No.  It's not.  It's lots of changed interface items that require lots of learning for the users (who are often sketchy, at best, with their familiarity in setting up and using computers), which is frustrating when said users are faced with deadlines that must be met.  The original release of Windows 8 was buggy as hell, proving unreliable and untrustworthy for those who actually had to get things done.  Many of these users couldn't figure out how to upgrade to 8.1, and I've dealt with several such users whose update actually failed when attempted.  I'm not saying this cannot be salvaged.  I'm saying it's not remotely worth the pain--as a user--of switching/upgrading from Windows 7.


I'm NMLS with a bank, won't name it, but you can buy and sell points up to .5 if I remember right.  Might be 1% but it's the difference between 1300 and 1700 if I remember right for monthly payments.


Here is the answer from my brokerage: Regular equity monthly options expire on the 3rd Friday of every month. The last time to trade them is by market close at 4 PM Eastern time. The weekly options will expire on the Friday of that week, also with a last trading time of 4 PM Eastern time. Options that expire in the money by .01 or more are automatically exercised. If you are long an option that is out of the money at expiration, it will expire worthless. If you are short an option, even if it expires out of the money, you are still at risk for possible assignment since the long option holder always has the right to exercise an option prior to expiration.*


I started this off as a comment to Joe's answer, but it got rather messy in that form so I'll just post it as a separate answer instead. I suggest that you read Joe's answer first. I believe you are overthinking this. First, you really should be discussing the matter with your girlfriend. We can provide suggestions, but only the two of you can decide what feels right for the two of you. Strangers on the Internet can never have as complete a picture of your financial situations, your plans, and your personalities, as the two of you together. That said, here's a starting point that I would use as input to such a discussion: As you can see, a common theme to all of this is transparency and communication. There is a reason for this: a marriage without proper communication can never work out well in the long term. I don't know about Germany specifically, but disagreements about money tends to be a major reason in couples splitting up. By setting your lives up for transparency in money matters from the beginning, you significantly reduce the risk of this happening to you. Scott Hanselman discusses a very similar way of doing things, but phrases it differently, in Relationship Hacks: An Allowance System for Adults.


"First to actually answer the question ""how long at these rates/payments?""-  These is nothing magic or nefarious about what the bank is doing. They add accrued interest and take your payment off the new total.  I'd make higher payments to the 8.75% debt until it's gone, $100/mo extra and be done. The first debt, if you bump it to $50 will be paid in 147 months, at $75/mo, 92 months. Everything you pay above the minimum goes right to the principal balance and gets you closer to paying it off.  The debt snowball is not the ideal way to pay off your debt. Say I have one 24% credit card the bank was nice enough to give me a $20,000 line of credit on. I also have 20 cards each with $1000 in credit, all at 6%. The snowball dictates that the smallest debt be paid first, so while I pay the minimum on the 24% card, the 6% cards get paid off one by one, but I'm supposed to feel good about the process, as I reduce the number of cards every few months.  The correct way to line up debt is to pay off the (tax adjusted) highest rate first, as an extra $100 to the 24% card saves you $2/mo vs 50 cents/mo for the 6% cards. I wrote an article discussing the Debt Snowball which links to a calculator where you can see the difference in methods. I note that if the difference from lowest to highest rate is small, the Snowball method will only cost you a small amount more. If, by coincidence, the balances are close, the difference will also be small.  The above aside, it's the rest of your situation that will tell you the right path for you. For example, a matched 401(k) deposit should take priority over most debt repayment. The $11,000 might be better conserved for a house downpayment as that $66/mo is student loan and won't count as the housing debt, rather ""other debt"" and part of the higher ratio when qualifying for the mortgage. If you already have taken this into account, by all means, pay off the 8.75% debt asap, then start paying off the 3% faster. Keep in mind, this is likely the lowest rate debt one can have and once paid off, you can't withdraw it again. So it's important to consider the big picture first.  (Are you depositing to a retirement account? Is it a 401(k) and are you getting any matching from the company?)"


Yes it is. The government already controls the banks. The fed sets reserve amounts. It is about 20% but they can make it 99% if they wanted. A bank that doesn't meet its reserves loses its charter and is seized. I believe it is Office of Thrift Supervision or something. The president appoints the Fed chairman and congress oversees the Fed. The Fed gives 90%+ profits to the Treasury.


I am going to assume that this is going to be a long term investment and you don't need this money before 5-6years at the very least. My advise would be to invest in one of the following funds : IDFC Premier equity fund growth plan (Direct) (Only SIP allowed right now) ICICI Discovery fund growth plan (Direct) DSP microcap fund growth plan (Direct) In case you do not want to be invested in small and mid cap and want a little less volatility then my first choice for that would be : Quantum long term equity fund dividend plan Whatever you go for make sure you go directly with the fund house and not through a broker as you end up getting charged an extra .63% extra as opposed to going direct and you will also be paying for a demat account which can be avoided if you invest directly with a fund house. Out of the above mentioned funds Quantum has the lowest expense ratio of 1.25% and it is a huge benefit if you are talking 10+ years because it makes a lot of difference. Source : My own research and experience as an investor.


I have a ton of overpriced lego sets that sit in the basement collecting dust...while my 7 and 10 year old are watching You tube or video games.. it's sad actually- we (wife and I) built them and they would never play with them... we finally noticed that it was a good intention bad result... oh well


"Some people are better drivers than others.  A collision can happen to anybody, even good drivers. The collision might not be your fault at all; it might be entirely the fault of the other party. However, the best drivers do a better job of avoiding collisions in situations where the other drivers on the road are doing the wrong things.  The ""no claims discount"" is a way to identify and reward those good drivers, as they have a lower likelihood of claims in the future."


So my Question is this, in reality is investment in equities like the   stock market even remotely resemble the type of growth one would   expect if investing the same money in an account with compounding   interest? Generally no as there is a great deal of volatility when it comes to investing in stocks that isn't well represented by simply taking the compounded annual growth rate and assuming things always went up and never went down. This is adding in the swings that the market will take that at times may be a bit of a rude surprise to some people. Are all these prognosticators vastly underestimating how much savers   need to be socking away by overstating what is realistic in terms of   growth in investment markets? Possibly but not probably. Until we know definitively what the returns are from various asset classes, I'm not sure I'd want to claim that people need to save a ton more. I'll agree that the model misses how wide the swings are, not necessarily that the averages are too low or overstated.


"As Dilip said, if you want actual concrete, based in tax law, answers, please add the country (and if applicable, state) where you pay income tax. Also, knowing what tax bracket you're in would help as well, although I certainly understand if you're not comfortable sharing that. So, assuming the US... If you're in the 10% or 15% tax bracket, then you're already not paying any federal tax on the $3k long term gain, so purposely taking losses is pointless, and given that there's probably a cost to taking the loss (commission, SEC fee), you'd be losing money by doing so. Also, you won't be able to buy back the loser for 31 days without having the loss postponed due to the wash sale that would result. State tax is another matter, but (going by the table in this article), even using the highest low end tax rate (Tennessee at 6%), the $50 loss would only save you $3, which is probably less than the commission to sell the loser, so again you'd be losing money. And if you're in a state with no state income tax, then the loss wouldn't save you anything on taxes at the state level, but of course you'll still be paying to be able to take the loss. On the high end, you'd be saving 20% federal tax and 13.3% state tax (using the highest high end tax state, California, and ignoring (because I don't know :-) ) whether they tax long-term capital gains at the same rate as regular income or not), you'd be saving $50 * (20% + 13.3%) = $50 * 33.3% = $16.65. So for taxes, you're looking at saving between nothing and $16.65. And then you have to subtract from that the cost to achieve the loss, so even on the high end (which means (assuming a single filer)) you're making >$1 million), you're only saving about $10, and you're probably actually losing money. So I personally don't think taking a $50 loss to try to decrease taxes makes sense. However, if you really meant $500 or $5000, then it might (although if you're in the 10-15% brackets in a no income tax state, even then it wouldn't). So the answer to your final question is, ""It depends."" The only way to say for sure is, based on the country and state you're in, calculate what it will save you (if anything). As a general rule, you want to avoid letting the tax tail wag the dog. That is, your financial goal should be to end up with the most money, not to pay the least taxes. So while looking at the tax consequences of a transaction is a good idea, don't look at just the tax consequences, look at the consequences for your overall net worth."


If you buy for $1 and sell $1 when the price goes to $2, you would have sold only half of your initial investment. So your investment would now be worth $2 and you sell $1 leaving $1 still in the market.  This means you would have sold half your initial investment, making a profit of $0.50 on this half of your initial investment, and having to pay CGT on this amount.


ATM surcharges exist based on the preference of the ATM owner, not the country where it sits.   I believe that any country could have these ATMs if the owner so desired.


"On the one hand the author says this:  >the forcible seizing of land from individuals by government without just compensation deserves to be called tyranny.  Then in the next breath says this:  >Property owners merely need to pay the communities from which they receive benefits through their exclusive use of land the exact market value of the benefits that they receive.  There is no way to ""pay the communities"" except through some form of representation: Government.  So what the author is stating is that people who gain value of the land they use must pay the government a fair market value for that use.  Also known as taxation.  But the author takes it one step further: ALL land should be in the hands of the representatives of the community (Government) and everyone must lease said land from the community (Government).    Yeah. That will work well."


Vamos paella is a unique culinary concept where our chefs will be cooking paella and tapas live at your gathering. You read that right! It’s time to unwind and enjoy yourself in good company while our dedicated team takes care of all your Paella party needs. With a strong passion for fine food and excellent service, the team at Vamos paella would be delighted to help create and share the experience of putting together a truly special Paella catering event. Click here for more details:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e-l4ry72lo&feature=youtu.be


During a stock split the only thing that changes is the number of shares outstanding.  Typically a stock splits to lower its price per share.  Sometimes if a company's value is falling it will do a reverse split where X shares will be exchanged for Y shares.  This is typically done to avoid being de-listed from an exchange if the price per share falls below a certain threshold, usually $1.  Again the only thing changing is the number of shares outstanding.  A 20 for 1 reverse split means for every 20 shares outstanding the shareholder will be granted one new share. Example X Co. has 1,000,000 shares outstanding for a price of $100 per share.  It does a 1 for 10 split.  Now there are 10,000,000 shares outstanding for a price of $10 per share. Example Y Co has 1,000,000 shares outstanding for a price of $1 per share.  It does a 10 for 1 reverse split.  Now there are 100,000 shares outstanding for a price of $10. Quickly looking at the news for ASTI it looks like it underwent a 20 for 1 reverse split.  You should probably look at your statements and ask your broker how the arithmetic worked in your case. Investopedia links for Reverse Stock Split and Stock Split


With all due respect, a market being saturated is not a marker of failure or stagnation, in fact if you look at the market for service providers you'll see that is worth an estimated $400-600 billion with the largest chunk being the offline service providers (yellow pages). This shows that there is ample space for an innovative service platform that offers a refreshing take on costumer and vendor relationship.


To try to answer the three explicit questions: Every share of stock is treated proportionately: each share is assigned the same dollar amount of investment (1/176th part of the contribution in the example), and has the same discount amount (15% of $20 or $25, depending on when you sell, usually). So if you immediately sell 120 shares at $25, you have taxable income on the gain for those shares (120*($25-$17)). Either selling immediately or holding for the long term period (12-18 mo) can be advantageous, just in different ways.   Selling immediately avoids a risk of a decline in the price of the stock, and allows you to invest elsewhere and earn income on the proceeds for the next 12-18 months that you would not otherwise have had.  The downside is that all of your gain ($25-$17 per share) is taxed as ordinary income.   Holding for the full period is advantageous in that only the discount (15% of $20 or $25) will be taxed as ordinary income and the rest of the gain (sell price minus $20 or $25) will be taxed at long-term capital gain tax rates, which generally are lower than ordinary rates (all taxes are due in the year you do sell).  The catch is you will sell at different price, higher or lower, and thus have a risk of loss (or gain). You will never be (Federally) double taxed in any scenario.  The $3000 you put in will not be taxed after all is sold, as it is a return of your capital investment.  All money you receive in excess of the $3000 will be taxed, in all scenarios, just potentially at different rates, ordinary or capital gain.  (All this ignores AMT considerations, which you likely are not subject to.)


"The best advice I have heard from any of my professors is ""Think before you speak""  A moment of silence is Okay. Especially if it is a question that involves a great deal of critical thinking. Formulate your responses so they sound intelligent and mature. Asking the interviewer questions works too -- the more they talk, the better!"


First thing to do when you notice a credit card fraud is to call the respective banks who issues the credit card and most banks immediately (as far as my experience goes - twice) they will cancel the credit card and issue a new card with different number. Your credit card account will remain the same, no effect on credit score as the account is still active, its just the credit card number is changed. If you are more concerned about Identity Theft, there are two further options you can pursue. Place a Fraud Alert : Ask 1 of the 3 credit reporting companies to put   a fraud alert on your credit report. They must tell the other 2   companies. An initial fraud alert can make it harder for an identity   thief to open more accounts in your name. The alert lasts 90 days but   you can renew it. - as per Federal Trade Commission Credit Freeze : If you’re concerned about identity theft, those reported mega-data breaches, or someone gaining access to your credit   report without your permission, you might consider placing a credit   freeze on your report. - as per Federal Trade Commission


"The link highlighting on that page is bonkers. Not sure I trust what nymag.com is saying about internet culture.  Also: ""It’s tough to generate revenue when your most active user base is too young to have a steady income.""  Really?"


"> Yea that's all fine and dandy if you have the resources to afford not having a reliable income while you take the risk of being entrepreneurial.   Start small.  No one said you need to rent out a floor of an office building in Manhattan and hire 25 people right off the bat.  Check out this [20 year old's story](http://www.reddit.com/r/smallbusiness/comments/2ahuun/how_i_started_my_business_now_im_moving_on/) in /r/smallbusiness.  He started a janitorial company with $500 and sold for $670k a few year later.  Instead of just *clearly* being jealous of the rich, why not create something?  This kid was obviously tired of being told ""find a job"" and he went out a created his own empire.  This is what we should be teaching kids in school.  Instead of telling them to go pay $200k for a worthless degree in liberal arts then telling him to cross his fingers to find a ""job"".  Fuck that mindset.  Fuck finding a ""job"".  Go make jobs."


Nobody can give you a safe 6% return with that portfolio under current conditions. It looks like the current 10 year treasury is yielding about 2.2%. With 60% in bonds, the stocks would have to yield about 12%, which just isn't happening safely now.


"More like ""I'm going to give you a pile of sandwiches for you and your friends, and you'll like it, but if your friends don't, I'm going to charge you double.""  They're advertising the product as good, with some stupid warning if it's not good.  They're simply trying to manage complaints by making complaining impossible, rather than fixing the actual problems."


Monopolies spur competition by startups and other giants. If Intel abuses a monopoly Apple will make their own CPUs or invest in AMD. Microsoft Office resulted in Google Docs. Internet Explorer in Firefox.  If anything monopolies without government backing (preventing entrance to a market) cannot last long because it shows there is a shit tin of profit to be had. Even with ISPs we are seeing investment and innovation in gigabit wireless with companies like Starry to get over the natural monopoly.


The preparation for starting up of the company has lasted already more than 2 years. Let's say the company starts officially in January next year. So, in January 2014... 8 million USD is invested to purchase the equipments and the company will start selling their prdocuts right away. Imagine the company will be selling the same amount of products each year at the same price for 5 years. After 5 years it will sell the equipments for 6 million USD and cease to exist. The depreciation of  equipments is divided into those 5 years. So, each year the depreciation of equipments is 400.000 USD. In despite of this, the company will make 500.000 USD per year as a profit before tax.  So, the equipments are bought in Januardy 2014 (first month of the existence of the company) and sold in December 2018 (last month of the existence of the company). This is the NPV that I calculated. Is it correct?


I've rolled mine over into IRAs, and once you have one rollover account you can roll further 401ks into it-- I've done that.


"In the UK, using a credit card adds a layer of protection for consumers. If something goes wrong or you bought something that was actually a scam, if you inform the credit card company with the necessary documents they  will typically clear the balance for that purchase (essentially the burden of 'debt' is passed to them and they themselves will have to chase up the necessary people). Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act  I personally use my credit card when buying anything one would consider as  ""consumer spending"" (tvs, furniture ect). I then pay off the credit card immediately. This gives me the normal benefits of the credit card (if you get cashback or points) PLUS the additional consumer credit protection on all my purchases.  This, in my opinion is the most effective way of using your credit card."


"Sure there are. We still want skilled workers, people who speak English, and people who share our principles of freedom and hard work. We'd also have to discard our welfare system for their to be ""no additional hurdles"" as it used to be.  Before welfare our immigration system was non-existent."


Yeah.  The drive to do this kind of thing at a federal level is pretty much dead unless there is some kind of for-profit road company that can start privatizing roads. Then they could open up the gusher.  I feel conflicted over it. I remember during the Stimulus Act a lot of roads were repaved and they're now all shit again. I question why crushed gravel and oil is really the very best we can do when it comes to roads.  I know some roads that get scraped, then paved and STILL are full of bumps. They inevitably start cracking and failing almost immediately. Also, no matter where I go in the US the tech being used to resurface roads looks positively ancient. I've seen other countries use very advanced machines that resurface and pave quickly in one pass.


"Senator Orrin hatch (R-UT) is the same guy who famously endorsed remotely destroying the computers of people who pirate music and software. He's an all around douchebag and I disagree with his positions on pretty much everything. He is quoted in this article blasting the decision because of the recent security breach. I never thought I would see the day where I nod along and scream ""YEAH ORRIN GO GET 'EM!"" Equifax seriously fucked up and I think they might actually suffer the consequences because there is so much bipartisan hate against them across the political spectrum. Also rich people got fucked over here too so they have reason to go after Equifax.  We live in interesting times."


Well for a start funds don't pay interest.  If you pick an income-paying fund (as opposed to one that automatically reinvests any income for you) you will receive periodic income based on the dividends paid by the underlying stocks, but it won't be the steady predictable interest payment you might get from a savings account or fixed-rate security. This income is not guaranteed and will vary based on the performance of the companies making up the fund. It's also quite likely that the income by itself won't cover the interest on your mortgage.  The gains from stock market investment come from a mixture of dividends and capital growth (i.e. the increase in the price of the shares).  So you may have to sell units now and again or cover part of the interest payments from other income. You're basically betting that the after-tax returns from the fund will be greater than the mortgage interest rate you're paying.   3 facts: If you're comfortable with these 3 facts, go for it. If they're going to keep you awake at night, you might not want to take the risk.


>You can sound very intelligent by denoiuncing ideas that challenge the status quo, not do much when it is clear that the status is about to fall off of a cliff  Except all those ideas, ending the Fed, going on a gold standard, are returns to *old ideas* that have already been shown to have significant problems. These are not challenging the status quo. These are ignoring well established knowledge and the pain it took mankind to understand *why* these ideas are worse for us than the current system.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2017/09/macro_events_in.html) reduced by 91%. (I'm a bot) ***** > NGDP aggregates prices and output, and thus NGDP cannot change unless at least some individuals adjust their output or pricing decisions.  > Proponents of NGDP stabilization point to such abrupt downturns in the growth of nominal GDP as occurred in 2008 as something that could be eliminated by having the Fed stabilize nominal GDP. We do not doubt that a sufficient monetary expansion could offset any decline in nominal GDP, provided only that V remains positive.  > Unstable monetary policy shows up as unstable NGDP. Since wages are sticky, employment tends to move with NGDP in the short run, and unemployment is countercyclical.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6z8a10/macro_events_in_big_economies_dont_have_micro/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~207480 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*: **NGDP**^#1 **economic**^#2 **monetary**^#3 **targeting**^#4 **agents**^#5"


Why does selling a bond drive up the yield? The bond will pay back a fixed amount when it comes due. The yield is a comparison of what you pay for the bond and what will be repaid when it matures (assuming no default). Why does the yield go up if the country is economically unstable? If the country's economy is unstable, that increases the chance that they will default and not pay the full value of the bonds when they mature. People are selling them now at a loss instead of waiting for a default later for a greater loss. So if you think Greece is not going to default as it's highly likely a country would completely default, wouldn't it make sense to hold onto the bonds? Only if you also think that they will pay back the full value at maturity. It's possible that they pay some, but not all. It's also possible that they will default. It's also possible that they will get kicked out of the Euro and start printing Drachmas again, and try to pay the bonds back with those which could devalue the bonds through inflation. The market is made of lots of smart people. If they think there are reasons to worry, there probably are. That doesn't mean they can predict the future, it just means that they are pricing the risk with good information. If you are smarter than the herd, by all means, bet against them and buy the bonds now. It can indeed be lucrative if you are right, and they are wrong.


Have a look at my answer to a similar question (asked by a 22 yo) ... Basically


I worked in a lab that designed micro machines to more rapidly conduct biological tests. These sorts of devices which collect data could easily do what several lab technicians and doctors can do in a short amount of time.   People should always be on the move and willing to learn new skills.


To start trading at a minimum you need 3 things; Bank Account: This again is not must, but most preferred to transact. Quite a few broker would insist on this. Demat Account: This is must as all shares on NSE are held electronically. The custodians are CSDL or NSDL both Government entities. These don't offer services directly to customer, but via other financial institutions like Banks and Large Brokers. Broker Account: This is required to buy or sell securities. If you are only buying in IPO, this is not required as one can directly participate in IPO and Broker is not involved. However if you want to buy and sell on NSE you would need a broker account. Quite a few financial institutes offer all 3 services or 2 services [Demat/Broker]. The fee structure and online service etc are differentiators. You can take a look at options and decide the best one to use.


Look for unsustainable policies and actions by policy makers, both before and possibly during, when looking at the ForEx markets.  Consider some examples: Each of those events could be seen in the growing unsustainability of local policies.  ForEx markets and local policies can appear to stay on an unsustainable path for a long time, but equilibrium will force itself on everything in the long run.  In two of the above cases, the initial response wasn't enough to offset the mess, and more and more intervention had to be done, only making matters worse.  When you know how unsustainable policies are and how big the corrections need to be, you can quickly ascertain whether an action by policy makers will be enough.


"I don't know what the legal situation in the US is, but in the UK I would take the bank to court. Your case is simple - you never authorised the transactions, and they have provided no evidence to you that you did. The details of the VISA ""zero liability"" promise you mention may also be worth quoting as it ought to form part of your contract with the bank."


That is including over time paid. This title is misleading at best. How many hour do they work? Cop's shift is 12 hours. Over time only happens after 12 hours so these guys are literally busting their balls for this money how can you just simply put the total out there and not tell people how many hours do they work to earn this much? I'd say a police making that money by working over time is much more deserving that money than a money manager who makes easily hundred times that much.


Heh, I bought my 3ds from sears with discover cash back at 10%, so I got $25 back then when the price dropped I got a bonus 10% on the difference so $88 off I think? Anyway I totally took advantage of them as I was aware (honestly wouldn't consider it insider info since everyone knew) of a coming price drop.  Otherwise sears is terrible, but I'm about to buy multiple appliances through them and having them do installs. So I guess I'm helping them float.


"Payroll is a huge part of these companies' costs. The notion that payroll could be doubled or tripled and prices would only rise ""a few cents"" is wild hyperbole fit for /r/politics, not /r/business. We expect better than Alternet here.  But regardless, it's not about damage to the consumer via higher prices. In my  opinion, the fact that something costs the consumer more is almost totally irrelevant to this discussion.   The point is that businesses that operate by employing teens and college students are under no obligation to raise their wages just because the broader economy is crap and adults are filtering into the positions."


I think it looks pretty good. Something about the reverse white typography seems a bit harsh to me what with everything else being in warm browns but that's a quibble.  I remember being told in some business course ages ago that one needed to be able to withstand 3 years of few sales when starting a new biz. That was pre-internet. There are probably new rules but I think one should still be prepared for a long wait. People have to find the site. How will they do that?


Thank you Aegeus for voting on metric\_units.    This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://goodbot-badbot.herokuapp.com/).     ***    ^^Even ^^if ^^I ^^don't ^^reply ^^to ^^your ^^comment, ^^I'm ^^still ^^listening ^^for ^^votes. ^^Check ^^the ^^webpage ^^to ^^see ^^if ^^your ^^vote ^^registered!


"As others have pointed out, leveraged investing is investing borrowed money. To do so, you need to convince a lender that you're good for the loan. This usually means you need to have collateral worth what you're trying to borrow, or you need to pay a higher rate to account for the fact that they're gambling that you will remain employed and pay off the loan. Leveraged investing is, in general, a risky move for exactly this reason. You can lose not just your original investment, but everything you borrowed as well. The only time it really makes sense, in my admittedly conservative opinion, is when you (a) can afford to suffer that loss, (b) are pretty confident of your investment, and (c) have assets which you have no intention to sell for the duration of the loan. An ""unneeded"" mortgage on a house is a classic example, thusly: When I purchased my house, I had enough savings that I could have bought it without taking a mortgage. Instead, I took out a mortgage for a large part of that, and left the remainder in my investment accounts -- essentially building the leveraging loan into the mortgage. I then got obscenely ""lucky"" when interest rates fell through the floor due to the Great Recession, and was able to refinance the mortgage to near record low rates. As a result, on that loan -- which, as I say, I'm in the position of being able to pay off at any time without killing my finances -- I'm currently paying about 3.5%, while the cash this has let me leave in my investments is earning several times that... a net win. But again, note that this required collateral. Essentially, all I'm doing is paying a bit to to borrow my own money (part of the value of the house). There really is no easy way to ""convert 25k to 250k"" -- if there was, everyone would be doing it.  There's no magic in investment. Just time and compounding returns and trading off risk against potential gain. The more you try to push it and win big, the more you risk losing big. I really recommend not attempting anything fancy until you're wealthy enough that you can afford those losses. But if you insist on playing in this space, the answer to your question is to buy options. Options are a packaged form of borrowing to invest. Note that they're still considered high-risk unless you know EXACTLY what you're doing, and again I strongly recommend you not put money into them unless you can afford to lose it -- options have a nasty habit of turning from apparent gains on paper to losses remarkably quickly."


"Fantastic find. The only thing is that gold and other precious metals would ""make sense"" as a potential way to deliver dividends (highly liquid, seen as borderline synonymous with cash, etc.).   I wonder if anything more illiquid, such as my example, has been done or would make sense."


Short term investments, treasuries, current accounts.


There isn't a difference - he/she likely meant to say the difference between sales and profit.    Sales, in this case, means the amount of money that a business receives from its customers.  Profit would be what is left after deducting costs (wages, product, etc.) from sales.  To put it another way:  Sales - Costs = Profit


"These ""doomsday"" articles always make me laugh. If it doesn't happen the article is simply forgotten. If it does come true then years later the author can bring it out and say "" see I was right"".  In this case it does seem obvious though."


You can open a self-employed 401k, here's an example. You can deposit up to 50K (including the personal cap and the profit sharing/matching portion).


Cost Rica is one of the most popular vacation destinations in Central America and perhaps the world. Many things define the beautiful country. From the active volcanoes, to gorgeous beaches on Pacific to tropical landscapes, you will find everything you need for the best vacation experience. https://aaatourcostarica.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/4-things-make-costa-rica-the-best-vacation-destination/


"The type of ""office job"" and the level at which you're expected to perform (usually relative to the compensation) need to be considered.  Just because you know Susie, the slacker data entry specialist I, can play on Facebook and Snap chat in between her poor attempts at being productive doesn't mean that all office jobs are like this.  Susie probably isn't expected to get very much done and is most likely compensated as such, most likely less than a good manufacturing or laborer's job."


But if increasing demand is brought about by increasing spending, and wide-ranging increased spending appears when many people have money to spend - why not just give everyone some money to spend?   Why tie it to the hourly rate at a job, thereby making tons of positions too expensive for employers to justify?   Seems like a simple allocation of money to everyone, no strings attached, would stimulate demand nicely.


"We need a new kind of economy that is actually economic, that ""saves"", rather than the one we have now that is largely based on waste.  We need more jobs and higher wages so that everyone can work a little less hours and have the time to go back to doing a few things for themselves like gardening, or even walking their own dog instead of paying someone to do it.  We need to include the ""cradle to grave"" costs of products into the price so that someone can get paid to take it apart and actually recycle it instead of land filling it. And, we need to build products better, in the first place so that each item lasts longer before needing to be recycled.  The last 2-3 decades, we have been so focused on getting a lot of stuff as cheap as possible. We need to reverse that and buy less individual items of a higher quality so that they last a while. I am willing to spend more to buy a TV that will last 30 years like my parents TV did. Today's flat screens seem to be doomed at 2 years.  We also need to focus on rebuilding and repairing what we were given by our parents and grandparents--the nations roads, bridges, pipelines, water systems, and landmark building--all of these things need to be repaired before they are beyond hope.  Unfortunately, none of these things are going to happen."


"There is a lot misinformation in this thread that I'd like to clear up. In fact, you're more than welcomed to PM me if you wish to see any backup to the statements I'm about to make.   First, I'd like to say that as an Uber/Lyft driver, the experience has been nothing short of exhilarating. I normally work in the L.A. and O.C. areas of So. Cal and the amount of interesting, super successful, and wonderful people I meet on a daily basis is off the charts. It's as if I'm some sort of talk show host on wheels.   Initially, I applied for Lyft, as the social and community angle of its service intrigued the hell out of me. I'm an outgoing guy and I'm also an artist of some type who receives a royalty check only once a month. Instead of doing kickstarters and begging for money, I thought doing Lyft would be a great idea instead. So far my customers have been nothing short of an inspiration. Anyway, after passing a background check, a driving test with my mentor, a driving record check, alongside submitting all my documentation (license, registration, insurance) , and a quick vehicle inspection (my car is rather new and in great condition) I was hired quickly.   That same day I decided to get to work quickly, see how the whole system works. As soon as I got to the destination I wanted to get to I got my first call on my phone within 5 minutes. I use my GPS and rush to pick my customer up (while obeying all traffic laws, of course). After a couple of minutes of chit chat I come to find out my first Lyft customer ever is an Uber recruiter. She likes my car and my approach so she hands me a Uber logo'd black bag with an iPhone, a car charger, and a mount. I asked her if this means I have to work exclusively for Uber, she says, ""Nope.""  My eyes then light up like some medieval lights in the sky, chicken little for the peasantry, ancient aliens approved phenomena when I realize I'll have access to both customer bases just one week removed from not being able to pay my phone bill.   After submitting a background check, a driving record check, and pretty much all the stuff Lyft asked for, I was driving for both Uber and Lyft a week after I was hired for Lyft.   The good news for you the consumer is that both companies are being cut throat because they want your money! There's never been a better time to hitch a ride on the cheap. Both companies have thrown millions of dollars over the past couple of months through social media,  driver bonuses, and other venues, so you're able to get a free ride or a deep discount off a long ride.  If you haven't tried both services, now's the time. Don't want to risk getting a DUI just for driving down a couple of blocks to your favorite bar this weekend? You'll probably be able to get a free ride there (if you scour gently for specials) and pay between $7-13 for the trip back. Better than getting your car impounded, losing your license, and paying $10,000+ in penalties and court fees, eh? You have no idea how many poor saps I take to and from work who can't drive because they just got a D.U.I., and who are now plunking $25-35 per ride just to get to where they gotta go.     **INSURANCE**  As for insurance, both companies have given me supplemental insurance. I have full coverage on my car for when I'm off the clock (which was required at time of hiring, btw). So here's how the insurance for Lyft and Uber works.   [For Lyft](http://i.imgur.com/mc6hanN.jpg)   When App is turned on (on the way to pick up client) -or- ""Contingent Liability""   1. * up to $50k/person (bodily injury)  1. * up to $100k/accident (bodily injury)  1. * up to $25k/accident (Property damage)   When you pick up client(s) in the car and you're on your way to the destination.   Excessive liability & UM/UIM  1. Up to $1,000,000/occurence  Contingent Collision & Comprehensive   1. up to $50,000/accident  ($2500 deductible)   [For UberX](http://i.imgur.com/k9kIvzB.png)   When App is turned on (on the way to pick up client) -or- ""Contingent Liability""  1. up to $50k/person (bodily injury) 1. up to $100k/accident (bodily injury) 1. up to $25k/accident (Property damage)   When you pick up client(s) in the car and you're on your way to the destination.  Excessive liability & UM/UIM  Up to $1,000,000/occurence  Contingent Collision & Comprehensive  up to $50,000/accident ($1000 deductible)  Other than the deductible, as you can see both plans are pretty much the same. Which in my opinion, should be more than enough.   **SERVICES & EXPECTATIONS**  Both apps are easy to use and within 5-10 minutes (sometimes much sooner, there've been many times where I get a call and the customer is on the sidewalk a few feet from where I was parked waiting for my next call). Both passengers and drivers adhere to a rating system. As of today, if either driver or passenger fail to maintain a rating of 4.6 and above they risk being booted from using the app. So it's important that drivers know what the hell they are doing (like being courteous, respectful, professional, clean, and know how to use a GPS while driving accurately and safely and/or knowing their routes instinctively) and passengers should also be polite, respectful, communicative (very important since drivers aren't psychics). Also, don't be so drunk that you either pass out or throw up in the back and make sure that if your bring your friends along for the ride, that they adhere to the code of conduct expected of passengers. I've run into numerous instances where an otherwise perfect passenger gets dinged for their drunk and/or rude friends.    Also, as a driver, for your insurance to work, don't EVER end a drive early because you made a wrong turn or were late for a pick up. You're risking an insurance hiccup in the event of an incident, and passengers should also make sure that their driver has their app online throughout the entire trip, as well as making sure the driver's pic of him/her and his/her car match the profile you see on the app.   As for safety, I've yet to hear from a passenger they felt they were ever in immediate danger. Did they get a creepy vibe from one of their drivers? Sure, not everyone is a social butterfly, and there has been an inundation of ex-cab drivers going over to Uber (which is good, cause' the service is getting pro drivers with experience, but could prove detrimental, since they're gonna have a hard time competing with Lyft on the charisma side of things).   However, I've already numerous accounts from young women in Hollywood who are now refusing to call for a yellow cab or taxis on Hollywood Blvd and Sunset and the surrounding areas due to unwelcome sexual advances by drivers looking to take advantage of their sometimes solitary and inebriated drive home. It's heartwarming and great to hear whenever you drop one of these young women off at their places and they thank you for being both professional, courteous, welcoming, and above all else, trustworthy, all while paying a fraction of the cost of what a cab would normally run at that time of night.   **MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE (IN SUMMARY)**  I'm literally having the time of my life. My other job requires me to interact with humanity, pick its brain, and then express those experiences to everyone else in an invigorating, positive, and inspirational manner. What better way to do it--while earning some decent money--than driving around for Uber and Lyft.   These services are, without a doubt, revolutionary, and are being used and employed by both young and old, men and women, struggling students, and strategically utilized by incredibly wealthy and successful Hollywood types and investment bankers. It's cheap, reliable, and very fun too. It's also bringing back the long lost art of human interaction and conversation back into our daily lives.   So far, so good, and it breaks my heart whenever I hear misinformation and astroturfing about these services throughout the internet, and I'm supremely angered as to how certain municipalities are colluding with taxi cab lobbies to prevent Uber and Lyft and other ride-share services from competing fairly at a time where cities are desperate to ease congestion, reduce DUI's, and make sure their citizens are happy and are left with more money in their pocketbooks."


When the market isn't allowed to favor one currency (provider) over another, there must be a central authority with the power to regulate, provide, and insure it. People don't learn the dangers of fractional reserve banking and the resulting expansions and contractions of the money supply when the providers of the currency aren't allowed to fall, taking the savings of depositors with them. Insuring people against the dangers of mismanaged money guarantees the mismanagement of money.


I don't understand how they can force Walmart to pay more to their employees. Like most people have said they aren't forced to work there. If they demand higher wages given their skill set then they should be going elsewhere. People won't be asking for higher wages once they see that higher wages are pushed onto consumers through higher prices.


I am not entirely sold on investing in start-up companies, but I really like the idea of crowdfunding investments. I've been an investor at [LendingClub](https://www.lendingclub.com/) for 10 months now and am quite happy so far. For those of you who don't know, Lending Club is where you can crowdfund consumer loans.  I'm also very interested in [Solar Mosaic](https://solarmosaic.com/). Once their quiet period ends I am planning on investing in solar projects through them. Of course I'll want to see some data related to their risk and returns, but I love the idea of earning a return from funding solar projects.    I think that crowdfunding allows you to invest in areas that are normally off-limits to those of us who aren't rich. At the very least these investments offer a nice source of portfolio diversification.


Why would exchanges self regulate? It is like asking two nfl teams to play without referees and work out the rules and penalties on their own.   You need an outside party ref - govt. to set the rules and regulations.


Well considering I am middle class and living in America (and a woman to boot!)...  However, your father on his factory salary probably didn't have to save for his own retirement, at the time he probably thought his company's pension would provide for him. Now if you want any hope of having a decent retirement, you gotta save 15% a year. Your dad probably also didn't have to pay for insurance in the age of Lipitor and Viagra. But the chances of his dying of a heart attack at 60 were much greater (lost my own grandpa to a heart attack at 58 in 1975) We live longer and better thanks to medicine, albeit expensive medicine.   I still think if you subtract out all the things from our current lives that normal middle class folks pay for today that they wouldn't have had to pay for in say 1960 we'd be able to raise a family of 4 on one middle class salary.   PS we can have an awesome discussion without being rude. :)


Salary pay does not compute to hourly wages. As a salary employee you aren't being paid for hours worked, you are being paid for a week of work. Sometimes that requires more time other times less. You could just as well divide your salary by the amount of overtime you work and each week you work 40 hours say that you are being over paid or paid for time not worked.


It really depends. I mean, did he *actually* get hundreds of thousands of dollars, or did he go bankrupt? Did the IRS actually come in demanding cash, or was it a scam? Are the funds for the transaction being held in escrow? Were they transferred to the wrong bank? Why isn't your dad lawyering up over this? Etc. etc. etc.


Imagine that I own 10% of a company, and yesterday my portion was valued at $1 Million, therefore the company is valued at $10 Million.  Today the company accepts an offer to sell 1% of the company for $500 Thousand: now my portion is worth $5 Million, and company is worth $50 Million. The latest stock price sets the value of the company. If next week the news is all bad and the new investor sells their shares to somebody else for pennies on the dollar, the value of the company will drop accordingly.


Except it has nothing to do with crypto, IBM has been here for a while and all they care about is private blockchains, similar to intranets in computer days. Come back in a few years when they realize the project doesnt actually really bring much efficiency and gets abandoned.


"I had the same thing happen to my house. I bought it in 2011 for 137,000, which was the same as the FHA appraised value (because FHA won't guarantee a loan for more than their appraiser thinks its worth). January of last year, I get the letter from the tax office and see that my house has been assessed at only 122,000. I was shocked too, until I read a similar document that Phil told you to read. The short of it is, no matter what the tax assessor calls their calculation, it is an assessment. It was mass-produced along with everyone else's in your neighborhood by looking at its specs on paper (acreage, house square footage, age, beds/baths) and by driving by your home to see its general condition. The fact that your lawn may be less well-kept than the last time they drove by could have affected the decision a little. It's very unlikely to have been a major determinant of the assessment. The assessment value affects taxes, and taxes only. It is, in most states, a matter of public record, and so it could be used by a potential buyer to negotiate a lower price. However, everyone in the housing business knows that the assessed value is not the market value, and the buyer's agent will be encouraging their client to make a more realistic bid. This ""assessed value"" is not an ""appraisal value"". An appraisal is done by someone actually walking into and through your home, inspecting the general condition inside and out, to try to make a fair evaluation of what the home is actually worth. That number is almost always going to be more than the assessment value, because it takes into account all the amenities of the home; the current fixtures, the well-kept (or recently-replaced) flooring, the energy-efficient HVAC and hot water system, etc etc. It also takes into account recent comparables; what have other houses, with the same general statistics, the same amenities, relatively close in location, sold for recently? That will still generally be different from the true market value of the home. That value is nothing more or less than what a potential buyer will pay to have it at the time you decide to sell it, and that in turn depends 100% on your potential buyers' myriad situations. Someone may lowball even the assessed value because they're looking for a deal and hoping you're desperate; you just reject the offer. Someone may be looking at comparables indicating the house is maybe overpriced by $10k. You can counter and try to come to an agreement. Or, your potential buyer could work five minutes from your house, and be willing to pay at or above your asking price because the next best possibility is another 10 miles away. Since you aren't looking to sell the home, none of this matters, except to determine any escrow payments you might be making towards property taxes. Just keep making your mortgage payment, and don't worry about it. If you really wanted to, you could petition the state for a second opinion, but you think the value should be higher; if they agree with you, they'll raise the assessed value and you'll pay more in taxes. Why in the world would you want to do that?"


Both android and IOS have basically been _complete shit_ with app permission management as a rule. It's one of the reasons that I essentially refuse to treat my smartphone as an actual personal information device, and instead treat it like some shared platform that I just have on really extended loan that could be revoked at any time.  Frankly, I think that permissions should be dynamically selectable and with multiple levels (including options to allow things only while an app is running in the foreground), and it ought to be fuckin' trivial to see what an app is accessing at any given time. I mean, FFS, they already try to sandbox users, so failure to do the rest is just halfassing it.


I use to sell IT equipment to the corporation behind the store - they are ridiculously prejudice. I was a tad shocked as all I had was the happy Hawaiian shirt store to go by, their corporate (not unlike Wholefoods) side is pretty fugly.


"Unaddressed pressure?  Have you seen any scifi books movies or tv shows from the past 40+ years?  It is a very common theme that has been beaten to death.  The solution is pretty simple to me, I say ""evolve or don't"".  Technological progress is always better than living in the Luddite fear factory.  The *real* hard part is going to be deciding which mods are going to give you the best return on investment.  I see that as the next step of natural selection.  If anything, I think that this progress is going to be what finally unseats the old money families that clog innovation.  I really believe that as someone gets more intelligent, they care less about dominating their fellow humans, and care more about growing their surroundings, and seeking beauty rather than destruction."


"I refuse to vote for Mitt Romney but I don't see what's wrong with his position in this instance. Homes are way too expensive currently and helping people with underwater mortgages would be akin to propping up unsustainable home prices.  The only way to fix the housing market it so value homes at a value that people are willing or able to pay. Given the wage deflation going on in the USA coupled with a good portion of an entire generation of new home buyers saddle with a mortgage sized student loan debts, it's ridiculous to think current home prices represent the ""bottom"" of the market."


A few questions:  1) Are there any 'low emission' fuels or technologies that are even remotely viable for long-haul air travel, within the next decade or two? Asking people to travel less is silly, and punishing companies for CO2 emissions when there is no alternative is also silly, so I hope these regulations are trying to encourage some sort of 'positive' behaviour?   2) Is there any evidence that CO2 credits or offsets are actually helpful? Is there any proof that it's not just a money laundering scam?


I successfully used Currency Fair a few times, they seem to cater for both Australia and the UK. If I remember correctly, you can set everything up via Internet. As they explain on their website, first you open an account with them, then you transfer AUD to an Australian bank account that they will give you, then you exchange and transfer the money to your friend on their web page. Usually they are cheaper than PayPal, especially if you have time to play with their exchange by marketplace functionality (not recommended if you just want to do the transfer).


I don't think Canada truly respects the business competitiveness side of emailing business with business-related propositions. In turn, cold calling volume will shoot through the fucking roof for confirmation to send an email with appropriate content. Next thing you know, they pass a law for anti-spam calling -.-


"Natural seasonings is annoying. Note that it's often mandated too, as in you can't put what it actually is, and must say ""natural seasonings.""  There are other issues too. Lots of processing aids may be omitted if they have no nutritional impact, and that seems very wrong to me. But the ""made with 100% chicken"" thing still seems fair.  My biggest complaint is the ""no added nitrites  (except for the nitrites we added)"" but that's mostly because it's the one I encounter the most."


Personally, I think this one is best. RAROC (risk-adjusted return on capital) puts things in perspective for excess returns when considering risk-contribution. It does have its flaws, e.g. the quality of the VaR can be manipulated or simply incorrectly measured. But as in any model, it's GIGO (garbage-in garbage-out).


Wtf are you talking about, the article is not mud slinging, there's been evidence for a while now that Trump's cabinet is not entirely happy with him. Just because you're not happy with the facts doesn't mean that's mud slinging. That's not what that expression means.  Trump has no understanding of international politics or the US domestic legislative process. Are you seriously shocked stories like the ones cited in the article are a fact?


"I work in the casino industry. We overbook tickets to concerts/events every single time, and 99% of the time we get enough cancels to not have to worry about it. But that 1% of the time where we have more players than tickets, we bend over backwards to make sure everyone gets a ticket.  I've purchased tickets from ""ticket brokers""(scalpers) for like 5x the face value to make sure no one is unhappy.   Of course I don't expect a car rental place to go buy a car so I have one to rent, but at least if they overbooked (which I understand), they better freaking find an alternative even if its a competitor."


Successful people run into bad situations all the time.  Instead of giving up, they work around it and find a way to succeed anyway. You don't see how many failures a successful person actually had before succeeding, which is why you are attributing it to luck.  As an example, the South park guys were rejected 10 times before finally getting accepted.


It's a really big stretch to assume that a particular 10Q release will have the exact same impact on trading volume, trading price, and volatility as a prior release, in a different quarter, under a different set of circumstances and a different set of results, which is what you seem to be implying when you suggest that a lack of volume in response to one quarter's results should therefore be used as a benchmark.   I think traders and the HFT firms are a lot smarter than you think.


voip voip i have good quality mobile dialer and pc2phone reseller available.,  we sell new voiz,TaTa voiz, 24 dialer, itel mobile dialer, fring and nimbuzz sip dialer., if you need reseller panel or calling card, you may contact with us. we believe quality service with long time relationship business. Rates>>> BD silver 01———————– 0.0196$ BD gold 0880 ——- 0.0185$ BD IGW ——- 0.0365$ BD WHITE PREMIUM 00880—-0.0357$ INDIA 91 LAND——————— 0.0142$ INDIA 919 MOBILE—————– 0.0112$ INDIA 9194 BSNL—————– 0.0143$ PAKISTAN92———————— 0.0253$ PAKISTAN MOBILE923————0.0162$  MASUM SARKER Contact email:- salestalkdialer@gmail.com, mobiledialer@yahoo.com Contact phone:- +8801711062213,01673706969


They get higher interest payments.  If they were to sell now they would get a premium over par.  They get principal back if they hold so no gain, only gain if they sell now.  But then they have to put it elsewhere (another bond, this time lower interest?) so it's a wash.  Depends what you use the money for.


"What you are saying is a very valid concern.  After the flash crash many institutions in the US replaced ""true market orders"" (where tag 40=1 and has no price) with deep in the money limit orders under the hood, after the CFTC-SEC joint advisory commission raised concerns about the use of market orders in the case of large HFT traders, and concerns on the lack of liquidity that caused market orders that found no limit orders to execute on the other side of the trade, driving the prices of blue chip stocks into the pennies.  We also applaud the CFTC requesting comment regarding whether it is   appropriate to restrict large order execution design that results in   disruptive trading. In particular, we believe there are questions   whether it is ever appropriate to permit large order algorithms that   employ unlimited use of market orders or that permit executions at   prices which are a dramatic percentage below the present market price   without a pause for human review So although you still see a market order on the front end, it is transformed to a very aggressive limit in the back end. However, doing this change manually, by selling at price 0 or buying at 9999 may backfire since it may trigger fat finger checks and prevent your order from reaching the market.  For example BATS Exchange  rejects orders that are priced too aggressively and don't comply with the range of valid prices.  If you want your trade to execute right now and you are willing to take slippage in order to get fast execution, sending a market order is still the best alternative."


>**Because if it is achievable**, it is almost certainly better than just tying the whole economy to the price of a single commodity. **If it is not achievable**, then it is almost certainly better to let the markets adjust and correct, however imperfectly, than to tie the whole economy to the whims and wishes of incompetent and politically-motivated money-printers.  So... what I'm getting from all of this, is basically how we view the possibility of a workable flat currency.  I think the possibility of whether or not a flat currency will actually work depends on many things, some more important than others. The size (and power/influence) of a country can greatly affect how a flat currency will work within that country.  If the country is large and power hungry (like ours), then a flat currency will most likely not work in the long run. It will promote greed and monopolization of wealth, but what of gold? That can't work either because a large country can't sustain itself off such an inefficient monetary system.  So... to me, it seems like extremely large countries should be split into smaller countries that can actually use flat currencies (or gold) without all of the potential for corruption.  This same sort of logic applies to our primate cousins. If a tribe of chimps gets too large, the group will split to relieve social tension.  This is a big part of why I support ideas like Cascadia.  Do you think there is a way for monetary systems to work in very large countries?


If I have a 200-300 mile range EV, then the only time I ever have to worry about the inconvenience of charging up is on a cross country trip.  For the other 50 weeks of the year, I don't require the convenience of a gas station, other than to buy beer.


Just so everyone knows. A core model refers to a forecast of the Balance Sheet, income statement, and Statement of Cash Flows. From this you can solve for Free Cash Flow to Equity and solve for some more price values, like Sum of Parts.


You cannot open an account in USA unless you have an address to provide to the bank in USA, You need ID, such as US Driver's License.


Very rarely would an investor be happy with a 4% yield independent of anything else that might happen in the future. For example, if in 3 years for some reason or other inflation explodes and 30 year bond yields go up to 15% across the board, they would be kicking themselves for having locked it up for 30 years at 4%. However, if instead of doing that the investor put their money in a 3 year bond at 3% say, they would have the opportunity to reinvest in the new rate environment, which might offer higher or lower yields. This eventually leads fixed income investors to have a bond portfolio in which they manage the average maturity of their bond portfolio to be somewhere between the two extremes of investing it all in super short term/ low yield money market rates vs. super long term bonds. As they constantly monitor and manage their maturing investments, it inevitably leads them to managing interest rate risk as they decide where to reinvest their incremental coupons by looking at the shape of the yield curve at the time and determining what kind of risk/reward tradeoffs they would have to make.


Your broker should be able to answer this. Many brokers will buy it from you for the cost of a commission, if there's no legit buyer.


"You're confusing so many things at once here...... First thing first: we cannot suggest you what to do business-wise since we have no idea about your business. How on Earth can anyone know if you should sell the software to someone or try to distribute to customers yourself? How would we know if you should hire employees or not? If you say you don't need employees - why would you consider hiring them? If you say you want to sell several copies and have your own customers - why would you ask if you should sell your code to someone else? Doesn't make sense. Now to some more specific issues: I heard sole proprietary companies doesn't earn more than 250k and   it's better to switch to corporation or LLC etc. because of benefits. I heard it was snowing today in Honolulu. So you heard things. It doesn't make them true, or relevant to you. There's no earning limit above which you should incorporate. You can be sole proprietor and make millions, and you can incorporate for a $10K/year revenue business. Sole proprietorship, incorporation (can be C-Corp or S-Corp), or LLC - these are four different types of legal entity to conduct business. Each has its own set of benefits and drawbacks, and you must understand which one suits you in your particular situation. For that you should talk to a lawyer who could help you understand what liability protection you might need, and to a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your state) who can help you understand the tax-related costs and benefits of each choice. On the other hand I heard that if I create LLC company, in case of   failure, they can get EVERYTHING from me, what's this all about? No. This is not true. Who are ""they"", how do you define ""failure"", and why would they get anything from you at all? Even without knowing all that, your understanding is wrong, because the ""LL"" in LLC stands for LIMITED liability. The whole point of forming LLC or Corporation is to limit your own personal liability. But mere incorporation or forming LLC doesn't necessarily mean your liability is limited. Your State law defines what you must do for that limited liability protection, and that includes proper ways to run your business. Again - talk to your lawyer and your tax adviser about what it means to you. I'm totally unfamiliar with everything related to   taxes/companies/LLC/corporation etc Familiarize yourself. No-one is going to do it for you. Start reading, ask specific questions on specific issues, and get a proper legal and tax advice from licensed professionals."


Thanks for the insight. You kind of confirmed my thoughts on it as well. I will most likely pursue it until the possibility of a job offer, which in the least, I can use to leverage a possible job offer in the supply chain team with my boss.


"They stated *ebooks* are only 1% of their revenue. Amazon is responsible for 65% of *all* online new book sales, print included. Amazon and Hachette's disagreement on ebook pricing *shouldn't* affect the sales of Hachette's *print* books available on the site, but Amazon is increasing ship times, removing the ability to pre-order books, raised the prices of existing books, and lowering the chances that Hachette's book show up in their ""you might also like"" section. ([source](http://theverge.com/2014/8/9/5985901/amazon-hachette-contract-dispute-storystream))  I guess those changes might not add up to *half* of Hachette's revenue (I was mistakenly remembering [when Amazon removed the ""buy"" button from Macmillon's books in 2010](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/technology/30amazon.html) because of a similar dispute over ebook pricing), but you can bet their attempts to decrease Hachette's print book's availability, accessibility, and visibility on their site is having a very significant effect on their income.  Again, Amazon is decreasing the availability of a publisher's *print* books because of a dispute over *ebook* pricing. That's nuts."


Hi! This is just a friendly reminder letting you know that you should type it as `¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯` to format it correctly.  A backslash on reddit is used as an escape character, meaning that it can be used to make special characters, such as underscores and other backslashes ignore the formatting that they do to other characters on Reddit, and instead display them literally.  ---  *^I ^am ^a ^bot. ^If ^I ^have ^done ^something ^wrong, ^please ^message ^my ^owner, ^[John_Yuki](https://www.reddit.com/user/John_Yuki/).*


The Muscat Overseas Group established over four decades ago, is committed to the growth and progress of our nation. As the Founder and Chairman of the Group, I have watched it grow, from humble beginnings into a force to be reckoned with. It is with a sense of pride and satisfaction that I look back on the years of vigorous effort and struggle.


Every people has a dream to have own home. But they did not buy a home due to financial problem. So don’t worry David Imer is a Mortgage Advisor which provide Mortgage finance at very low cost. For more visits:-


You can follow the intra-day NAV of an ETF, for instance SPY, by viewing its .IV (intra-day value) ticker which tracks it's value.   http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=spy http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^SPY-IV Otherwise, each ETF provider will update their NAV after business each day on their own website. https://www.spdrs.com/product/fund.seam?ticker=spy


I'm sure you did. I'm pretty sure a hedge fund manager knew the underwriters couldn't short IPOs. No one would have been able to follow your advice because they wouldn't have been able to short it on day two either. You still don't get it.


As of this moment the DOW 30 is up 6.92% Year-to-date. Of the 30 stocks in the index  6 are in negative territory for the year. And of the 6 in negative territory 3 are farther below 0 than the average is above 0. The investors in those 3 stocks (Boeing, Goldman Sachs and Nike) would look at this year so far as a disaster. Individual stocks can move in opposite directions from the index.


Whenever Chipotle starts doing really well a random problem pops up.   It's not like they're the only ones using certain ingredient components or that their health and safety procedures are much different than any other fast food restaurant.   But you know who does have a lot to lose? Even larger fast food conglomerate who long ago gave up using whole foods for their products.


"I think you're missing the point. In terms of profit margin, the trucks actually pay a larger percentage of their gross in overhead - that is, their net is a larger proportion of their gross than it is, on average, for restaurants. They pay more for inspections, they pay for commissary services and many other things (and licenses and permits) than restaurants typically pay.  What you are proposing is a law that would also bar another brick and mortar restaurant - in your own words, one that ""sells the same product for cheaper due to the lack of overhead"" (say, for example, a chain fast-food restaurant).  Are you saying that new businesses shouldn't be allowed to open next door to established businesses of the same type? Or does your argument only apply to food trucks?  I am not a flag-waving libertarian or anything, but I don't think that choosing which types of business model to protect should be on the list of things that city governments should be doing - especially in the case of states like California and Texas, where the state vehicle code clearly states that the ONLY regulation a municipality may enact on otherwise-legal mobile vendor are rules that serve the public health and/or safety. Not competition.  Just because some people may not agree with you doesn't mean that they are either ""simple minded,"" or misread your point. I understand your argument very well - I just don't happen to agree with it. That doesn't mean I think you are ""simple minded,"" either; I just think you're a name-calling jerk."


This depends on the terms and conditions of your IRA account, and those of the investments you have chosen. In general, you are better off investing as quickly as is feasible given those terms.  Money in your cash account doesn't earn much of a return, so the quicker you get money into something earning a return, the better. However, pay attention to the fees and costs associated with investing.  If there is a per-transaction fee, you may want to consolidate, as it may be more efficient to do so - after all, if you contribute $500 at a shot, and it costs you $5 to make a trade, you're paying 1% off the top to make that trade if you make 11 of them, versus 0.1% to make 1, so the question is do you earn that 1% back over the course of the six months?  That will depend on what you are investing in.   More than likely you're going to earn more than 1% over the course of the six months, so it's probably worth investing it in pieces still in that situation, but if the transaction cost is higher, or the time differential lower, you may have a less clear-cut answer.  I invest at Vanguard in their funds and have no transaction fees, so I have a more obvious answer (invest as soon as possible). You also need to consider whether you have minimums to pay attention to - maybe your investment is something you can only buy whole shares of, for example, or you might have a much higher fee if you make small transactions.  In that case, you should wait until you have the minimum to make that transaction if the fee is more than the return you'll get. So the answer is - make the transactions as early as you can, subject to considering the fees you will pay for making them.


Some historical and mathematical insights as a complement to existing answers.  History. I found it astonishing that already in Ancient Roman they investigated the issue of perpetuity of 30'000 (almost). Columella writes in De re rustica (3, 3, 7–11.) in 1-st century AD about a perpetuity of 32480 sesterces principal under 6% p.a. resulting in 1950 sesterces annual payment. And  if  the  husbandman  would  enter  this  amount  as  a  debt  against his vineyards just as a moneylender does with a debtor,   so that the owner may realize the aforementioned six per cent. interest on that total as a perpetual annuity,  he  should  take  in  1950 sesterces every  year.   By  this  reckoning  the return on seven iugerum, even according to the opinion of Graecinus, exceeds the interest on 32'480 sesterces. Math. If we fix a scholarship at 1'000 a year, then it's clear that it could be paid out infinitely if we could achieve 3.33% p.a. on it.  On the other side, with 0% we'll spend out the endowment in 30 years. Thus, having the interest rate between 0% and 3.33% p.a. we could vary the life of endowment between 30 years and infinity. Just a few numbers in between: under 1%, it would be ~36 years, under 2% ~46 years, under 3% ~78 years (however, 1000$ in 78 years could be less than 10$ today). Conclusion: to keep it perpetual either the fund's yield must be at the level of scholarship, or re-adjust the amount of scholarship depending on fund achievement, or redefine the notion of perpetuity (like 50 years is approximately infinite for our purpose).


How is it more difficult? All you have to do if you are legit staying for at least 2 years is just get a cosigner. Also if they really did care, they would find all of us that did it, and collect the debt, and therefore it wouldn't be such a deterrence to give E2 guys visas. They would actually profit off it with the interests, lates fees, ect. They would WANT you to leave without paying. So if they dont care, whats the big deal?


In Australia the ATO can determine if you are considered a shareholder or a share trader. The ATO defines a shareholder as: A shareholder is a person who holds shares for the purpose of earning income from dividends and similar receipts. Whilst they define a share trader as: A share trader is a person who carries out business activities for the purpose of earning income from buying and selling shares. To find out the differences between them you can refer to the following link describing The difference between a share trader and a shareholder. The ATO also describes: To be classed as a share trader, you may be asked to provide evidence that demonstrates you are carrying on a business of share   trading, for example: the purchase of shares on a regular basis through a regular or routine method a trading plan  use of share trading techniques in managing your share acquisitions, such as decisions based on thorough analysis of relevant market   information a contingency plan in the event of a major shift in the market. Losses incurred in the business of share trading are treated the same   as any other losses from business. If your activities change from investor to trader, your investment changes from a CGT (capital gains tax) asset to trading stock. This can trigger CGT event for any investments you currently hold as they change from CGT assets to trading stock. Once you have changed over to a trader you will not be entitled to the 50% CGT discount for stocks held over 12 months. You will, however, be able to count any paper losses at the end of Financial Year to reduce your other income.


There really cannot be a straightforward answer to this question. It all depends on what lengths you take to make the situation advantageous.  If you manage to have a constant flow of people living at the place during all of the times you are not living there, and manage to find a cleaning service for a reasonable price. Then yes, there is a chance that this could be advantageous for you.  If you are simply looking for a way to offset some of the costs of the place you aren't living at full time, then you need to draw a comparison between upkeep and how often you will actually have customers.  It is likely you will have down time, in which there will be no one staying at the house. Hiring a cleaning service will cut some of your profit, and depending on how much that profit is, it could be a pretty big cut. Now, not being an expert on taxes, I cannot say how this will impact those, but it is likely that you will have to pay taxes on money earned.  All this in mind, its a decision you will need to make taking all of the factors into consideration. Maybe give it a trial run, see if after one tenant you make any kind of reasonable profit in the end, and decide from there.


The choices given are either leave after some reasonable hours or put in endless crunch time until you drop dead.  The reality, as usual, is between those extremes.  Most people are hired to get a job done.  That is likely to require some extra work, and if you really care about the job then that isn't really so bad and is not going to scale up to suicidal levels.    Crunch time as such is increasingly rare because the downsides are so glaringly obvious.  It generates inferior work and burns out critical assets.  At the same time there is no reason to believe that significant professional challenges will necessarily fit neatly into standardized work time arrangements.  Sometimes difficult problems come up and need to be handled or innovative products won't be released in time to make a difference in the marketplace.


"One way to possibly disambiguate it from a tip is to receive it outside of your service context.  If there really is a relationship, and they want to show appreciation or help you out financially, the ""gift"" could be given outside of the restaurant.   Otherwise, I agree that it seems like tax evasion.  The purpose of the money was to compensate for services rendered, which is income, not a gift. If it's just a random stranger, then I'd have a hard time arguing that the purpose was pure altruism versus socially-mandated tipping. Why can't I just have my employer just give me a ""gift"" every Christmas instead of a bonus?  Or just reduce by salary by $18k and give me a $1,500 ""gift"" every month?"


It might not make sense but sugar most readily goes into our glycogen stores in the muscles and have low efficiency to fat conversion (de novo lipogenesis).  Carbs alone do not contribute significantly to body fat:  http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/74/6/707.full  >Most experimental data in humans, however, contradict this view of the function of de novo lipogenesis. Initial studies in which indirect calorimetry was used showed little or no net de novo lipogenesis after short-term carbohydrate overfeeding (1). Subsequent isotopic studies confirmed the absence of quantitatively significant flux through hepatic de novo lipogenesis under most conditions of carbohydrate energy surplus (2,3).   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11722954  >CONCLUSION: De novo lipogenesis increases after overfeeding with glucose and sucrose to the same extent in lean and obese women but does not contribute greatly to total fat balance.  Now, if you're eating all the time, you will hardly burn off the fat you do have and consume all the time.  Also, a potato has 1% of it's calories from fat (and brocolli 8%), and potato chips will have 50%.  This is the problem.  Natural carbs, therefore, are not the problem.  Processed food is.


Because I see it everyday where {some} poor blow their money on beer and cigarettes and scratch off lottery tickets  And heroine and hookers and .... we don’t sell those things however, just see the results and have to deal with them.


A statistical measurement is still more honest than no measurements at all. For economics we don't have a reference frame for the absolute truth. There is no way to judge the absolute accuracy of a theory. Given that, at least a theory that matches real observational data is more *real* than something that does not match observations.   And quantitative easing has been in many ways one of the largest economic experiments. There were competing theories on what it would do, and one thing was certain - monetary velocity is inversely related to wealth. Even Kansas was an experiment. Something was predicted by Gov. Brown back, and that something turned out to be wrong. In the light of observations, I find it astonishing to hold on to a theory whose predictions have just not panned out.  Monetary velocity may still be wrong, but on a relative scale of wrongness, it is still much less inaccurate than the Laffer curve.


30billion is spent in venture capital and women only get 1.5 of that but what if men are seeking funding at a rate 30:1 compared to women. Then that statistic is much , much different and actually sounds fair.   The fact that there is no data for that when it is extremely relevant leads me to believe it is intentionally left out.


This will not result in any finance charges: I wouldn't recommend cutting it quite so close, but as long as you pay the full balance as shown on each statement by the due date shown on that same statement, you won't incur a finance charge. Of course this only applies in the case of ordinary purchases that have a grace period.


The questions what the price of the mechanisms would have been if there were several large scale manufacturers in the marketplace. Given that few people have bothered to try,it suggests that there is little opportunity to produce these mechanisms for a healthy profit and make them cheaper than swatch. However, the industry is probably a very conservative slow moving beast (little new technology impacting them in the last 50 years) and heavily brand focused, so it sounds very plausible to me that there has been a missing efficiency opportunity.   We'll certainly find out in the coming years.


"Lucky break, that is all. Not an inspirational story or ""hard work"".  There would be many many companies who get bogged down dealing with customers like ""bob"" leaving them unable to get out there and sell/grow the business."


"There are a couple of things that are missing from your estimate. In addition to your standard deduction, you also have a personal exemption of $4050.  So ""D"" in your calculation should be $6300 + $4050 = $10,350. As a self-employed individual, you need to pay both the employee and employer side of the Social Security and Medicare taxes.  Instead of 6.2% + 1.45%, you need to pay (6.2% + 1.45%) * 2 = 15.3% self-employment tax. In addition, there are some problems with your calculation. Q1i (Quarter 1 estimated income) should be your adjusted annual income divided by 4, not 3 (A/4). Likewise, you should estimate your quarterly tax by estimating your income for the whole year, then dividing by 4.  So Aft (Annual estimated federal tax) should be: Quarterly estimated federal tax would be: Qft = Aft / 4 Annual estimated self-employment tax is: Ase = 15.3% * A with the quarterly self-employment tax being one-fourth of that: Qse = Ase / 4 Self employment tax gets added on to your federal income tax.  So when you send in your quarterly payment using Form 1040-ES, you should send in Qft + Qse. The Form 1040-ES instructions (PDF) comes with the ""2016 Estimated Tax Worksheet"" that walks you through these calculations."


"From your original reply to me  >Another typical redditor who doesn't even know the difference between a depository bank and an investment bank  I'm the ""typical redditor"" who doesn't know the difference between a depository bank and an investment bank. So, you dumb fuck, tell me. Which one is Citibank?  Also...  >the CEO of a financial institution that was partly responsible for keeping the US economy from the shithole is a ""fucker""  Those CEOs (including this prick) were responsible for it. CDOs and mortgage backed securities loaded with shit mortgages didn't just fucking emerge from thin air. The big banks created them and loved them because they made billions in fees from them, and they never stopped to evaluate either the individual risks of the products or the systemic risks in the system. They didn't care because they knew the taxpayers would pick up the tab. So pull your head out of your ass and unfuck yourself, you moron.  On the other hand, why don't you go the other way and completely fuck yourself. Since you can't even tell this typical redditor what type of bank Citibank is you're fucking worthless."


"The office = the entire floor or shared space. It's a common term used by Americans to describe their company as a whole. Ie; ""I have to be in the office  for meetings tomorrow, I can't work from home""   No offices = personal private offices within ""the office"" (above). Ie; ""I have a corner office with a view which is nice for conducting private matters with new clients""     Kinda confusing how they mean different things for the same word."


"I wasn't thinking in absolutes - that's specifically why I said ""barring unusual circumstances.""   Being 6'6'' is **literally** an unusual circumstance (in airline customer heights).   In your case, upgrading to a seat that you can sit in with a ""normal"" level of comfort is so obviously appropriate that I'm surprised that you thought my comment, in the context of this post (which is predominantly centered on creature comforts rather than actual needs) was even applicable to you.  Frankly, I think that you should be automatically bumped up for free because economy seats are designed in a way that makes them physically unsuitable for very tall people - a deliberate choice by the airlines that imposes an additional burden on you through no fault of your own.   Though I'd be happiest if airlines would just design *all* seats to accommodate people 6'6"" tall. :)"


I would stick with your book, investopedia, and taking the practice tests until you score consistently above 90 percent.  I have seen this method as a reoccurring successful method used to pass the test from the research I have done.  Practice exams really help retain the information for test day so retake them over and over the day before your test.


I'm not positive my answer is complete, but from information on my broker's website, the following fees apply to a US option trade (which I assume you're concerned with given fee in dollars and the mention of the Options Clearing Corporation): They have more detail for other countries -- see https://www.interactivebrokers.co.uk/en/index.php?f=commission&p=options1 for North America.  Use the sub-menu near the top of the page to pick Europe or Asia. The brokerage-charged commission for this broker is as low as $0.25 per contract with a $1.00 minimum.  Though I've been charged less than $1 to STO an options position, as well as less than $1 to BTC an options position, so not sure about that minimum. Regarding what I read as your overall underlying question (why are option fees so high), in my research this broker has one of the cheapest commission rates on options I've ever seen.  When I participate in certain discussions, I'm routinely told that these fees are unbelievable and that $5.95, $7.95, or even $9.95 are considered low fees.   I've heard this so much, and discussed commissions with enough people who've refused to switch brokers, that I conclude there just isn't enough competition to drive prices lower.  If most people won't switch brokers to go from $9.95 to $1 per trade, there simply isn't a reason to lower rates.


Jew sponsorship is the way forward in politics, show business, and the media, why would mercantile operations be any different .. high profile acts Andy Warhol, Martin Luther King, and William F Buckley, were hands on in the 1963 killing, in Dallas Tx. of President John F Kennedy! [JFK Assassination Nutshell](http://www.dockersunion.net/vb/showthread.php?632-JFK-Assassination-Nutshell)  Branson's silence on the same issues, indicates his operations are similarly at the discretion of Jews .. he operates airlines, whence the entire world's airport security infrastructure, is in the hands of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service!   The TSA screenings in the US, with groping, X Rays and full body scanners, came into being after a series of transparent hoaxes, involving an underwear bomb in one instance, and an alleged shoe bomb in another, and it don't need a loser to explain, that can not be good for business!  If ppl are driven away from air transport, because of the same invasive airport security measures, and because it is by now common knowledge, the entire world's air fleets civil and military,  are compromised by computer software, that enables planes to be taken over in flight,   And to be flown by ground operators .. witness numerous otherwise unexplained air crashes, and the hijacking and rerouting of planes, September 11, 2001, by Zionist terrorists, aided and abetted by American traitors in politics and the media!


You receive a 1099-misc for the value of the car. You claim that as income (even though you received goods rather than cash). When you sell the car, it would be much like selling any posession, and would cause no tax consequence unless the sale price was much different than the value... When you sell the car, you may have received more or less than the value of the car (likely less). If you sold it for more, then you might need to claim the additional money as income (perhaps short term capital gains). If you sold it for less, but to a friend or relative, then you might think you could claim a loss, but the tax collector would just claim that you had given them a gift, and attempt to collect the tax from them. Contest winners often have the frustration that they are taxed at the full value of the item(s) won, even though they would not value the item at that amount. And contest prizes often do not sell for the full value stated on the 1099, and often for much less. Marginal tax rates were higher prior to Reagan, and when a contest winner would sell an item for 80% of the value, they often paid most of the proceeds to taxes.


"Follow the money and youll find the bullshit right there.   To be fair as well, where does a ""drug addicted looser"" go to get help in the United States? What risks as a community do we then inherit by ignoring such situations?"