query: What are some way to transfer money from Hong Kong to India on a monthly basis?

positive: Western Union, Money to India, Remit to India are some of the services that specilize in remittance and would be cheaper than an International Wire.   There is not tax for transfering your own money earner outside India into India.  Edit: The business of Remittance is bought into the Service Tax Net by Govt. It is seen that Banks are offering this as a service and hence the tax to Banks which is passed on to customers. 0.12% of tax on the converted amount. IE if you transfer Rs 1,00,000/- you would need to pay a tax of Rs 120/-. Above Rs 1,00,000 the incremental rate is 0.06%

negative: The Hong Kong Dollar is based on the US dollar.  The Hong Kong central bank recognizes the US dollar as its reserve currency.  That is, the Hong Kong central bank keeps US dollars as its main reserve.  Not long ago the reserve currency of choice would have been gold.  Central banks of each country would need to have enough gold to back up any currency they issued.  Now central banks use the US dollar instead.  This is what is meant when people mention the US dollar being the reserve currency for most countries. From wiki regarding the HK dollar: A bank can issue a Hong Kong dollar only if it has the equivalent   exchange in US dollars on deposit. So you're assumption is correct: as the US Federal Reserve prints more money and that money finds its way to Hong Kong banks, the Hong Kong banks will be able to issue more Hong Kong dollars which will have an inflationary affect. What to do?  If you look around enough on this site you'll find some suggestions.  Here is one.

negative: "Clearing means processing unsettled transactions. Specifically - all the money transfers between the banks, in this case. Clearing Bank for RMB business means that all RMB transactions will be cleared through that specific bank. If bank A in Hong Kong gets a check drawn on Bank B in Hong Kong, and the check is in RMB - A will go to the BoC with the check and will get the money, and BoC will take the money from B. That obviously requires both A and B have accounts with BoC. ""Sole"" clearing house means there's only one. I.e.: in our example, A and B cannot settle the check through C where they both happen to have accounts, or directly with each other. They MUST utilize the services of BoC."

negative: "you didn't say it was perfect. you didn't say it was imperfect. you said:  >i want america to be hong kong  surely you realize that the amount of control exerted by the chinese government over hong kong contributes to the economic rating given to it by the conservative think-tank/research group whose website you provided as a source  you can't pick and choose which parts of a country you want if you ""want america to be hong kong""  you didn't say that you just want it to be similar in some ways (but not all) to hong kong -- you're stating that you want it to be just like it"

negative: 15-19% gains also includes 15-19% and greater losses. They may not be required to disclose that to you in Hong Kong. If it isn't a leveraged account then that isn't too bad. Hong Kong is a nice jurisdiction, The US Federal Government is the only person you don't hide your assets from - but they dont want anything - so just report the accounts as commanded and you'll be A-Okay.

negative: Hong Kong's day as financial center of China is over. China doesn't need Hong Kong anymore. Shanghai has reclaimed (rightfully?) her role as the financial center of China.   The only path forward for Hong Kong is continual integration with other cities of [Pearl River Delta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_River_Delta). However, I don't have high hope for Hong Kong as its inexperienced political leaders don't want to reach political compromise with Beijing.   Expect continual decline of what was once a great city.

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-22/hong-kong-braces-for-storm-hato-stock-trading-may-be-disrupted) reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Hong Kong upgraded the storm warning to the highest for the first time in five years and canceled its morning trading session as Severe Typhoon Hato drew closer to the financial center.  > Should the signal remain in effect by noon, trading on the world&#039;s fourth-largest equity market will be scrapped for the day, according to Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing Ltd. rules.  > At 9 a.m., Severe Typhoon Hato was centered about 80 kilometers south of Hong Kong, the Observatory said.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6vgq2t/hong_kong_delays_morning_trading_as_typhoon_hato/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~196625 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*: **Hong**^#1 **Kong**^#2 **close**^#3 **Typhoon**^#4 **trading**^#5"

negative: Who says they don't? In the United Kingdom the Bank of England and the Bank of Scotland print the money. In some other countries (like Hong Kong, Israel, and the US) commercial banks were issuing the currency at some point of time, but now the governments do that. The problem with commercial banks issuing currency is the control. If a bank is allowed to print money - how can the amount of currency be controlled? If it is controlled by the government then the bank will be just a printing press, so what's the point? And since governments now want to control the monetary policy, banks have no reason to just be printing presses for the government, the governments have their own. edit Apparently in Hong Kong it is still the case, as I'm sure it is in some other places in the world as well.

negative: Because of things this article doesn't go to that I've read other places.   1. Britain didn't have elections in Hong Kong for decades at the request of Communist China.    2. Britain started really democratizing Hong Kong before the handover to get some facts on the ground to try and have a better representational system in place for the Chinese handover.    3. Stuff in Hong Kong used to get done under the British.    4. Now with newly empowered representation and politicians who don't necessarily trust the Beijing government, opposition to development and policy issues is happening, and less is getting done in Hong Kong vs. other major mainland cities.

negative: These markets are independent, just like any other stock market. For example, there are stocks on the Milan stock exchange that are also on the New York stock exchange and have different historical prices. Remember, this is all about offer and demand. The Hong Kong stock exchange has the Hong Kong Dollar as its currency, which is anchored to the USD. Also, there is more trade going on, on the Hong Kong stock exchange. As for the answer, I don't know whether these stocks are exactly the same. I guess they should be, but maybe somebody else could answer that.

negative: if it was not China, then India, Brazil, South Africa, or Russia... the companies want lower taxes and wages, and will go where these are, in Brazil where I live there is a Shenzhen and Hong Kong equivalent(Polo de manaus), but never boomed because China had even lower wages and taxes, if the taxes were lower maybe the factories would come back but I doubt.  simplify the law and the taxes  would be enough of a change for a start. each day america looks closer to Brazil's 16 metric tons of taxes law and 69% corporate taxes

negative: Born in Hong Kong and worked for a Hong Kong bank but still can't speak Mandarin as a middle aged man? Lol, no one to blame but yourself. If you're in a country and they give you a job, and a nice cozy banking one at that, take the time to learn the fucking language.

negative: You would still be the legal owner of the shares, so you would almost certainly need to transfer them to a broker than supports the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (which allows you to trade on the Shanghai exchange). In order to delist they would need to go through a process which would include enabling shareholders to continue to access their holdings.

negative: Capital International Business Center is one of the first business centers in Hong Kong that providing one-stop business services like temporary offices, meeting rooms, registration service, virtual office. The company is the first to receive an ISO9002 service quality certification in Hong Kong and one of the first to establish a full-service system.

negative: Only in foreign ports. For example Cathay Pacific is based out Hong Kong, it will employ staff to do everything from check in to cleaning. When they fly into overseas ports they will contract other airlines or menzies etc to do their ground handling.

negative: "You, Sir, have no idea what is going on here in Hong Kong. It is amusing to hear American Apple fans proclaim so confidently that ""Apple knows"". At least Asian Apple fans have the numbers against them so they shut the fuck up with the pronouncements about divine insight by the one true phone-maker."

negative: I am a non-resident alien transferring a limited amount ( in dollars post tax) to India every couple of months. Assuming you are transferring this into an NRE account in India or atleast NRO account in India. As a NRI, by regulations one should not hold normal Savings account. This has to be converted into NRO. I put that money as a fixed deposit in a bank (which gives 6-7 percent annual return) Assuming you have FCNR deposits. Also assuming that you are declaring the taxes in your US Tax returns and paying tax accordingly. There is no tax in India on FCNR. If this was in ordinary FD or in NRO account, you are declaring and paying taxes in India as well as in US. What is the max limit on transferring money back from India to USA? If you have transferred this into NRE account, there is no limit. Other account there is a limit. Read more at Liberalized Remittance Scheme and here. What are the legitimate ways to transfer the money? From India point of view, this has to be Bank to Bank transfers. You can't carry cash [Indian Rupees] outside of India beyond Rs 25000 [or 15000?]. You can't hold excess of USD 250 without valid purpose. Western Union is not authorized to transfer funds out of India. Will there be any tax levied? No assuming you are already paying taxes on the Interest in US and depending on the type of account in India.

negative: [P. C. Woo & Co.](http://www.pcwoo.com/practices_com.html) provides top-notch services and creative solutions to a wide range of commercial and corporate finance matters to both overseas and Hong Kong clients.  We have established ourselves as one of the major players in the field with a diversified clientele ranging from financial institutions, public bodies, listed companies to private enterprises.  Our partners' close association with many public bodies and charitable organizations enable us to have extensive experience in serving public bodies and claim to be one of the top local solicitors' firms in Hong Kong which can provide highly specialized services in this area.

negative: I have not opened any NRE/NRO account before coming to Finland.  This is in violation of Foreign Exchange Management Act. Please get this regularized ASAP. All your savings account need to be converted to NRO. Shall I transfer funds from abroad to both NRE and NRO account or I can transfer only to NRE account in India? You can transfer to NRE or NRO. It is advisable to transfer into NRE as funds from here can be repatriated out of India without any paperwork. Funds from NRO account need paperwork to move out of India. I am a regular tax payer in abroad. The Funds which i'll transfer in future will attract any additional tax in India? As your status is Non Resident and the income is during that period, there is no tax applicable in India on this. Few Mutual Fund SIPs (monthly basis) are linked with my existing saving account in india. Do these SIPs will stop when the savings account will turn into NRO account? Shall I need to submit any documents for KYC compliance? If yes, to whom I should submit these? is there any possibility to submit it Online? Check your Bank / Mutual Fund company. Couple of FDs are also opened online and linked with this existing saving account. Do the maturity amount(s) subject to TDS or any tax implication such as 30.9% as this account will be turned into NRO account till that time and NRO account attracts this higher tax percentage. These are subject to taxes in India. This will be as per standard tax brackets. Which account (NRE/NRO) is better for paying EMIs for Home Loan, SIPs of Mutual Funds, utility bills in India, transfer money to relative's account etc Home Loan would be better from NRE account as if you sell the house, the EMI paid can be credited into NRE account and you can transfer this out of India without much paperwork. Same for SIP's. For other it doesn't really matter as it is an expense. Is there any charge to transfer fund from NRE to NRO account if both account maintain in same Bank same branch. Generally No. Check with your bank. Which Bank account's (NRE/NRO) debit/ATM card should be used in Abroad in case of emergency. Check with your bank. NRE funds are more easy. NRO there will be limits and reporting. Do my other savings accounts, maintained in different Banks, also need to be converted into NRO account? If yes, how can it be done from Abroad? Yes. ASAP. Quite a few leading banks allow you to do this if you are not present. Check you bank for guidance.

negative: **OUR FIRM**  Established in 1945, [P. C. Woo & Co.](http://www.pcwoo.com/about.html) has served Hong Kong with quality, efficient services for over 65 years. We are conveniently located in the central business district of Hong Kong with a network of associates in major cities throughout Mainland China and the world.  We offer a wide spectrum of professional legal services in the areas of: Commercial & Corporate, Property, Litigation & ADR, Probate & Trusts, , China Practice , Corporate Governanceand Pro bono Work. Our broad range of clients includes government departments, public authorities, listed companies, commercial corporations, educational institutes and charities.  P. C. Woo & Co. is honored to be in an MOJ approved Association with ZhongLun W&D Law Firm and get the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Justice approval for our Jinan branch office on 25th February 2011. As part of this association, P. C. Woo & Co. will be positioned to service the needs of clients in Beijing, Shanghai, London, Riyadh, Shijiazhuang, Chengdu, Nanjing, Tianjin, Wuhan, Taiyuan, Jinan, Shenzhen, Guangzhou and Hong Kong.  **OUR VISION**  We aim to create a positive and lasting impact on our profession and community through our dedication to effectively serving clients in Hong Kong, Mainland China, and internationally.  **OUR MISSION**  To uphold our commitment to offering:  • To our clients, high quality work and cost-efficient services.  • To our staff, fulfilling careers and professional satisfaction.  • To our legal profession, unyielding integrity as members of the profession, continuing support for legal education, and career opportunities for law graduates.  • To our community, the responsibilities of a good corporate citizen.

negative: Government subsidies could be provided if we could all agree what activities are of higher social worth, this is not an insurmountable obstacle.  For example, in Hong Kong and Singapore civil servants are paid vastly more than in the US. The reasons are that society wants to attract some of its best people to serve in these positions, and they want to insulate them from the temptation of corruption. In effect, these positions are considered to be of high social worth and society rewards them accordingly.   Also note that HK and Singapore have even freer capitalist market societies than the US (speaking of economic freedom here)...

negative: Richard Liu gave up a seven-figure salary this month to get into one of the hottest financial instruments around right now: initial coin offerings. The former China Renaissance deal-maker has since backed a clutch of cryptocoin sales that’ve raised millions -- sometimes in seconds -- often without a single product.  From Hong Kong and Beijing to London, accomplished financiers are abandoning lucrative careers to plunge into the murky world of ICOs, a way to amass quick money by selling digital tokens to investors sans banks or regulators. Cut out of the action, a growing cohort of banking professionals are instead applying their talents toward buying or hawking cryptocurrency.

negative: You have not mentioned the dates when you left India. Taxability is not depended on whether you transfer the funds to India or NOT. It is dependent on whether you are NRI for tax purposes for the given financial year. Refer to this question for more details Will it be taxable if I transfer money from UK account to India account? Edit: The lottery earnings are also treated in the same way. If you are NRI, you don't pay tax. Else you pay tax

negative: I have a company in China, so I have to regularly come back for work. If the Chinese were to revolt, there would be thousands on the streets causing chaos. That was why instagram was banned, there was a revolt in Hong Kong or shanghai and people used insta to spread the news.

negative: foreign income, transfer it to my savings account in India  Yes you can transfer to India. The right account would be NRO/NRE. As an NRI one should not hold a regular savings account. forum that foreign income is not taxable unless used to buy stocks, fds etc If you are an NRI, income earned outside of India is not taxable in India. However any income you generate in India is taxable, i.e. interest income, gains from shares etc. Do we need to pay taxes for the money transferred No tax if you are an NRI even if you transfer funds to India. Taxation does not depend on whether or not you transfer the money, it depends on your status used to pay home EMIs or principle amount? You can use the money for what ever you like.

negative: But not until we have shipped the last manufacturing job left in America there and then wondered why we did all that packing up and shipping over and training and learning new language and moving the family to Hong Kong and hating it there...only to make themselves look like heros by coming back from whence they never should have left.

negative: >Entire families living in a 2 bedroom apartment, for example.  That's due to the fact that there isn't much land, same problem in hong kong.  However, at the very least 80% of them live in public housing so at least they're not getting gouged on rentals.

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-17/superpower-india-to-replace-china-as-growth-engine) reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot) ***** > By. India is poised to emerge as an economic superpower, driven in part by its young population, while China and the Asian Tigers age rapidly, according to Deloitte LLP. The number of people aged 65 and over in Asia will climb from 365 million today to more than half a billion in 2027, accounting for 60 percent of that age group globally by 2030, Deloitte said in a report Monday.  > In contrast, India will drive the third great wave of Asia&#039;s growth - following Japan and China - with a potential workforce set to climb from 885 million to 1.08 billion people in the next 20 years and hold above that for half a century.  > Deloitte names the countries that face the biggest challenges from the impact of ageing on growth as China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Thailand and New Zealand.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/70rvoj/superpower_india_to_replace_china_as_growth_engine/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~211835 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*: **age**^#1 **growth**^#2 **Deloitte**^#3 **India**^#4 **workforce**^#5"

negative: You can look into specific market targeted mutual funds or ETF's. For Norway, for example, look at NORW. If you want to purchase specific stocks, then you'd better be ready to trade on local stock exchanges in local currency. ETrade allows trading on some of the international stock exchanges (in Asia they have Hong Kong and Japan, in Europe they have the UK, Germany and France, and in the Americas they have the US and Canada). Some of the companies you're interested in might be trading there.

negative: I am a US citizen and I want to transfer some amount 10 lakhs+ to my brother from my NRE account in India to his account. My brother is going to purchase something for his business. He is going to return my amount after 3-4 Months From the description it looks like you would like to loan to your brother on repatriation basis. Yes this is allowed. See the RBI Guide here and here for more details. There are some conditions; (iv) Scheme for raising loans from NRIs on repatriation basis   Borrowings not exceeding US$ 2,50,000 or its equivalent in foreign exchange by an individual resident in India from his close relatives resident outside India, subject to the conditions that - a) the loan is free of interest;   b) the minimum maturity period of   the loan is seven years;   c) The amount of loan is received by inward   remittance in free foreign exchange through normal banking channels or   by debit to the NRE/FCNR account of the non-resident lender;    d) The   loan is utilised for the borrower's personal purposes or for carrying   on his normal business activity but not for carrying on   agricultural/plantation activities, purchase of immovable property or   shares/debentures/bonds issued by companies in India or for   re-lending. Although it is mentioned as Seven years, this is revised to one year. Since he cannot deposit into my NRE account I guess he has to deposit it into my NRO account. A repatriate-able loan as above can be deposited into NRE Account. Is there any illegality here doing such transaction? No. Please ensure proper paper work to show this as loan and document the money trail. Also once I get my money in NRO account do I need to pay taxes in India on the money he deposited? This question does not arise.

negative: Typically there are several parties involved: (Sometimes one company plays multiple roles; for example AmEx is a network and an issuer.) When a merchant charges a card and the issuer approves it, money is transferred from the issuer to the acquirer to the merchant. This settlement process takes some time, but generally is completed within a day. Of course, most cardholders pay on a monthly basis. The issuer must use their own funds in the mean time. If the cardholder defaults, the issuer takes the loss.

negative: We have a house here in India worth Rs. 2 Crores. We want to sell it and take money with us.  Selling the house in India will attract Capital Gains Tax. Essentially the price at which you sell the property less of the property was purchased [or deemed value when inherited by you]. The difference is Capital Gains. You have to pay tax on this gains. This is currently at 10% without Indexation and 20% with Indexation.  Please note if you hold these funds for more than an year, you would additionally be liable for Wealth tax at 1% above Rs 50 lacs. Can I gift this whole amount to my US Citizen Daughter or what is the   maximum limit of Gift amount   What will be the tax liability on me and on my Daughter in case of Gift   Whether I have to show it in my Income Tax Return or in my Daughter's Tax Return. What US Income Tax Laws says.   What will be the procedure to send money as Gift to my Daughter.   Assuming you are still Indian citizen when to gift the funds; From Indian tax point of you there is no tax to you. As you daughter is US citizen, there is no gift tax to her. There is no limit in India or US. So you can effectively gift the entire amount without any taxes. If you transfer this after you become a US Resident [for tax purposes], then there is a limit of USD 14,000/- per year per recipient. Effective you can gift your daughter and son-in-law 14,000/- ea and your husband can do the same. Net 14,000 * 4 USD per year. Beyond this you either pay tax or declare this and deduct it from life time estate quota. Again there is no tax for your daughter. What are the routes to take money from India to US   Will the money will go directly from my Bank Act.to my Daughter's Bank Account.   Will there will be wire transfer from bank to bank   Can I send money through other money sender Certified Companies also. The best way is via Bank to Bank transfer. A CA Certificate is required to certify that taxes have been paid on this funds being transferred. Under the liberalized remittance scheme in India, there is a limit of USD 1 Million per year for moving funds outside of India. So you can move around Rs 6-7 Crore a year.

negative: Would I have to pay income tax other then TDS on interest earned on my saving bank account. No being NRI you are not taxed in India on income outside of India. I am sending money from EU to my OWN saving account. Please note this account is not NRI\NRO\FCNR As an NRI you CANNOT by law hold a regular Savings Account. Please convert this account to NRO ASAP. Does the channel I use to transfer money to India would make any difference? Its 3rd party transfer service. Whether you transfer the funds or not is irrelevant. As the income was during the period when your status is NRI, there is no Tax in India. sold some shares from my Indian demat account online and got some STCG. You would need to pay tax on this in India Edit:   Self Assessment Tax can be paid till 30 July 2015 for the Financial Year 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015. Tax have to be paid in advance, so if your tax obligation is more than Rs 10,000/- there will be an interest at 1% per month and penalty at 1% per month payable


query: How and Should I Invest (As a college 18 year old with minimal living expenses)?

positive: I have about $1K in savings, and have been told that you should get into investment and saving for retirement early. I make around $200 per week, which about $150 goes into savings. That's $10k per year.  The general rule of thumb is that you should have six months income as an emergency fund.  So your savings should be around $5k.  Build that first.   Some argue that the standard should be six months of living expenses rather than income.  Personally, I think that this example is exactly why it is income rather than living expenses.  Six months of living expenses in this case would only be $1250, which won't pay for much.  And note that living expenses can only be calculated after the fact.  If your estimate of $50 a week is overly optimistic, you might not notice for months (until some large living expense pops up).   Another problem with using living expenses as the measure is that if you hold down your living expenses to maximize your savings, this helps both measures.  Then you hit your savings target, and your living expenses increase.  So you need more savings.  By contrast, if your income increases but your living expenses do not, you still need more savings but you can also save more money.  Doesn't really change the basic analysis though.  Either way you have an emergency savings target that you should hit before starting your retirement savings.   If you save $150 per week, then you should have around $4k in savings at the beginning of next year.  That's still low for an emergency fund by the income standard.  So you probably shouldn't invest next year.  With a living expenses standard, you could have $6250 in savings by April 15th (deadline for an IRA contribution that appears in the previous tax year).  That's $5000 more than the $1250 emergency fund, so you could afford an IRA (probably a Roth) that year.   If you save $7500 next year and start with $4k in savings (under the income standard for emergency savings), that would leave you with $11,500.  Take $5500 of that and invest in an IRA, probably a Roth.  After that, you could make a $100 deposit per week for the next year.  Or just wait until the end.   If you invested in an IRA the previous year because you decided use the living expenses standard, you would only have $6500 at the end of the year.  If you wait until you have $6750, you could max out your IRA contribution.  At that point, your excess income for each year would be larger than the maximum IRA contribution, so you could max it out until your circumstances change.   If you don't actually save $3k this year and $7500 next year, don't sweat it.  A college education is enough of an investment at your age.  Do that first, then emergency savings, then retirement.   That will flip around once you get a better paying, long term job.  Then you should include retirement savings as an expected cost.  So you'd pay the minimum required for your education loans and other required living expenses, then dedicate an amount for retirement savings, then build your emergency savings, then pay off your education loans (above the minimum payment).  This is where it can pay to use the more aggressive living expenses standard, as that allows you to pay off your education loans faster.   I would invest retirement savings in a nice, diversified index fund (or two since maintaining the correct stock/bond mix of 70%-75% stocks is less risky than investing in just bonds much less just stocks).  Investing in individual stocks is something you should do with excess money that you can afford to lose.  Secure your retirement first.  Then stock investments are gravy if they pan out.  If they don't, you're still all right.  But if they do, you can make bigger decisions, e.g. buying a house.   Realize that buying individual stocks is about more than just buying an app.  You have to both check the fundamentals (which the app can help you do) and find other reasons to buy a stock.  If you rely on an app, then you're essentially joining everyone else using that app.  You'll make the same profit as everyone else, which won't be much because you all share the profit opportunities with the app's system.  If you want to use someone else's system, stick with mutual funds.  The app system is actually more dangerous in the long term.   Early in the app's life cycle, its system can produce positive returns because a small number of people are sharing the benefits of that system.  As more people adopt it though, the total possible returns stay the same.  At some point, users saturate the app.  All the possible returns are realized.  Then users are competing with each other for returns.  The per user returns will shrink as usage grows.   If you have your own system, then you are competing with fewer people for the returns from it.  Share the fundamental analysis, but pick your stocks based on other criteria.  Fundamental analysis will tell you if a stock is overvalued.  The other criteria will tell you which undervalued stock to buy.

positive: You have great intentions, and a great future. As far as investing goes, you're a bit early. Unless your parents or other benefactor is going to pay every dime of your expenses, you'll have costs you need to address. $1000 is the start of a nice emergency fund, but not yet enough to consider investing for the long term. If you continue to work, it's not tough to burn through $200/wk especially when you are in college and have more financial responsibility.

positive: I'd suggest you keep putting money in your savings account and start investing after you land that first big job. As another answer mentioned, unless you're fortunate enough to have all of your tuition and living expenses paid for, an emergency fund is an invaluable tool for a college student. And the bigger the better. Your laptop gets stolen or your car's air conditioner (or heater) dies -- both of these things happened to me in college -- and it would have been a much bigger deal for me if I didn't have some money tucked away.

positive: While others have made a good case for how you may want to save and spend I just want to take a moment to comment on Acorn and Robinhood.  Having never used either of them, I would stick to the seasoned professionals for my long term investment relationship. I'm sure they have the right licensing and proper SIPC coverage etc, but I wouldn't, personally, trust my money to an entity that's almost entirely funded by venture capital.  I would stick to a company that exists and is profitable on it's own.  All of the major brokerage houses (Vanguard, Schwab, ETrade, Scottrade, etc) in the US give account holders access to a list of ETFs and Mutual Funds with zero load on deposits, no or low minimum account balances, no or low investment minimums, and no commissions.  With access to these no cost options, I wouldn't waste time with an entity that exists because of it's investor fund raising abilities.

positive: "The $1K in funds are by default your emergency fund. If absolutely necessary, emergency funds may need to come from debt, a credit capacity, focus on building credit to leverage lower rates for living expenses eventually needed. Profitable organizations & proprietors, borrow at a lower cost of capital than their return. Join your local credit union, you're welcome to join mine online, the current rates for the first $500 in both your checking and savings is 4.07%, it's currently the fourth largest in the U.S. by assets. You may join as a ""family member"" to me (Karl Erdmann), not sure what their definition of ""family"" is, I'd be happy to trace our ancestry if need be or consider other options. Their current incentive program, like many institutions have often, will give you $100 for going through the hassle to join and establish a checking and savings. Some institutions, such as this credit union, have a lower threshold to risk, applicants may be turned down for an account if there is any negative history or a low credit score, shooting for a score of 600 before applying seems safest.  The web services, as you mentioned, have significantly improved the layman's ability to cost effectively invest funds and provide liquidity. Robinhood currently seems to be providing the most affordable access to the market. It goes without saying, stay objective with your trust of any platform, as you may have noticed, there is a detailed explanation of how Robinhood makes their money on this stack exchange community, they are largely backed by venture funding, hopefully the organization is able to maintain a low enough overhead to keep the organization sustainable in the long run. The services that power this service such as Plaid, seem promising and underrated, but i digress. The platform gives access for users to learn how investing works, it seems safest to plan a diversified portfolio utilizing a mix of securities,such as low Beta stocks or ""blue chip"" companies with clear dividend policies. One intriguing feature, if you invest in equities is casting votes on decisions in shareholder meetings.  Another popular investment asset class that is less liquid and perhaps something to work toward is real estate. Google the economist ""Matthew Rognlie"" for his work on income equality on this type of investment. There are many incentives for first time homeowners, saving up for a down payment is the first step. Consider adding to your portfolio a Real Estate Investment Trust (REITs) to gain a market position. Another noteworthy approach to this idea is an investment commercial property cooperative organization, currently the first and only one is called NorthEast Investment Cooperative, one stock of class A is $1K.  If you are interested and plan to focus on equities, consider dropping into your college's Accounting Capstone course to learn more about the the details of fundamental and technical analysis of an organization. The complexities of investing involve cyclical risk, macro and micro economic factors,  understanding financial statements and their notes, cash flow forecasting - discounting, market timing, and a host of other details Wikipedia is much more helpful at detailing. It's safe to assume initial investment decisions by unsophisticated investors are mostly whimsical, and likely will only add up to learning opportunities, however risk is inherit in all things, including sitting on cash that pays a price of inflation. A promising mindset in long term investments are in organizations that focus on conscious business practices. Another way to think of investing is that you are already somewhat of a ""sophisticated investor"" and could beat the market by what you know given your background, catching wind of certain information first, or acting on a new trends or technology quickly. Move carefully with any perhaps biased ""bullish"" or ""bearish"" mindset. Thinking independently is helpful, constantly becoming familiar with different ideas from professions in a diverse set of backgrounds, and simulating decisions in portfolio's. Here is an extremely limited set of authors and outlets that may have ideas worth digging more into, MIT Tech Reviews (Informative), Bloomberg TV (it's free, informative), John Mackey (businessman), Paul Mason (provocative journalist). Google finance is a simple and free go-to application, use the ""cost basis"" feature for ""paper"" or real trades, it's easy to import transactions from a .csv.   This seems sufficient to start off with. Enjoy the journey, aim for real value with your resources."

negative: Sure! Started working since I was 12, used that money to buy a car, and was working full time starting at 15 years old. By 17 had two full time jobs and banked all that money, besides buying a car.  At 18 fulfilled my dream and was hired as a police officer. Did the academy for 6 months, saving all of that money to buy a trailer to live in for cheap.  Max out pay for my department was 5 years, so by 23 years old I was making 68,000 a year. With overtime and details included( I basically worked anytime I could, 8 hour shift with either an 8 hour detail or double shift) usually kept one day off, working my other day off.   My take home for the year after taxes was somewhere around 90k give or take, with my living expenses barely passing 25k a year. Banked all that money for years. When I hit 25ish I got together with my now wife, also an officer making the same amount. She also received about 300k from a settlement. So with both of our salaries plus money invested since I was about 14, annual take home was about 200k.   Saved for 2 more years and at 28, used the 300k to buy a house and pay off any vehicles and credit card debt.  Paid cash for the house so no mortgage, no car payments, just utilities and taxes for the year.  With the budget set we were able to retire living just like we were. There is a lot more to it but that's the quick summary!

negative: > Get them into coding and they will never need a degree. I'm 20 years old in college and I strongly believe that is where it is all going  Don't you think that you should at least get your first job before declaring how the industry works?

negative: Your 5-8 year time frame is interesting because it is actually a two windows.  When people are savings for retirement, they tell us how many years or decades they have until they reach retirement age. But they also imply that they are planning on spending decades withdrawing the money.  But you wanting the money for a house in 5-8 years are needing the money more like somebody who is saving college money for a teenager. In fact your plan is similar in time frame as a 13 year old has for their college fund; start in 5 years but only have a 4 year spending window. Take the California 529 program: Beneficiary Age 13-14: Beneficiary Age 18+: The funding agreement provides a minimum guaranteed rate of return on the >amounts allocated to it by the Investment Portfolio. The minimum effective >annual interest rate will be neither less than 1% nor greater than 3% at >any time. So you plan of investing 100% in the S&P with your window is way too risky. You should only invest a portion of your down payment in equities, and be prepared to only be in that mode for a few years. Any drop in the market now hurts you, but one just before you need the funds would be devastating.

negative: College costs are increasing 8% per year.  In 18 years that's 4 times the current costs of college.  The [current costs](http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/26/pf/college/college_tuition_cost/index.htm) of college are $21,000 annually for a public 4 year degree, and $42,000 annually for a private 4 year degree.  In 18 years that's $336,000 for a public college bachelor's degree, and $672,000 for a private college bachelor's degree.  Per kid.  Suddenly $900,000 doesn't seem so big.

negative: Lets pretend that your parents were given the opportunity to pay X for a year of college tuition in the year that you were born. That would have been a significant portion of their yearly income.  But what if they were given the opportunity to pay for that year of college when you are 18, but at the price it was when you were born. That tuition bill would be much easier to pay. That would be a very small amount of their yearly income.  Why? the cost of tuition grew at a high inflation rate, but the second option allowed them to skip inflation on the bill side, but keep inflation regarding wages. You asked about paying for stuff you want today with future money; where my example was to pay new money for old expenses.  If you believe that inflation will be high,and your income will keep up with it; it is advantageous to pay with future $'s

negative: Buddy I know how a student investment club works, my school had a great one but thanks for the explanation. Doesn't change the fact that a valuation by some college kids is meaningless, but you wouldn't understand that because you're still a 20 year old kid with no industry experience. I love that you're bragging about your college to someone who has already graduated and made it into the industry, shows you really have no accomplishments to speak of.

negative: My god man, where do you live that is too expensive to live on your own and  7K isn't enough for emergency cash? Anyway, with your age and income I would be more worried about a long-term sustainable lifestyle. In other words, a job that nets you more than $26K/year. Someday you may want to have a wife and kids and that income sure as hell wont pay for their college.   That was life advice, now for financial: I've always been a believer that if someone is not a savvy investor, their priorities before investments should be paying off debt. If you had a lot of capital or knew your way around investment vehicles and applicable returns then I would be telling you something different. But in your case, pay off that car first giving yourself more money to invest in the long-run.

negative: At 19 years old you can and should be investing to see your money grow over the years. Reinvesting the dividends does get to be pretty significant because they compound over many years. Historically this dividend compounding accounts for about half of the total gains from stocks. At 70 years old I am not investing to see my money grow, although that's nice. I am investing to eat. I live on the dividends, and they tend to come in fairly reliably even as the market bounces up and down. For stocks selected with this in mind I get about 4% per year from the dividends.

negative: Something something old people retiring something something ignore the 18-25 205+ unemployment rate something something THE ECONOMY IS RECOVERING BLAH BLAH BLAH  *Decreasing participation rates can also be the result of perfectly natural phenomena such as people leaving the labor force so they can go to college/graduate school, raise small children at home or retire. Furman said these phenomena, particularly the boomers’ retirements, are responsible for participation rate’s dip more than anything else.*  This article is trying to piss on me and tell me it's raining: first, it was snow/weather hindering the economy. Now, it's all going according to plan since old people are retiring. If this jackass Googled unemployment rates for 18-26 he'd realize how ignorant or stupid he was. Just waitin for that Student Loan bubble to pop to watch this so called recovery come crashing down.

negative: >  It's just like an 18-21yr old kid at college, away from their parents and has the first unrestrained access to alcohol. They usually overdo it.  I actually have much more respect for binge drinkers in college. At least they don't do it everyday and understand they are impaired.  > And to second my original intent, it's up to the business/owner to determine if they want to discriminate or not against drug users. If you have a problem with that, seek employment elsewhere  I agree

negative: ">>Have enough funds to run the business and pay yourself the first year, plus 30%  >This is going to vary wildly depending on the particular business. So much so that a rule of thumb would be impossible to define.  Absolutely.  One of the things that varies ""widely"" is what amount constitutes the **""pay yourself the first year""** -- which will fall anywhere on a wide spectrum from the low end that is essentially below poverty level (someone young, used to living as we used\* to say ""like a college student"" -- needing only enough to cover a minimal ""survival"") to someone who has ridiculously extravagant needs (married with a family, McMansion mortgage and multiple ""new"" status vehicles, etc) that they expect to maintain -- and then the additional 30% grows in proportion *on top* of that subjective base figure.  \* I wrote ""used to say"" because we are talking about *back in the day* when ""living like a college student"" meant minimalist ""bare-bones"" needs, akin to a monastic/ascetic life: a shared small dorm/boarding house room with minimal furniture, NO partying, ZERO ""amenities"" (certainly no water parks with ""lazy rivers"", no ""food courts"", etc -- nothing like most US colleges and universities have today)."

negative: > Even with a Pell Grant to attend school, it can be very hard to get a job that will accommodate a class schedule and also pay enough for basic living expenses. And many people around here were not encouraged to pursue education, because of the expense. And because, until 10-15 years ago, there were always factories hired and it was expected to start at 18 and stay until retirement.  Yeah but I know plenty of poor people that got grants and other free money and lived off campus and were able to survive. Maybe they didn't live like I did or spend like I did, but they could get by with that and maybe a part time job. I worked all throughout college.   > If you do too well at work, they don't want to give you the time off to move forward (problem I had at a law office where I was working way more hours than hired for, then told I couldn't cut back to our original agreement when the next semester required more seated classes). If you don't excel, it's not worth their trouble to accommodate you because there are plenty of others begging for a job that can work whenever they're told.  I hope you're not trying to become a lawyer. That field is way over saturated.

negative: "I disagree with the selected answer. There's no one rule of thumb and certainly not simple ones like ""20 cents of every dollar if you're 35"". You've made a good start by making a budget of your expected expenses. If you read the Mr. Money Mustache blogpost titled The Shockingly  Simple Math Behind Early Retirement, you will understand that it is usually a mistake to think of your expenses as a fixed percentage of your income. In most cases, it makes more sense to keep your expenses as low as possible, regardless of your actual income.  In the financial independence community, it is a common principle that one typically needs 25-30 times one's annual spending to have enough money to sustain oneself forever off the investment returns that those savings generate (this is based on the assumption of a 7% average annual return, 4% after inflation). So the real answer to your question is this: UPDATE Keats brought to my attention that this formula doesn't work that well when the savings rates are low (20% range). This is because it assumes that money you save earns no returns for the entire period that you are saving. This is obviously not true; investment returns should also count toward your 25-times annual spending goal. For that reason, it's probably better to refer to the blog post that I linked to in the answer above for precise calculations. That's where I got the ""37 years at 20% savings rate"" figure from. Depending on how large and small x and y are, you could have enough saved up to retire in 7 years (at a 75% savings rate), 17 years (at a 50% savings rate), or 37 years! (at the suggested 20% savings rate for 35-year olds). As you go through life, your expenses may increase (eg. starting a family, starting a new business, unexpected health event etc) or decrease (kid wins full scholarship to college). So could your income. However, in general, you should negotiate the highest salary possible (if you are salaried), use the 25x rule, and consider your life and career goals to decide how much you want to save. And stop thinking of expenses as a percentage of income."

negative: There are, of course, many possible financial emergencies. They range from large medical expenses to losing your job to being sued to major home or car repairs to who-knows-what. I suppose some people are in a position where the chances that they will face any sort of financial emergency are remote. If you live in a country with national health insurance and there is near-zero chance that you will have any need to go outside this system, you are living with your parents and they are equipped to handle any home repairs, you ride the bus or subway and don't own a car so that's not an issue, etc etc, maybe there just isn't any likely scenario where you'd suddenly need cash. I can think of all sorts of scenarios that might affect me. I'm trying to put my kids through college, so if I lost my job, even if unemployment benefits were adequate to live on, they wouldn't pay for college. I have terrible health insurance so big medical bills could cost me a lot. I have an old car so it could break down any time and need expensive repairs, or even have to be replaced. I might suddenly be charged with a crime that I didn't commit and need a lawyer to defend me. Etc. So in a very real sense, everyone's situation is different. On the other hand, no matter how carefully you think it out, it's always possible that you will get bitten by something that you didn't think of. By definition, you can't make a list of unforeseen problems that might affect you! So no matter how safe you think you are, it's always good to have some emergency fund, just in case. How much is very hard to say.

negative: "As soon as you specify FDIC you immediately eliminate what most people would call investing. The word you use in the title ""Parking"" is really appropriate. You want to preserve the value. Therefore bank or credit union deposits into either a high yield account or a Certificate of Deposit are the way to go. Because you are not planning on a lot of transactions you should also look at some of the online only banks, of course only those with FDIC coverage. The money may need to be available over the next 2-5 years to cover   college tuition If needing it for college tuition is a high probability you could consider putting some of the money in your state's 529 plan. Many states give you a tax deduction for contributions. You need to check how much is the maximum you can contribute in a year. There may be a maximum for your state. Also gift tax provisions have to be considered. You will also want to understand what is the amount you will need to cover tuition and other eligible expenses. There is a big difference between living at home and going to a state school, and going out of state. The good news is that if you have gains and you use the money for permissible expenses, the gains are tax free. Most states have a plan that becomes more conservative as the child gets closer to college, therefore the chance of losses will be low. The plan is trying to avoid having a large drop in value just a the kid hits their late teens, exactly what you are looking for."

negative: "For some states they give you a tax break when you make a deposit into the accounts.  The 11 year old is still 11 years away from college graduation, so the growth can be significant. The 15 year old will have most of their funds in safe investments to avoid a big drop just as the they need the money. many view the automatic adjustment in risk a benefit since if this wasn't in a ""529"" plan you would have tax issues when selling the investments during the shift."

negative: If you are living at home as an adult, then you should be paying your fair share and contributing to the household expenses. You said your parents have loans to pay for that was part of your expenses to go to college. As an adult, you should be paying your parents back for the loans they took out on your behalf. You are a responsible person, it sounds like. Therefore, you need to finish restoring your parent's financial position first before moving out or transfer the loans that are actually yours back to you. Your college education and financial duties are your responsibility. Basically, if you are an adult you should move into your own place in a responsible way or stay at home while contributing to your parent's financial household status in a mutually beneficial way of shared responsibility.  Remember, healthy adults take care of their lives and share in paying for the expenses required to live.

negative: "It's a certified accountant who has passed the CPA exam in order to hold the designation.       If you don't pay taxes on your income, you'll be completely fucked down the line. If you're self reporting and it's not automatically deducted, definitely speak to a CPA. They may even recommend filing taxes quarterly. The sub you're using is more for high finance and capital markets, I'd suggest /r/personalfinance for your situation.       Also, far be it from me to say, because $2k/mo is great for an 18 year old who is presumably in college, but you won't get in trouble as long as you pay taxes. If you mean in a long-term sense of financial stability, yeah that could be bad. $24k is absolutely amazing now and if being hot on instagram can pay for your college, then 100000% do it, that's fucking awesome.      Just make sure to get a degree because if you're still only making $24k in your mid 20's, yes you could be in ""trouble"" as in dire financial straits. That's not much to live off of when you finally have lots of bills to pay."

negative: >I don't think we'll actually pay for shows, we're way too cheap to do that  People pay for cable and itunes.  People go to the movies and spend quite a bit.  They (mostly) complain when they feel they don't get value for what they pay for.  On Reddit many people have written about how the are (more or less) forced to torrent Game of Thrones, but will be happy to buy the Blurays when available.  Not every show is GOT, but that is what people will look and pay for happily.  Advertisers will pay (a lot) for shows that attract the 'right' types of viewers.  News programs attract older viewers, so drug companies see those shows as opportunities.  The Super Bowl attracts everyone, but mostly 18 to 49 year old males, so beer and car companies find it attractive.  I can't see the Super Bowl ever being a pay-on-demand event, but it could be.  If people want no commercials, or extra commentary, better graphics, higher definition, and the list goes on.  People schedule parties and events around the Super Bowl, so of course they will pay for its content.    >We have total information overload  I can't agree there.  50 years ago one could turn on the radio, TV, see a movie, or go to the library, and be fully occupied.  Adding the internet doesn't really 'create' overload.  I have friends who choose not to own a cellphone and/or a TV.  They find the expense/wasted time is not a priority in their lives.  I have a TV, but I only turn it on once or twice a week (a shame really, it's a beautiful 42 incher).  I think your point is advertisers are finding advertising to a large captive group is increasingly hard.  I'll agree with that.    The average 18 year old has already seen a million ads, so in modern urban life it's no wonder that most people tune out most advertising.  Advertisers now have good ways of targeting their dollars, I don't see broadcast TV as an efficient use of those dollars.

negative: I think we resolved this via comments above. Many finance authors are not fans of target date funds, as they have higher fees than you'd pay constructing the mix yourself, and they can't take into account your own risk tolerance. Not every 24 year old should have the same mix.  That said - I suggest you give thought to the pre-tax / post tax (i.e. traditional vs Roth) mix. I recently wrote The 15% solution, which attempts to show how to minimize your lifetime taxes by using the split that's ideal for your situation.

negative: >Landlords vs slumlords - somehow I doubt if the author lives in a real slum with a landlord that provides substandard housing. Why call a landlord a derogatory name for providing you a place to live>?  Because my apartment needed 5 repairs in the first four months of renting.  Because my landlord claims to be a nonprofit university (MIT owns large portions of Cambridge) when it's time to pay property taxes but increased the rent 27% over the rent from 3 years ago when they rented the apartment to me.  Because renting out housing stock as old as this by doing the minimal necessary repairs to get it back on the market every year is basically just economic rent-seeking on the value of living in this city.

negative: I am 10 years out of college and been debt free for 4.  My school would have cost me $180k for 4 years.  I was aware of the cost to go to the school I wanted and so I worked in highschool for every possible scholarship available.  I then went into a degree program which I knew was a good investment, engineering.  I came out of college in the middle of the recession with you guessed it, around $100k in debt.  I moved to a place where the cost of living made it so I could get a job and save.  I did not live a lavish lifestyle, I invested my money well, and I worked hard.  Garbage in, garbage out.  Go to a bad school, not worth it.  Do not work hard in college, not worth it.  Work hard in a major which has no economic value, not worth it.  Do not set yourself up for success by working hard in high school, getting things like AP credits and scholarships, not worth it.

negative: "In my opinion, the key variable for you (and others) is not age, but ""vintage."" Your ""age"" suggests that you were born in the mid-1980s, in the middle of a bull market. The most remunerative investing periods for you are likely to be in your childhood (past) and middle age (forties and early fifties). Also your, ""old-old"" period (around age 80, in the 2060s), if you live that long. For now, you can, and perhaps should invest cautiously, like today's 40-year olds, with a heavy emphasis on bonds. The main difference between you and them is that you can shift to stocks in about ten years, in your mid to late 30s, while they will find it harder to do so when approaching old age."

negative: I love how this probably won't get many replies because your in the trenches doing it, keep up the hard work. I graduated high school with 1k in savings and dropped out of college to help support my depressed and unemployed mother with some help from my Father.   I am now a married new construction homeowner and we take home enough money to have new cars, save for retirement, and enjoy life with no college degrees. I went from 8 an hour to over 35 now in 4-5 years.  We both had to get off social media because of all our old high school friends who went to college for garbage degrees, never tried to get entry level jobs in their industry while in school or network, and now cry all day about how Bernie sanders didn't win the election and why school should be free so they don't have to pay off debt for a worthless degree as they wait tables. No sympathy

negative: In addition to the issues discussed in BrenBarn's answer, I think you need to consider your medium term saving needs and existing savings. In particular, do you have a sufficient rainy day fund, a fund you will spend if things go wrong? For example, if you are dependent on a vehicle that is not covered by a guarantee or service plan, you should have enough money saved for a couple of major repairs. Depending on how secure your job is, whether it carries sick leave and long term disability, and how easy or difficult it would be to find another job in the event e.g. of your employer going bankrupt due to a downturn in your industry, you should have months to years of minimal living expenses in your rainy day fund. If you don't have those things covered, you should urgently save as much as you can until they are covered. If you do, then the next savings priority is to put money by for retirement. Of course, if all goes well the rainy day fund will ultimately get folded into retirement, but it needs to exist now, in a form you can access quickly.

negative: I agree with you. I'm a millennial. I'm not some old dude sitting in a chair writing on Reddit without first hand knowledge. I took out six figures of college debt, but spent a long time calculating my expected ROI.  Years after working I lived in relative poverty to pay of my loans and finally have done so.   I totally believe in many forms of loan forgiveness, but a blanket forgiveness I cannot support.

negative: Retirement calculation, in general, should be based on the amount of money needed per year/month and the expected life expectancy. Life expectancy, if calculated to 90 years (let's say) indicates that post retirement age (60 yrs.) your accumulated/invested money should generate adequate income to cover your expenses till 90 years. The problem in general is not how long you shall live but what would be your expected spending from retirement to end of life expectancy. The idea is at the minimum your investments should generate income that is inflation adjusted. One way to do this is to consider your monthly expense now i.e. the expense that is absolute minimum for carrying on (food, electricity, water, medicines, household consumables, car petrol, insurance, servicing, entertainment, newspaper etc.) this does not contain the amortizable liabilities (home loan, child's education, other debts). It is better to take this amount per family rather than per person and yearly rather than monthly (as we tend to miss a lot of yearly expenses). This amount that you need today will increase at a Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of the average inflation. For example, if today you spend 100 per year in 7 years you will need to spend appx. 200 at 10% inflation. Now, your investments will not increase post your retirement, so your current investment needs to do two things (1) give you your yearly requirement (2) grow by a fixed amount so that next year it can give you CAGR adjusted returns. In general, this kind of investment grows by high net amounts initially and slowly the growth decrease. The above can be calculated by Net Present value (NPV) formulae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_present_value). The key is to remember that the money that is invested when you retire should be able to give you inflation adjusted returns to cover your yearly expenses. How much money you need depends on your life style/expectation and how much return is received depends on the instruments that you invest on. As for your question above on the difference between the age of you and your spouse, it better to go with the consolidated family requirement and get an idea of how much investment is necessary and provision the same as soon as possible from your as well as your spouse's income. Hope this helps.- thanks

negative: ">""retail investors did not sufficiently research and think about the company, invested poorly""  A million times this.  I wish I had sufficient funds to open a brokerage account at FB's IPO.  I wanted to shortsell the stock with every fiber of my being once I saw that imaginary $38 price valuation.  Facebook, IMO, has minimal growth prospects and is tapering off in popularity.  Within 3 years I figure they'll be on the downswing, with the only new users being companies who foolishly use it as their website for a movie or product launch. (and 8 year olds)."

negative: She seems to be paying an inordinate amount of money for car payments. $850/month is just too high. She may be able to get by on public transit, depending on where she lives, but if not, she needs to look at selling her car and picking up a cheap second-hand vehicle. Public transit would probably save her $750/month. Going to a cheaper car should still save her $300 - $400/month. Next, phone and cable. These are certainly nice, but they are rarely necessities. I do not have cable t.v., for example. I do have a cell phone, and I do have Internet (a requirement of my job), but no cable t.v. She may be able to save some money there. My guess is that she could save $125/month here, though I may be biased on how much it costs to heat a Canadian home in our cold, cold winters. And, of course, the college payment. $900 - $1000 a month? I understand that she is paying this so that your sister can attend college. That's very nice, but it certainly sounds like your mother cannot afford that. On the other hand, if this is repayment of college expenses already incurred, there may be no choice here. Rent, at $1625/month. I have no idea what that gets you in NJ, but perhaps she could rent out a room. It's not inconceivable that she could bring in $1000/month from doing so, though obviously that's going to very much depend on the real estate/rental market where you live. Alternatively, she could move out and move in with someone else and that should certainly get her share of the rent down to $800 - $1000/month or thereabouts, and most likely cut her utility bills, also. I've identified a number of places where she can save money. No doubt, the budget is tight, but I think she's spending on far more than just bare essentials. One thing that concerns me here is that she appears to have no emergency funds and very little for entertainment, other than cable t.v. If at all possible, she needs to cut her budget down so that she is not living paycheque to paycheque and has money to cover, for example, emergency car repairs. And I'd really like to see her have more than $50/month for expenses (which I'm guessing is entertainment). It may not be possible, of course, but I would most definitely say she should not be paying for your sister's college if this places her in such dire financial risk. Easier said than done, of course. Most certainly, I would not even consider cutting the health insurance, by the way. Another approach would be to look at how her expenses will go down when your sister is done school and perhaps cleared up other expenses. It may be worth borrowing from family and friends, knowing that in a year, her expenses will go down $500/month. That makes her budget manageable. Additionally, the debt repayment presumably will finish at some point. The point I'm trying to make is that, in a year, her budget will be just about manageable, and she may be able to get there with smaller trims in the immediate future.

negative: "There is no formula to answer the question. You have to balance return on investment with risk. There's also the question of whether you have any children or other heirs that you would like to leave money to. The mortgage is presumably a guaranteed thing: you know exactly how much the payments will be for the rest of the loan. I think most annuities have a fixed rate of return, but they terminate when you both die. There are annuities with a variable return, but usually with a guaranteed minimum.  So if you got an annuity with a fixed 3.85% return, and you lived exactly 18 more years, then (ignoring tax implications), there'd be no practical difference between the two choices. If you lived longer than 18 years, the annuity would be better. If less, paying off the mortgage would be better. Another option to consider is doing neither, but keeping the money in the 401k or some other investment. This will usually give better than 3.85% return, and the principal will be available to leave to your heirs. The big drawback to this is risk: investments in the stock market and the like usually do better than 3 or 4%, but not always, and sometimes they lose money. Earlier I said ""ignoring tax implications"". Of course that can be a significant factor. Mortgages get special tax treatment, so the effective interest rate on a mortgage is less than the nominal rate. 401ks also get special tax treatment. So this complicates up calculations trying to compare. I can't give definitive numbers without knowing the returns you might get on an annuity and your tax situation."

negative: The question is how does $16,000/year for 6.5 years fit into your budget. Or to put it another way, what won't you be spending that money on? Housing, food, vacations, retirement fund, investments (though you can invest your car fund in the meantime), building a hefty emergency fund, kids college funds, saving for a down payment on a home, charity, etc... are all other places that money could go. I don't know what your needs are today let alone 6.5 years into the future, but I'd encourage you to consider all your financial goals and evaluate where this expense would fit.  It seems your plan is to save up to the total cost of the car and then buy it in cash. That's a valid strategy, but it means you'll have no car (unless you already own one) for 6.5 years.  Do you need a car? If so, what will you drive in the meantime (and even if you already own another car outright, you'll have gas and maintenance expenses)? If you don't need a car, then $100,000 is a rather extravagant purchase for something we just established you don't need. Would you be happier having this expensive car in 6.5 years, or having a series of less expensive cars starting now? Or buying a used model of the expensive car sooner? Or having no car at all? Also, a lot can change in 6.5 years. Cars will evolve and there'll be different models and options available. Maybe your salary will have doubled, or maybe you'll be unemployed. You could be living in a different city, have a different commute, and maybe you'll need a minivan to haul kids around or live in a place with bad winters and want a 4-wheel-drive. You'll also need to be prepared for the additional expenses that generally come with expensive cars, such as higher insurance and maintenance rates, and parking could be costly if you live in an expensive city.  The other option, of course, if the car is truly something you need, want, and can afford, would be to save up a sizable down payment and finance the rest so you can get the car sooner. Finally, there's nothing wrong with saving your money for 6.5 years, building up that fund, and then reevaluating what makes the most sense for you at that time. Maybe it will the car, maybe something else, but the nice thing about having savings is that it gives you more options.

negative: "So my read on the question is ""How do I invest 300k such that it earns me a 'living wage' without the ongoing grind inherent in most formal employment?""  Reading the other answers to date it looks like most of them are thinking in terms of investment accounts and trying to live off of the earnings from such.  I wanted to throw out a couple of alternative choices that may be worth considering... The first is real-estate investing.  $300k should allow you to pick up 2 or 3 single family dwellings with little or no mortgage.  Turning them into rentals placed with a good property management company should easily pay their expenses and provide a consistent income with minimal effort/attention from you.  Similar story with buying into multifamily housing or commercial real-estate. Your key concern here is picking the right market in which to buy and finding a reputable manager to handle the day to day issues on your behalf. Note that you are not overly concerned with the potential resale value of the property(s), but the probable rental income they can generate, these are separate concerns that may not align with each other. Second is buying/founding a business that has a general manager other than yourself.  Franchise ownership may be a potential option for you under the circumstances.  The key concern here is picking the business, location, and manager that make you comfortable in terms of the risk involved.  You need the place to make enough money to pay for itself and the salary of everyone working there, with enough left over for you to live on.  Sounds easy enough, but not so much in practice.  Generally you can expect at least a few years of being hands on and watching things very closely to make sure it is going the way you want it to.  Finding a mentor who has done this type of transition before to walk you through it would be strongly advised.  So would preparing yourself for a failure or two before you work out the exact combination of factors that work for you."