buyer doesn't follow through on the agreement, you're on your own as far as starting foreclosure, etc. You can read up on some of the linked pages for more details about the pros and cons. In general, as those pages note, seller-financed mortgages are relatively rare. A home is a big purchase, and if you don't know what you're doing it's easy to screw up in a way that could cost you a large amount of money if things go wrong."


Thinning scissors are also popularly called as thinning shears. It is an essential tool for hairstylists as well as the barbers across the world. Although, these shears are akin to that of traditional scissors, they vary by their form and use.


In addition to what others have said, I think it is important to consider that government retirement assistance (whatever it is called in each instance) is basically a promise that can be revoked. I talked to a retired friend of mine just yesterday and we got onto that subject; she mentioned that when she was young, the promise was for 90% of one's pay, paid by the government after retiring. It is very different today. Yes, you can gamble that you won't need the saved money, and thus decide not to save anything. What then if you do end up needing the money you did not set aside, but rather spent? You are just now graduating college, and assuming of course that you get a decently-paying job, are likely going to have loads more money than you are used to. If you make an agreement with yourself to set aside even just 10-15% of the difference in income right from the start, that is going to grow into a pretty sizable nest egg by the time you approach retirement age. Then, you will have the option of continuing to work (maybe part-time) or quitting in a way you would not have had otherwise. Now I'm going to pull numbers out of thin air, but suppose that you currently have $1000/month net, before expenses, and can get a job that pays $1800/month net starting out. 10-15% of the difference means you'll be saving around $100/month for retirement. In 35 years, assuming no return on investment (pessimistic, but works if returns match inflation) and no pay rises, that will still be over $40K. That's somewhere on the order of $150/month added to your retirement income for 25 years. Multiply with whatever inflation rate you think is likely if you prefer nominal values. It becomes even more noticable if you save a significant fraction of the additional pay; if you save 1/3 of the additional money (note that you still effectively get a 50% raise compared to what you have been living on before), that gives you a net income of $1500/month instead of $1800 ($500/month more rather than $800/month more) which grows into about $110K in 35 years assuming no return on investment. Nearly $400 per month for 25 years. $100 per week is hardly chump change in retirement, and it is still quite realistic for most people to save 30% of the money they did not have before.


"The ends justify the means? Do you even understand that phrase? Obviously the end is our open-faced sandwiches. So you're saying the means are...abuse? ""Means"" must be something *necessary*. Abuse is not a necessity. The means are the things required to make the animal grow to an edible size. Also, the ends can change. In Korea, pet theft for food does occur. By your logic, if someone stole your dog on Tuesday (when it would be morally reprehensible to abuse it) by Wednesday--when its end has been determined by the thieves as food--it's open season for beatings. Same dog, but a different situation (which it had no say in, obviously) makes it OK to abuse. Have fun with that argument in social situations. Don't forget to bring up your defense of gall-bladder draining and, I'm assuming, gorilla poaching."


"So item 1 The two investors leading the suit say ""it's because we want lots of control"" and sue founder. The standard share holders want equal voting - as would I. Founder appoints two new board members to ensure this happens. Item 2 the suit: The suit is to remove the ability to appoint new board members from the founder correct? After he has appointed two new ones to implement the changes the other shareholders want correct? But somehow the suit is ""on behalf"" of the other share holders? Do I have you explanation right?"


In 2011 fraudulent certificates were obtained from Comodo and DigiNotar[4][5], allegedly by Iranian hackers. There is evidence that the fraudulent DigiNotar certificates were used in a man-in-the-middle attack in Iran.[6] In 2012, it became known that Trustwave issued a subordinate root certificate that was used for transparent traffic management (man-in-the-middle) which effectively permitted an enterprise to sniff SSL internal network traffic using the subordinate certificate.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority#Subversion_of_CA


"Usually you need to switch accounts. Lower rate cards usually offer less generous benefits. I'd advise looking at the charts on credit card rates in the back of a magazine like ""Money"" or ""Kiplingers""."


Many colleges have offices that can help students find off campus housing. They will have information about rooms being let by families, and about houses being shared by groups of students. The biggest issue is that many of the best places were filled months ago. With only a month to go before classes start time is tight. You can also look for electronic listings organized through a campus newspaper. The advantage of going through university resources is that they will have more information regarding the types of students they are looking for. A house full of undergrads is different than a family house that rents only to young professors.


Truly decentralized and censorship proof, but not yet ready for prime time. https://akasha.world/ > As a decentralized application AKASHA deploys a next-generation information architecture born from the fusion of Ethereum and the Inter-Planetary File System. Thanks to these technologies we were able to create a planetary-scale information network immune to censorship by design, where your thoughts and ideas will echo throughout humanity’s existence.


"Capitalization rate and ""Net Profit margin"" are two different things. In Capitalization rate note that we are taking the ""total value"" in the denominator and in Net profit margin we are taking ""Revenue/Sales"". Capitalization Rate: Capitalization Rate = Yearly Income/Total Value For example (from Investopedia: ) if Stephane buys a property that will generate $125,000 per year and he pays $900,000 for it, the cap rate is: 125,000/900,000 = 13.89%. Net Profit margin: Net Profit margin = Net Profit/Revenue For example (from finance formulas): A company's income statement shows a net income of $1 million and operating revenues of $25 million. By applying the formula, $1 million divided by $25 million would result in a net profit margin of 4%. Although the formula is simplistic, applying the concept is important in that 4% of sales will result in after tax profit."


It's only symbolic if things continue as if nothing had happened. Once large segments of people start becoming poor, it ceases to be symbolic and starts becoming real. Will a Greek default be felt in the US? Hard to say, but probably not. Will it be felt in Greece? You bet it will.


"Step 1. Log onto chase.com Step 2. Click on the account in question Step 3. Add ""Outstanding balance"" to ""Pending charges"" Step 4. Pay said total amount With all the energy you spent trying to find out if they're doing something illegal, you could've resolved the original issue yourself and be done with it."


When you say patted down. Are you talking about extra security checks where they pull you out of line each time, or just when going through security? Cause if you choose to object to full body scans, you get a pat down every time?


All successful CEOs have one thing in common: They’re able to maintain a big-picture perspective. It’s also something successful moms have in common, says Zenovia Andrews, a [business](http://businessclarksville.com/business/how-to-run-your-home-like-a-ceo/2014/07/30/65318) strategist, speaker, author and mom who coaches [entrepreneurs](http://theshearingroups.org/) and CEOs on time and budget [management](http://theshearingroups.org/news/). “In business, CEOs implement a process that achieves efficient time and resource management in the most cost-effective way; sounds a lot like a mom, doesn’t it?” says Andrews, founder and CEO of The MaxOut Group, a company devoted to empowering and tea ching entrepreneurs development strategies to increase profits. “If every mom were a CEO, America would rule the world!” Andrews, author of the new book “All Systems Go – A Solid Blueprint to Build Business and Maximize Cash Flow,” (www.zenoviaandrews.com), suggests the following tips for moms to better manage money and time. - CEOs utilize apps, and so should CEO Moms. When a CEO’s personal assistant isn’t around or, if it’s a small business and she doesn’t have one, then apps do nicely. There are several apps for moms, including Bank of Mom – an easy way to keep track of your kids’ allowances. Set up an account for each child and track any money they earn for chores or allowance. The app also allows you to track their computer and TV time as well as other activities. - Measurement is the key to knowledge, control and improvement. CEOs have goals for their businesses and Moms have goals for their family members. In either case, the best way to achieve a big-picture goal is to identify action steps and objectives and a system for measuring progress. Want to improve your kids’ test scores, help your husband lose weight or – gasp – free some time for yourself? There are four phases to help track progress: planning, or establishing goals; collection, or conducting research on your current process; analysis – comparing information from existing processes with the new one; and adapting, or implementing the new process. - Understand your home’s “workforce.” A good CEO helps her employees grow and develop, not only for the company’s benefit, but for the employee’s as well. Most people are happiest when they feel they’re learning and growing, working toward a goal, which may be promotion within the company or something beyond it. When they feel the CEO is helping with that, they’re happier, more productive, more loyal employees. Likewise, CEO Moms need to help their children gain the skills and knowledge they need not only to succeed in general but to achieve their individual dreams. - A well-running household is a community effort; consider “automated” systems. In business, automated systems tend to be as clinical as they sound, typically involving technology. Yet, there’s also a human resource element. Automated systems are a must for CEO Moms, and they tend to take the form of scheduling at home. Whose night is it for the dishes, or trash? One child may be helpful in the kitchen, whereas another may be better at cleaning the pool. About the Author: Zenovia Andrews, www.zenoviaandrews.com, is a business development strategist with extensive experience in corporate training, performance management, leadership development and sales consulting with international clients, including Pfizer, Inc. and Novartis Pharmaceuticals. A sought-after speaker and radio/TV personality, she is the author of “All Systems Go” and “MAXOut: I Want It All.”


Probably because it's a question of Excel vs Access, not VBA vs SQL. You probably don't need VBA for any of the calcs that the OP mentions. Excel is the one tool everyone uses in Finance. CR and SSRS require tools and permissions that the average guy simply won't have, and a level of expertise that is not useful for most front/middle-office analysis work. I usually see these done in Excel. SSRS and CR seem like way overkill for something done trivially and transparently in Excel, whose presentation will change frequently anyway. Depending on what OP is talking about, analysis is not reporting, and flexibility and transparency usually win. Especially when you want to poke around the underlying data and iterate with other people. SSRS and CR only make sense when you know what you're looking for, that the data is appropriate for it and you don't expect it to change.


I'm all for free enterprise, but I feel like when services like Uber and Lyft get so big it might do them some good to offer disabled services. I mean obviously you can't cater to every single type of rider out there but basic wheelchair service would probably be good.


You could, but the bank won't let you... If you're a sole proprietor - then you could probably open a personal account and just use it, and never tell them that is actually a business. However, depending on your volume of operations, they may switch you on their own to business account by the pattern of your transactions. For corporations, you cannot use a personal account since the corporation is a separate legal entity that owns the funds. Also, you're generally required to separate corporate and personal funds to keep the limited liability protection (which is why you have the corporation to begin with). Generally, business accounts have much higher volumes and much more transactions than personal accounts, and it costs more for the banks to run them. In the US, some banks offer free, or very low-cost, business accounts for small businesses that don't need too many transactions. I'm sure if you shop around, you'll find those in Canada as well.


"There are many tactics you can use. If your biggest problem is regretting your larger purchases, I'd suggest giving yourself rules before making any purchases over a certain minimum dollar amount that you set for yourself. For example, if that amount is $50 for an item, then any item starting at an average price of $51 would be subject to these rules. One of your long-term goals ought to be to become the kind of person who finds joy in saving money rather than spending it. Make friends with frugal people - look for those who prefer games nights and potlucks to nights out at the club buying expensive drinks and dinners at the newest steak joint in town. Learn the thrill of a deal, but even more learn the thrill of your savings growing. You don't want to enjoy money in the bank for the purposes of becoming a miser. Instead you want to realize that money in the bank helps you achieve your goals — buying the house you want, donating a significant amount of money to a cause you ardently support, allowing you to take a dream vacation, letting you buy with cash the car you always wanted, the possibilities are endless. As Dave Ramsey says, ""Live like no one else, so you can live like no one else."""


Here's the key: >If I buy back my own mortgage, I don’t have a mortgage. You don't have a mortgage, you probably ended up with another type of depth. This is what happens. The Bank of Japan is buying the debt. It didn't disappear. Why did it buy the debt? To be able to print more money. Why does it need more money? To create more inflation. 0.2% of inflation is bad. You need 2%. //edit:grammar.


"wtf are we as a country and society going to do for all the Frans in 10 years when there is barely retail or fast food jobs left? are we just going to throw up our hands and say ""welp, guess your fucked""? we're going to have millions of unemployed people a lot sooner than people think and we are doing nothing to address this upcoming problem!"


"Seems like no one in this thread has heard of ""treasury stocks"", which indeed allow a company to own and sell its own stock. Think about it. When there is a stock buy-back funded by excess profits, where does that stock go?"


I can easily live off purchase 1. The issue is that I have a guaranteed paycheck at my corporate gig and my fiancé is worried about not having enough income to pay bills. We're both new to business ownership and she doesn't want me to lose my benefits and guaranteed salary at my current job. I'm only keeping this job for extra income. I'd have to leave my second income producing job to take the plunge for the second business. She just doesn't think it's the right time but E V E R Y T H I N G is playing out to where it just makes sense financially. Take a small cut back on expenses to make 4x what I'm making now with my first business and my second income producing job.


Why not 180 weeks then? Being able to get cash without having to work for it changes the human psyche regarding the necessity of work. At the end if the 99 weeks, a lot of people resent having to work again, which translates into an overall lesser quality labor pool. I'm not arguing for no unemployment, but 99 weeks is extreme. No one is actively job searching that long.


"I agree that you should CONSIDER a shares based dividend income SIPP, however unless you've done self executed trading before, enough to understand and be comfortable with it and know what you're getting into, I would strongly suggest that as you are now near retirement, you have to appreciate that as well as the usual risks associated with markets and their constituent stocks and shares going down as well as up, there is an additional risk that you will achieve sub optimal performance because you are new to the game. I took up self executed trading in 2008 (oh yes, what a great time to learn) and whilst I might have chosen a better time to get into it, and despite being quite successful over all, I have to say it's the hardest thing I've ever done! The biggest reason it'll be hard is emotionally, because this pension pot is all the money you've got to live off until you die right? So, even though you may choose safe quality stocks, when the world economy goes wrong it goes wrong, and your pension pot will still plummet, somewhat at least. Unless you ""beat the market"", something you should not expect to do if you haven't done it before, taking the rather abysmal FTSE100 as a benchmark (all quality stocks, right? LOL) from last Aprils highs to this months lows, and projecting that performance forwards to the end of March, assuming you get reasonable dividends and draw out £1000 per month, your pot could be worth £164K after one year. Where as with normal / stable / long term market performance (i.e. no horrible devaluation of the market) it could be worth £198K! Going forwards from those 2 hypothetical positions, assuming total market stability for the rest of your life and the same reasonable dividend payouts, this one year of devaluation at the start of your pensions life is enough to reduce the time your pension pot can afford to pay out £1000 per month from 36 years to 24 years. Even if every year after that devaluation is an extra 1% higher return it could still only improve to 30 years. Normally of course, any stocks and shares investment is a long term investment and long term the income should be good, but pensions usually diversify into less and less risky investments as they get close to maturity, holding a certain amount of cash and bonds as well, so in my view a SIPP with stocks and shares should be AT MOST just a part of your strategy, and if you can't watch your pension pot payout term shrink from 26 years to 24 years hold your nerve, then maybe a SIPP with stocks and shares should be a smaller part! When you're dependent on your SIPP for income a market crash could cause you to make bad decisions and lose even more income. All that said now, even with all the new taxes and loss of tax deductible costs, etc, I think your property idea might not be a bad one. It's just diversification at the end of the day, and that's rarely a bad thing. I really DON'T think you should consider it to be a magic bullet though, it's not impossible to get a 10% yield from a property, but usually you won't. I assume you've never done buy to let before, so I would encourage you to set up a spread sheet and model it carefully. If you are realistic then you should find that you have to find really REALLY exceptional properties to get that sort of return, and you won't find them all the time. When you do your spread sheet, make sure you take into account all the one off buying costs, build a ledger effectively, so that you can plot all your costs, income and on going balance, and then see what payouts your model can afford over a reasonable number of years (say 10). Take the sum of those payouts and compare them against the sum you put in to find the whole thing. You must include budget for periodic minor and less frequent larger renovations (your tenants WON'T respect your property like you would, I promise you), land lord insurance (don't omit it unless you maintain capability to access a decent reserve (at least 10-20K say, I mean it, it's happened to me, it cost me 10K once to fix up a place after the damage and negligence of a tenant, and it definitely could have been worse) but I don't really recommend you insuring yourself like this, and taking on the inherent risk), budget for plumber and electrician call out, or for appropriate schemes which include boiler maintenance, etc (basically more insurance). Also consider estate agent fees, which will be either finders fees and/or 10% management fees if you don't manage them yourself. If you manage it yourself, fine, but consider the possibility that at some point someone might have to do that for you... either temporarily or permanently. Budget for a couple of months of vacancy every couple of years is probably prudent. Don't forget you have to pay utilities and council tax when its vacant. For leaseholds don't forget ground rent. You can get a better return on investment by taking out a mortgage (because you make money out of the underlying ROI and the mortgage APR) (this is usually the only way you can approach 10% yield) but don't forget to include the cost of mortgage fees, valuation fees, legal fees, etc, every 2 years (or however long)... and repeat your model to make sure it is viable when interest rates go up a few percent."


Will they still create programming catered to an 8th grade education and watered down enough for children to watch? That's why I quit tv and cable. What the fuck am I watching shows made for teenagers for? No hard science, no hard news, and not a single person talks like a regular human. It's fucking bizarre seeing it at this point. A weird world of nonsense.


Oh hey, let's take an insane valuation from the peak of the tech bubble and act like it should be a useful metric. Exxon has a market cap around 430 billion, Apple is just under 600 billion. Microsoft was never making enough nor looked like it could sustain enough growth to support a 600b market cap. Don't be stupid. The stock was grossly overvalued as everything was then.


"IRA is a tax-deferred account. I.e.: you're not paying any taxes on the income within the account (as long as you don't withdraw it) and you can deduct the investment (with certain limitation on how much, depending on your total AGI). It is taxed when you withdraw it - at ordinary rates for the ""traditional"" IRA and with 0% rate for ROTH, as long as the withdrawal is qualified (if not qualified - you pay ordinary rate tax for ROTH and additional 10% tax for both on the taxable amounts). The details are a bit complicated (there's deductible IRA, non-deductible IRA, roll-overs, etc etc), but that's the basic. Regular investment accounts are taxed currently on any income, but you get the ""better"" capital gains rates on many things. So which one is better depends how long your investment is going to be, what is your tax situation now, and what you anticipate it to be later when you retire."


No, if your brokers find out about this, even though it is unlikely, you will be identified as a pattern day trader. The regulations do not specify a per broker limit. Also, it's like a credit history. Brokers are loosely obligated to inform other brokers that a client is a pattern day trader when transferring accounts.


"Strictly speaking, a ""default"" happens when you stop making a scheduled interest or principal payment. So you can ""default"" on your student loan by simply not paying it. What you describe is what generally happens afterwards. So when people say ""You can't default on your student loans"", that is not correct. What they mean to say is ""You (usually) can't discharge your student loans in bankruptcy""."


Traders sometimes look at the depth of the book (number of outstanding limit orders) to try and gauge the sentiment of the market or otherwise use this information to formulate their strategy. If there was a large outstanding buy order at $49.50, there's a decent chance this could increase the price by influencing other traders. However, a limit order at $2 is like an amazon.com price of $200,000 for a book. It's so far away from realistic that it is ignored. People would think it is an error. Submitting this type of order is perfectly legal. If the stock is extremely thinly traded, it might even be encouraged because if someone wanted to sell a bunch and did a really bad job of it, the price could conceivably fall that far and the limit order would be adding liquidity. I guess. Your example is pretty extreme. It is not uncommon for there to be limit orders on the book that are not very close to the trading price. They just sit around. The majority of trades are done by algorithmic traders and institutional traders and they don't tend to do this, but a retail investor may choose to submit an order like that, just hoping against hope. Also, buy orders are not likely to push prices down, no matter what their price is. A sell order, yes (even if it isn't executed).


Nope. And you're making things up while being a condescending dickhead. Good look! 5 states allow you to take the bar without even attending law school let alone graduating. Thanks for playing though. Maybe 12 seconds of google next time?


"That wasn't friendster, that was a site that never launched called ""Harvard connect"" I believe. Friendster was already a decently sized company when Zuck started facebook. In fact he even has noted that he wanted the site to be something like friendster originally."


"I have a basic rule: it is the ""business"" guy's responsibility to raise the money. If they can't do it, then they are incompetent, and the ""tech"" guy should avoid them. Generally speaking, the business side needs to be able to identify and validate the market opportunity, define the product, handle sales and marketing and raise the money. The tech side needs to translate the product definition into a technical solution and build it. If you have programming skills, you have plenty of options, and should not partner with people who can't do their part. You can probably handle the business side of things as well, though there is a difference in skill and temperament. Find someone who is as good or better at the business side than you are at programming."