"Very interesting question. While searching i also found that some precious metal ETFs (including IAU) gains are taxed at 28% because IRS considers it ""collectible"", rather than the usual long term 15% for stocks and stock holding ETFs. As for capital gain tax you have to pay now my guess it's because of the following statement in the IAU prospectus (page 34): When the trust sells gold, for example   to pay expenses, a Shareholder will   recognize gain or loss ...."


To me it sounds more ridiculous that the same process can't be applied to other suppliers. The system we have can be used for all inbound invoices regardless the supplier or the inbound channel (email, EDI, paper invoice). Not all our suppliers can send electric invoices messages but even the paper invoices that go through OCR can be automated, as PO-number and invoice header info can be automatically read to our system.


"Obviously a stock that's hit a high is profit waiting to be taken, be safe, take the money, Sell Sell Sell!! Ah.. but wait, they say ""run your winners, cut your losers"", so here this stock is a winner... keep on to it, Hold Hold Hold!!!!! Of course, if you're holding, then you think it's going to return even higher.... Buy Buy Buy!!!! So,  hope that's clears things up for you - Sell, Hold, or maybe Buy :-) A more serious answer is not ever to worry about past performance, if its gone past a reasonable valuation then consider selling, but never care about selling out just because its reached some arbitrary share price. If you are worried about losses, you might like to set a trailing stop and sell if it drops, but if you're a LTBH type person, just keep it until you feel it is overvalued compared to its fundamentals."


Margin is when you borrow to buy stock.    The margin % is the amount you can have borrowed over your own stock. There may also be some other considerations e.g. risk portfolio. Say you have 10,000. Your broker allows you buy on margin with a margin requirement of 100%. So You buy 18,000 of stock. You have 10k of your own and borrowed 8k to buy this. So you have 80% extra stock on margin. Say the stock has a downturn and loses 12% or so. Suddenly you have 16k stock value. But you still owe 8k. You are now at 100% margin. 8k is yours 8k is borrowed money.     At this point if you drop anymore you are exceeding 100% margin and your broker may sell to ensure they get their 8k.    The benefits of this are of course if the stock goes in your favor. 10% rise is 1,800 instead of 1,000.


They're targeting people in pedestrian centric nightlife areas. The first one opened in a Chicago neighborhood that's very difficult to drive in, so the drive through had no value, but plenty of drunk people walking around looking for quick, cheep food.


The intention of making the charitable contributions tax deductible is to provide an economic incentive to contribute to organizations which tend to improve the general welfare of the community. Deductibility impacts government revenue generation, but has positive impacts that probably offset that loss by encouraging more giving by folks subject to high income tax -- particularly small business owners.  Unless you own a home and have a mortgage you may not have enough deductions to get any financial benefit from charitable contributions. Charitable contributions are only deductible when your deductions exceed the standard deduction.  For most people, charitable contributions are a way to support something that you care about, and the tax benefits are a secondary benefit, or a way to enhance their own giving.


>Growth requires adding employees  Citation needed. Employees offer diminishing returns. What happens during mergers? Layoffs due to redundancies and efficiencies.  How big is Apple, and how many employees do they have?  The growth -> employees link is not 1:1, and has high variance. If the goal is employment structure incentives to reward that. If the goal is growth, be honest about the expected impact to employment.


Regarding auto insurance, you have to look at the different parts. In the United Sates most states do require a level of specific coverage for all drivers. That is to make sure that if you are at fault there is money available to pay the victims. That payment may be for damage to their car or other property, but it also covers medical costs. Many policies also cover you if the other driver doesn't have insurance. The policy that covers the loss of the vehicle is required if you have a loan or are leasing the car. Somebody else owns it while there is a loan, so they can and do require you to pay to protect the vehicle.  If there i no loan you don't have to have that portion of a policy. Other parts such as towing, roadside assistance, and rental cars replacement may be required by the insurance standards for your state, or might be almost impossible to drop because all insurance companies include it to stay competitive with their competition.  Dropping the non-required parts of the coverage is acceptable when you don't have a loan. Some people do drop it to save money. But that does mean you are self insuring. If you can afford to self insure a new car, great. The interesting thing is that some people have more than enough assets to self inure the non-required part of auto insurance. But then they realize that they do need to up their umbrella liability insurance. This is to protect them from somebody deciding that their resources make them a tempting target when they are involved in a collision.


Are you doing seo web positioning but you do not notice anything? Okay, let's review all the critical points of your on page seo and your linked profile. With all this information we can already meet, Start Your Business Online and see how we started. Because since we started this adventure, we have managed not to be one more agency. We have endeavoured to understand and feel as your own all your projects, getting involved in each of its stages.


Been a freelance motion graphic artist for 18 years and I've never touched any of those sites. It's idiots and amateurs looking for cheap, shitty labor. I don't feel like competing against people in 3rd world countries so I get all my jobs the old fashioned way.


No, because of the balance transfer fees, which could be 4%. Unless of course you get a deal for 12 months of no payment, and you pay it back in 12 months, in which case a 4% annual interest rate is much less than a loan! At that point you are gambling that you will be responsible with the payments, and the card company is taking the opposite bet.


Running for-profit business doesn't pressure those involved to make the best product, it pressures them to make the best profit.  Making the best profit pressures those involved to produce the cheapest product that the market won't reject marked at the highest price the market won't reject.  Private companies have the freedom to avoid or limit the effect of that pressure if they choose, and sacrifice some profit for quality and improved customer satisfaction (though many still choose profit).  Public companies, who are eventually beholdent to shareholders who sole goal is profitability, are much less likely to avoid the pressures to increase profits at all costs;  particularly in the age of day traders and CEO merry-go-round, long-term planning is very difficult when short-term profitability is on the line.  A company that made one widget a year for $1 and sold that widget for $10 billion would be a very successful company from the profit standpoint, and would likely have an excellent share price if the business model looked secure for the next year or two.  Competition helps alleviate this morass and pushes for better products and lower prices by upping the bar of what the market will reject over time - increase the available alternatives, and the features/quality/price scale shifts.  The importance of having a level playing field, anti-monopoly laws and ensure that new players can come onto the scene is fundamental to capitalism working - otherwise those who hold monopoly positions will prevent competition from emerging and charge as much as is possible for the cheapest product people will still buy.  This is of particular issue when not buying the product is a threat to one's life or safety (medical care, emergency services, food, etc).


This may not be entirely scientific, but as a landlord my usual approach is just to do a search for rental properties on Craigslist for comparable homes in the neighborhood. There are all kinds of formulas professional property managers use, but in the end these listings are the ones you are going to be competing with for tenants. Also, it isn't super accurate, but online services like Zillow.com can give you some numbers for rental houses that include those that aren't currently advertising.


Heh, Argentina's inflation numbers these past few years are [basically lies](http://en.mercopress.com/2012/02/02/imf-warn-argentina-on-lack-of-progress-in-addressing-inflation-data). The IMF data is based off of this data, so it doesn't prove what you think it proves. Not to say they haven't done okay, but when they've done well it's been purely because of China's demand for natural resources.


Especially since one of the main reasons why private equity firms buy a company is because it's financially distressed and on their way to bankruptcy without the large cash infusion that private equity firms bring.  For these businesses, layoffs and outsourcing are a matter of survival.  This isn't an example of an already prosperous company like Apple or Nike engaging in this behavior because it provides a small boost to their already astronomical profits.


So home owners should simply only charge low rents and only rent to long term renters out of the goodness of their hearts, yes?    How do you expect to convince them ALL to act the way you want on a macro level?


I have a $2500 Roth IRA that I set up 40 years ago...it is worth about $2600. I keep it around for this exact talking point.  Compound interest at .1% is outstripped by inflation.  I have put away $18k a year in a 401 for 30 years now. It is worth just under $800k.  The bankers took the excess with their 2% fee and the GFC.  Its all in Vanguard now  I cleared +$5m in medium and high end residential real estate in the same period.  The first 18 years was sleeping on floors and having cardboard boxes as furniture.   Sad really.


It would be courteous to leave a little note in your original post next time. As you leave it now, you will get up voted because you removed the incorrect part, and he will get down voted because he's arguing something that isn't there.


"That's right. It is the far right that have fought Medicare and single payer health insurance from the 70s.   Ronald Reagan famously recorded a LP deriding Medicare as the slippery slope to socialism.  Health insurance is a tool large corporations use to #1 keep employees frightened of losing their job and #2 discouraging employees from leaving their ""organization"" and starting a small business that will compete with them.  It is anything but a ""poorly"" thought out policy. If large corporations felt it was bad for business they would join the fight for single payer which would relieve them of one hell of an expense.  They could save Billions! but they don't because they want it this way. It must be worth a lot of money to them."


"Welcome to the 21st century, the New Order. Forget all that legal mumbo jumbo you may have read back in law school in the 1960s about commercial code. Its all gone now. Now we have Check 21 and the Patriot Act !!! Basically what this means is that because some Arab fanatics burned down the World Trade Center, the US government and its allied civilian banking company henchmen now have total control and dictatorship over ""your"" money, which is no longer really money, but more like a ""credit"" to your account with THEM which they can do with what they want. Here are some of the many consequences of the two aforementioned acts: (1) You can no longer sue a bank for mishandling your money (2) All your banking transaction information is the joint property of the bank, its ""affiliates"" and the US Treasury (3) You can no longer conduct private monetary transactions with other people using a bank as your agent; you can only request that a bank execute an unsecured transaction on your behalf and the bank has total control over that transaction and the terms on which occurs; you have no say over these terms and you cannot sue a bank over any financial tort on you for any reason. (4) All banks are required to spy on you, report any ""suspicious"" actions on your part, develop and run special software to detect these ""suspicious actions"", and send their employees to government-run educational courses where they are taught to spy on customers, how to report suspicious customers and how to seize money and safe deposit boxes from customers when the government orders them to do so. (5) All banks are required to positively identify everyone who has a bank account or safe deposit box and report all their accounts to the government. (6) No transactions can be done anonymously. All parties to every banking transaction must be identified and recorded. So, from the above it should be clear to (if you are a lawyer) why no endorsement is present. That is because your check is not a negotiable instrument anymore, it is merely a request to the bank to transfer funds to the Treasury. The Treasury does not need to ""endorse"" anything. In fact, legally speaking, the Treasury could simply order your bank to empty your account into theirs, and they actually do this all the time to people they are ""investigating"" for supposed crimes. You don't need to endorse checks you receive either because, as I said above, the check is no longer a negotiable instrument. Banks still have people do it, but it is just a pro forma habit from the old days. Since you can't sue the bank, the endorsement is pretty meaningless because it cannot be challenged in court anyway. You could probably just write ""X"" there and they would deposit it."


"Well, that's about 3% higher than the national average, so... I'm not sure if we should be relieved or disturbed.  Personally, I find it deplorable that insurance companies are *allowed* to randomly exclude pesky unprofitable things they don't want to cover.  Floods?  No thanks.  Dental/Vision?  Why *ever* would you consider those ""medical"" issues?  Uninsured drivers?  Yeah, you live in a state that requires 100% of drivers have insurance, but **suck it anyway**, since you have no choice, mwa-hahaha!  And people seriously wonder why I utterly loathe insurance companies.  Insurance ""fraud"" should be viewed not as a crime, but as the moral frickin' high ground; it's *insurance itself* that is little short of fraud-hidden-in-a-6pt-font."


The unstated bit of info is that most minimum wage workers who want to work full time aren't able to. The employers prefer part-timers who get fewer benefits, and whose shifts can be altered at the last minute to match up to real or forecasted demand. If you are a retail clerk or fast food worker, you generally can't get a full time job and with the constantly shifting hours you find it a challenge to get a second part time job because you can't tell the hiring manager in advance when you'll be available to work.


If you can get the health ratios based off of the total sales the tenant does divided by their rent plus nets. I know a quite a few big firms look at that to determine the health of the tenant.   Another item would be a surrounding market overview. Occupancy rates, average rent, big clients, future developments. The information on existing competitive properties are easy to find, just type in the name of their property plus the word leasing on the end. To find future development information, the city they submit to has to approve the plans. Some cities have it set up on their website over a Google maps type of link.   Edit: spelling  Good luck!     Edit 2: example of competition link. http://properties.brixmor.com/cre/commercial-real-estate-listings/frisco/texas/preston-ridge/overview/


In January 2014, sales of newly built single-family homes were at a seasonally adjusted yearly rate of 468,000 units, according to estimates from the US Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The figures show a 9.6 percent increase from the revised rate of 427,000 last December, and is also 2.2 percent higher than the 458,000 estimate set in January 2014.


"How is that possible?? The mutual fund doesn't pay taxes and passes along the tax bill to shareholders via distributions would be the short answer. Your basis likely changed as now you have bought more shares. But I gained absolutely nothing from my dividend, so how is it   taxable? The fund has either realized capital gains, dividends, interest or some other form of income that it has to pass along to shareholders as the fund doesn't pay taxes itself. Did I get screwed the first year because I bought into the fund too   late in the year? Perhaps if you don't notice that your cost basis has changed here so that you'll have lower taxes when you sell your shares.  Is anyone familiar with what causes this kind of situation of   receiving a ""taxable dividend"" that doesn't actually increase the   account balance? Yes, I am rather familiar with this. The point to understand is that the fund doesn't pay taxes itself but passes this along. The shareholders that hold funds in tax-advantaged accounts like 401ks and IRAs still get the distribution but are shielded from paying taxes on those gains at that point at time. Is it because I bought too late in the year?  No, it is because you didn't know the fund would have a distribution of that size that year. Some funds can have negative returns yet still have a capital gains distribution if the fund experiences enough redemptions that the fund had to sell appreciated shares in a security. This is part of the risk in having stock funds in taxable accounts. Or is it because the fund had a negative return that year?  No, it is because you don't understand how mutual funds and taxes work along with what distribution schedule the fund had. Do I wait until after the distribution date this year to buy? I'd likely consider it for taxable accounts yes. However, if you are buying in a tax-advantaged account then there isn't that same issue."


"Yes, you will have to file taxes.  Each peson gets a standard deduction.  By ""claiming you"", your parents are applying your standard deduction to their taxes, meaning that you cannot use that same deduction on your taxes.  You still must pay taxes on your income.  This generally works out best overall, assuming that your parents are in a higher tax bracket (have a higher income) than you."


Which is exactly what it was supposed to *not* do, but that seems to be the trend with Lewis's writing.    Buffett's biography (*The Snowball*) is great.  *The Black Swan* by Taleb is another good one and he's just put out a new one as well, which I haven't read.  Stiglitz's *Freefall*.


That isn't stopping the market from seeking unhealthy norms:  lowest paid workers, maximum price service/product the market will bare.  Which would be fine if EVERY individual could and would stand up and fight for a livable wage.  But we are all too busy trying to make a livable wage that we don't have the time or resources to stand up and fight.


There could be an impact on Facebook because just before the IPO, Morgan Stanley apparently sent information to selected clients that their analysts had just lowered their valuation of the company.  There were also reports yesterday that the lowered valuation came about because Facebook sent some revised preliminary estimates of second quarter earnings (showing lower than expected earnings) to Morgan Stanley, and least one talking head said that Facebook might also face charges depending on what the cover letters and the e-mails back and forth between Facebook and Morgan Stanley said. Investigations have already been opened.  Yes, a company wants to sell the stock being offered at the IPO at the highest price possible, but if it misled the public when offering the stock for sale (through its underwriters), it can also be liable, possibly even criminally liable. Material added in Edit: In fact, a lawsuit has already been filed  in the US District Court in Manhattan in this matter. Whether the SEC ever does anything about the matter remains to be seen.


">HOWEVER, any close to normal person can see that there are a whole lot of people with serious issues that nobody mentions to them (or they themselves are afraid to acknowledge) because they don't want to deal with all of the drama.   Doesn't mean they are caused by a ""mental illness"".  >And, just to be clear, the term ""Mental Illness"" in this case(according to the above studies) is really anything from anxiety, to depression, to schizophrenia, personality disorders, and even more social things like compulsive lying. Obviously, the definition is very broad and that is precisely why the statistic(25%) is so shocking.   Just to be clear... that is basically the definition of a ""con operation"".  The term ""mental illness"" (as it is used by the industry) is simply a fraud."


Not a surprise really considering their main aim right now is expanding to new markets. Converting their users into paying customer is the second objective for them and something that I am sure will happen naturally. After all, the more people use Spotify the more inclined they are to pay for the service. And don't forget that they've been making profits in Sweden since 2009 and the results for the UK market is looking better for each year.


His books raises some good financial advice, but it leaves a gap because he lacks specificity... a gap that MLM swooped in to fill.   I think it is more correct to say that he made his fortune by making the whole Rich Dad idea complementary to MLM. MLM in turn goes all out to push his books as a promotional and motivational tool for their downlines.


Consider looking into real estate investment trusts (REITs). Assuming that they are available for the area that you are considering they simplify the process of investing in this sector. Your money pooled with other investors and then invested in a broad range of properties. If you go this route make sure to only by REITs that are traded in the open market (liquidity and an honest current valuation). Even better I would consider a index fund of REITs for more diversification. Personally I do use a US based REIT index as a small part of my portfolio so as to get better diversification.


Greece is a unique case. These are still individual states led by very different people. You have countries that are just doing fine, despite being poor in natural resources and I would put Portugal, Spain, Italy, etc in this category. Then you have countries that are doing really well because they have natural resources and thriving industries like Germany, UK and France. Then you have countries that are struggling like Ireland, Greece, etc (Portugal has been here before). And then, you have heaven like countries like Finland, Denmark, etc where all just goes smoothly and everything works. Super high quality education, teenagers speak 3 languages by the time they are 16, etc. One thing I can guarantee you, in none of these countries you'd pay $200k for cancer treatment or higher education.  Don't generalize.


I just don't see that many suckers falling for cheap or subprime loans, given their student loans. Yellen raising rates will dampen aggressive bank profits somewhat. Smucks will be smucks, but smarter buyers would appraise their debt load and opt for renting or cheaper houses.  But then again, people don't even learn from recent history. US market is at recovery/pre-euphoria stage now. Canada is soon to pop a year after rates rise courtesy of Yellen. Given the size of the US gen y cohort, it is likely that many in their 30s in 2020 will buy. And will cry when the next bubble pops, as Boomers start selling assets to fund their retirements.


Would you please get into whether or not you thought that getting away from the gold standard was a good idea? And why? I am not great with money/economy and I really felt like I understand a lot more now that I have read that post. Thank you either way


That's crudely put. The avenues to wealth management are limited, and most ibs are looking out for their clients best interest. Fees paid are minimal compared to average gains, especially when compared to other conventional investments.  If you wish to tuck your money under the mattress, by all means. The value won't go anywhere but down.  That being said, and to op... In literally any industry it certainly helps to have a courteous, outgoing personality. Work well with others, and you'll be fine. I've seen many brilliant people laid waste due to politics, but those were extreme circumstances. I suggest you read a book, emotional intelligence. It may lend some guidance.


I love Lynchpin by Seth Godin. Great book. Very entrepreneurial. He borrows a lot of concepts but still an outstanding read. It motivates me. I like to read it once a year.   The last book i read was flash boys which caused an outrage after it was published but to me there was nothing in it that was a surprise to me at all. Wall st is greedy and looking to profit off of others with clever schemes? Stop the presses!!!


"I don't know much beyond super simple HTML, so I can't give too much specific advice about which languages to learn, but I would suggest looking at the kind of jobs that interest you and seeing what the requirements are. I know Ruby on Rails is used a lot at my current company, and I would guess that you can't go wrong with Javascript, though I'm sure there are other subreddits where you could get better advice. I personally enjoyed going through a few courses at Codeacademy.com. As far as Excel goes, if you get a really good grasp of vlookups and pivot tables, that will put you ahead of most people that use Excel regularly. Also macros can be fun, and can make you a lot of friends if you can automate repetitive tasks that you and your coworkers have to do. ""Saved 2 hours per week by automating routine tasks in Excel and trained 4 coworkers to do the same"" looks pretty good on a resume."


In the short-term, a savings account with an online bank can net you ~1% interest, while many banks/credit unions with local branches are 0.05%. Most of the online savings accounts allow 6 withdrawals per month (they'll let you do more, but charge a fee), if you pair it with a checking account, you can transfer your expected monthly need in one or two planned transfers to your checking account. Any other options that may result in a higher yield will either tie up your money for a set length of time, or expose you to risk of losing money. I wouldn't recommend gambling on short-term stock gains if you need the money during the off-season.


Do a share split.  Your initial 1 share each becomes 10 (or 100) shares each,  then you can sell/gift/etc shares as needed.


> cough cough blockbuster  Blockbuster was ten thousand little independent franchise companies that rented videos to individuals at the strip mall.  The franchises paid dues to Blockbuster Corporate for advertising and marketing.  Essentially, Corporate was the franchise Union.  If your Union/Corporate was going to cut all the employees/franchises out of all the revenue and business (streaming like Netflix) then there would be problems.  The only choice was for Blockbuster to go out business, otherwise, they would have had to buy back all the franchises at full retail value and pay future profits.  It was cheaper to close them down, have the execs take their bonuses and wave at Netflix.


This is a super contentious topic but we have to have a floor wage because we don't have a free labor market.  In order for the labor market to come up with a fair wage the market must be as close to de-regulated as possible. But we've already seen what happens in an unregulated (or low regulation) market - safety problems, child labor, abysmal wages.  Just ready a history book to see how the US clamped down on sweat shops, child labor and the rise of the Unions.   No one wants to work like that so we put regulations in place to fix those things. This is why we have safety laws and rules to prevent our employers from stealing wages due to filing a report late or other stupid excuse.   So we make the work places safer, and put protections in to make sure people get paid. But now we created a wage floor. Businesses are literally designed to make profit and you make profit by trimming all your expenses as much as necessary. Skilled employees have an easier time negotiating wages and they can band together in unions. But low skilled and unskilled workers don't have this ability  so they work for minimum wage.   Now regardless of a company's ability to pay their workers $15/hr or not, if you create a wage floor than don't account for yearly COLA/inflation workers get left behind. Why does this matter? There is a strong relationship between crime and poverty. So we decide to create social programs to keep crime down. But as the wage floor is not increased, min wage workers require more government subsidy.   Either companies pay their employees enough where full time workers don't qualify for government subsidy or the government/tax payer ends up picking up the tab on behalf of these companies.   You can't actually quantify the relationship between min wage and labor because it's not just a labor issue. It impacts crime, health (who has the ability to pay a $30 co pay if you're chronically ill on min wage?), and government social welfare on local,state and federal levels.   We can't just demand that unskilled labors get skills so they get more money because that will end up devaluing skilled positions. Right now people argue that skilled positions are devalued when min wage increases. And that's true only if your employer fails to provide a like increase.


If your concern is scams, we should be talking about counterparties, not bitcoin itself. Unless you think the protocol itself is a scam, which imo it most certainly is not.  You're conflating the trustworthiness of counterparties with the trustworthiness of the underlying protocol, which imo is not a very good model to operate by.  You'll understand the situation better of you look at them independently.  Bitcoin isn't trying to be a credit agency or the better business bureau, it's just trying to be digital money.  Don't expect it to protect you from scams any more than cash will.  That's not its job, and does not affect its trustworthiness as money.


There are lots of sub-parts to your question. Let's takle them one at a time. Should I worry about an IRA at this age? Absolutely! Or at least some form of retirement account. When you are young is the BEST time to start putting money into a retirement account because you have so much time for it to grow. Compounding interest is a magical thing. Even if you can only afford to put a very small amount in the account, do it!  You will have to put a heck of a lot less money into the account over your working career if you start now. Is there a certain amount  you need for the IRA deduction? No. Essentially with a traditional IRA you can just subtract the amount you deposited (up to the contribution limit) from your income when calculating your taxes.  What kind of IRA should I get? I suggest a ROTH IRA, but be warned that with that kind you get the tax breaks when you retire, not now. If you think taxes will be higher in 40 years or so, then the Roth is a clear winner.  Traditional IRA: Tax deduction this year for contribution; investment   plus gains are taxed as income when   you take the money out at retirement. Roth IRA: Investment amount is taxed in the year you put it in; no   taxes on investment amount or gains   when you take it out at retirement. Given the long horizon that you will be investing, the money is likely going to at least double. So the total amount you are taxed on over your lifetime would probably be less with the ROTH even if tax rates remain the same. Is the 401K a better option? If they offer a match (most do) then it is a no-brainer, the employer 401K always comes out on top because they are basically paying you extra to put money into savings.  If there is no match, I suggest a Roth because company 401K plans usually have hidden fees that are much higher than you are going to pay for setting up your own IRA or Roth IRA with a broker.


Fire your fund manager. There are several passive funds that seek to duplicate the S&P 500 Index returns. They have lower management fees, which will make returns lower than S&P, and they have less risk by following a broadly diversified strategy (versus midcap growing stocks). There's also ETFs, but evidence is growing that they're not as safe as hoped. But here's the deal: the S&P has been on a tear lately. It could be overvalued and what looks like a good investment could start falling again. A possible alternative would be one of the Lifetime funds that seek to perform portfolio adjustment with a retirement decade target; they're fairly new which mostly means nobody knows how they screw you over yet. In theory, this decade structure means the brokerage can execute trading cash for stocks, stocks for bonds, and bonds for cash in house.


This doesn't make sense in an economic context. For justice to provide sufficient deterrent, it needs to be rational to avoid a crime. If your probability of being caught is comparatively lower, the punishment needs to be higher in order to remain a deterrent.   Basically,   P(get caught) * Punitive Cost > Profit


They did, but Google also owns a significant portion of Uber - they put in $258 million for 6.8% of the company at a $3.7 billion valuation (probably somewhat diluted by now), so Google's investment is probably worth ~$3 billion now.  Google stands to make more if Uber is successful in using the IP they stole and their valuation soars.  My guess is that the lawsuit ends in a couple billion dollar settlement so Google gets some cash out of it, and their investment is not hurt.


Adsense don't pay you daily. They pay you every month (as they have to calculate the final value). I'd say you only have to declare it when it hits your bank account. £60 actually isn't that much. It only took me a couple of months of just making a few quid, to making enough to get a monthly payment, and I only tot up what goes into my bank account. I've opened up a second account with my bank to send and receive payments relating to my online adventures. Then any in/out goes into a spreadsheet that I do at the end of the month keeping track of everything. If Mr. Taxman want to investigate at the end of the tax year, it's all logged in that account.  It gets a bit murkier if you start doing US Amazon affiliates. The simplest method is to get the cheque delivered, and then log the amount that goes into your bank (after $->£ conversion). I have a Payoneer account, and transfer most of the money into my account (after it hits $500), and keep a little bit in for things I buy that are in USD. Hope that helps.


"How can I say this more clearly? SCAM, SCAM, SCAM! This is another one of the oldest scams out there, where you've won a prize or an inheritance has come in, and all you have to do is pay the taxes on it to claim it. Don't be a sucker!  Ask yourself why the government couldn't (and wouldn't) just take the taxes due out of the funds they have and give the rest to the person they belong to?  Wouldn't that be the smartest and easiest thing to do? As an example, let's say that you have $1,000 that belongs to me, and I owe you $100.  Would you tell me to pay you the $100 and then you'll give me the $1,000 or would you take the $100 I owe you out of the $1,000 and give me the remaining $900? The fact this is someone you know from the internet and they want your ""help"" to claim their money should tell you how much of a scam this is. Stop talking to this person, and don't tell them anything personal about you.  They are scam artists, and whatever you tell them could be used to steal your identity or take your money. Be careful, my friend!"


I agree with you. I have many liberal viewpoints but over regulation is definitely not one of them. I work for a non profit health insurance company and a lot of the Affordable Care Act is something I am truly behind. However many things within it,  I believe, are going to increase costs across the board for all of us.   I hate to sound like Romney and say that regulation is of course needed but too much of it truly is doing more harm than good.


If you are willing to use one main credit card for shopping, use a grocery points rewards card like PC Financial Mastercard.   Pay for the groceries using the card to earn points and use those points to reduce costs.  The only limitation is that you must shop at Loblaws, Superstore, No Frills, Zehrs, Fortinos. It works out to $1 = 10 points and 20,000 points = $20.  So that works out to spend $1 to earn back $0.01.


"The general answer to this is ""yes"".  When you're dealing with single-digit millionaires, the answer is that their insurance habits and needs are basically the same as everyone else.  When you get into the double digit and triple digit millionaires, or people worth billions, they have additional options, but those basically boil down to using ""self-insurance"" rather than paying a company for an insurance policy.  The following is based on both what I've read and a fair deal of personal experience working for or with various stripes of millionaire, and even one billionaire. Addressing the types of insurance you mention: This is generally used to provide survivors with a replacement for income you can no longer provide when dead, in addition to paying for costs associated with dying (funeral, hospital/hospice bills, etc).  Even millionaires and billionaires have this, yes, but the higher your net worth, the less value it has.  If you're worth 9 or 10 figures, you probably already have trust funds set up for your family members, so an extra payout from an insurance policy is probably going to represent a small fraction of the wealth you're leaving your survivors, and as has been noted, insurance makes a profit, so the expectation by the insurance company is that they'll make more money on the policy than they'll have to pay out on death.  That being said, the members of the 9+ figure club I've worked for all had multi-million dollar life insurance policies on them, which were paid for or heavily subsidized by the companies they owned or worked for.  I doubt they would have held those policies if they had to pay the full cost, but when it's free or cheap, why not? Absolutely.  As health insurance in America is an untaxed employment benefit, owing to regulations from World War II, all the wealthy folks I've had contact with got outrageously good plans as part of the companies they work for or owned.  Having said that, even their trust fund beneficiaries held health insurance, because this type of insurance (in America, at least) is actually not really insurance, it's more of a pre-payment plan for medical expenses, and as such, it provides broader access to health care than you'd get from simply having enough money to pay for whatever treatments you need.  If you walk into a hospital as a millionaire and state that you'll definitely be able to pay for your open-heart surgery with cash, you'll get a very different response than if you walk in with your insurance card and your ""diamond-level"" coverage.  So, in this case, it's not as much as about the monetary benefits (although this is a type of ""insurance"" that's generally free or heavily discounted to the individual, so that's a factor) as it is about easier access to health care. Although this is required by law, it's one of the common forms of insurance that the very wealthy can, and often do handle differently than the rest of us.  Most (if not all) US states have a provision to allow motorists to self-insure themselves, which amount to putting up a bond to cover claims against them.  Basically, you deposit the minimum amount the state determines is required for auto insurance with the responsible state organization, get a certificate of self-insurance and you're good to go.  All the high wealth individuals I know when this route, for two reasons - first of all, they didn't have to deal with insurance companies (or pay sky-high rates on account of all the speeding tickets they picked up) and secondly, they made their deposit with government bonds they had in their portfolios anyway, and they could still collect the interest on their self-insurance deposits.  Of course, this meant that if they wrecked or dinged up their Maserati or Bentley or whatever, they'd be out of pocket to repair or replace it... but I guess if you can afford one $200,000 car, you can afford to buy a second one if you wreck it, or get by riding one of your other luxury automobiles instead. Since someone else mentioned kidnapping insurance, I'll point out here that what Robert DeNiro did in Casino when he put a couple million dollars into a safety deposit box for his wife to use if he was kidnapped or needed to pay off a government official is essentially the same thing as ""self-insurance"".  Putting money away somewhere for unexpected events in lieu of buying an insurance policy against them. In real life, the very wealthy will often do this with US treasuries, government bonds and other interest-bearing, safe investments. They make a little money, diversify their portfolios and at the same time, self-insure against a potential big loss. This is another insurance area where even the very wealthy are remarkably similar to the rest of us, in that they all generally have it, yes, although the reason is a little different.  For normal folks, the home they own is generally the largest part of their net worth, or at least a very substantial fraction, for those older folks with retirement savings that exceed the value of their homes.  So for us, we have home owners insurance to prevent a catastrophic event from wiping out the lion's share of our net worth. If you're an ultra-wealthy individual who can afford an 8 figure home, that's not really the case (at least with the ones I've dealt with, who made their fortunes in business and are good managing their wealth and diversifying their assets - could be different for sports stars or the entertainment industry), and these people generally own multiple homes anyway, so it's not as big a deal if they lose one. However, no one actually buys a multi-million dollar home by writing a multi-million dollar check.  They get a mortgage, just like the rest of us.  And to get a mortgage, insurance on the property is a requirement.  So yes, even the ultra wealthy generally have insurance on their home(s).  There is an element of not wanting to shell out another 20 million if the place burns down, or someone breaks in and steals your valuables, but the bigger part of the reason is that it's required to get a mortgage in the first place, which is generally done for financial reasons - interest on your mortgage is a tax deduction, and you don't want to sink millions of dollars all at once into buying a property that's not going to appreciate in value, when you can get a mortgage and invest those millions of dollars to make more money instead."


"Here's a formula;  I had to go over to SEMath, use their MathJax to compose the answer and then paste this screen shot. As a result, I can't fix a typo:  ""ST"" is the same as ""St"""


">The lawsuit was brought by a man named Chris Gillespie who had registered 763 domain names that included the word ""google."" In response, Google claimed trademark infringement, and Gillespie was ultimately ordered to forfeit the domains. Gillespie then sued in a bid to invalidate the trademark.  Wonder if their original aim was to cybersquat and/or hope Google would buy him out like [sometimes happens with domains](https://marketingland.com/google-apple-facebook-microsoft-among-major-brands-buying-sucks-domains-124248)"


Yeah I agree with you. I wasn't referring to Tesla though, as I'm from South Africa so I only look in to local investments and I don't really know their story in terms of financials. Was just speaking about PE ratios in general :)


Very interesting. I would like to expand beyond just precious metals and stocks, but I am not ready just to jump in just yet (I am a relatively young investor, but have been playing around with stocks for 4 years on and off). The problem I often find is that the stock market is often too overvalued to play Ben Graham type strategy/ PE/B, so I would like to expand my knowledge of investing so I can invest in any market and still find value. After reading Jim Rogers, I was really interested in commodities as an alternative to stocks, but I like to play really conservative (generally). Thank you for your insight. If you don't mind, I would like to add you as a friend, since you seem quite above average in the strategy department.


Today, when finding reliable tenants is a tough task, they leave no stone unturned to search for suitable tenants for your property. The best part is that when you have the support of a good property management company, you can sit back and relax, as they would take away your entire burden about the handling of your property.


There are some circumstances in which it is a good idea. Chris W Rea has already mentioned the case where you expect your marginal tax rate to decrease. But there is also the case where lack of contributions might cause your marginal rate to increase. Assume your income is $20,000 over the 46% threshold, and you normally contribute $20,000 to RRSP. However this year you have only been able to contribute $10,000. If you wait until next year and contribute an extra $10,000 (making $30,000) the extra $10,000 will only bring 35% tax back. If you can borrow the money and make the contribution this year it will get 46% tax back. That makes the loan worth taking. Making the contribution now can also get you a larger rebate this year. You will have that money for twelve extra months and you can invest it. That probably isn't enough to make it worthwhile alone, but it certainly makes the damage less. However I would always recommend taking out an RRSP loan for as short a time as possible. My recommendation would always be to make the contribution as late in the period as possible, apply for your tax refund as soon as you can, and then pay off the loan with the refund. You shoulod be able to get away with having the loan only for a couple of months.


The key to understanding a mortgage is to look at an amortization schedule.  Put in 100k, 4.5% interest, 30 years, 360 monthly payments and look at the results.  You should get roughly 507 monthly P&I payment.  Amortization is only the loan portion, escrow for taxes and insurance and additional payments for PMI are extra. You'll get a list of all the payments to match the numbers you enter.  These won't exactly match what you really get in a mortgage, but they're close enough to demonstrate the way amortization works, and to plan a budget.  For those terms, with equal monthly payments, you'll start paying 74% interest from the first payment.  Each payment thereafter, that percentage drops. The way this is all calculated is through the time value of money equations.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_value_of_money.  Read slowly, understand how the equations work, then look at the formula for Repeating Payment and Present Value.  That is used to find the monthly payment.   You can validate that the formula works by using their answer and making a spreadsheet that has these columns:  Previous balance, payment, interest, new balance.  Each line represents a month.  Calculate interest as previous balance * APR/12.  Calculate new balance as previous balance minus payment plus interest. Work through all this for a 1 year loan and you will understand a lot better.


i forget which one, but one of the two majors (S&P, Moodys), for a time, was not paid by issuers, but solely by subscribers. no surprise here, but at that time the issuer had, on average, lower ratings than the other service. after the service switched to subscriber-paid, within a year its ratings were on par with the other service.


The one whose order gets to the exchange first. The exchange receives the orders and arranges them in First-In-First-Out order, by which they're then executed. At some point it is synchronized and put into a list. Whoever gets to that point first - gets the deal.


Are you looking for the largest Ring Binder File Manufacturers In Mumbai then contact with Sagar Stationary pvt ltd which is the best manufactures of Sheet Protector file, Ring binder file, Plastics file folder and school stationary. For more details, Explore the full Blog or visit: http://www.svsmumbai.in/


The person holding the majority of shares can influence the decisions of the company. Even though the shareholder holds majority of the shares,the Board of Directors appointed by the shareholders in the Annual General Meeting will run the company. As said in the characteristics of the company,the owners and the administrators of the company are different. The shareholder holding majority of the shares can influence the business decisions like appointing the auditor,director etc. and any other business decisions(not taken in the ordinary business) that are taken in the Annual General Meeting.


Oh jeez. Really? Ok.   Yes. I am a millenial. No, I am not unemployed. I work for a living. I pay all my own bills. I feel satisfied by doing it. I have my own hobbies, plans, and goals for the future, and I don't expect anyone to hand me these things or map them out for me. Why? Because they haven't. Millenials got the shit end of the stick. I don't understand how the hell you think that makes us more entitled than the people who grew up before everything started going into decline. We have it harder and we have to clean up all of your fucking messes.  That being said, I pay for all of my content, or I find it available legally for free. This article is in fact available for free on Bloomberg's website, and  the Daily Herald in no way deserves my money for content that they didn't even produce.  So eat all the dicks, old douche.


Wanneer u op zoek bent naar kachelhout dan is het soms lastig om een goede keuze te maken. Het kachelhout is in twee groepen te verdelen, de zachtere soorten, zoals elzen en berken en de harde soorten, zoals essen en eiken hout. De zachtere soorten zijn lichter van gewicht en branden wat makkelijker en sneller. De hardere soorten branden een beetje trager en zijn iets moeilijker aan te steken. Voor een kleinere kachel gebruiken de meeste stokers berken hout, om dat dit wat makkelijker is aan te steken en ook goed brandt met minder blokken. Voor de middel grote kachel kunt u het beste essen gebruiken en voor de grotere kachels essen of eiken hout. U moet voor een eikenhout wel al snel 4 blokken tegelijk branden.


Web Content is vitally important for boosting your business on the internet. With our service, you can have content or articles written for your blog or website at a very affordable price. Our team is made up of Freelance Writers Professionals in their careers, with the experience to produce like cheap research paper writing service and any type of Content. Look at Our Plans. We have a team of professional and experienced Freelance Writers, therefore the web content is Optima Quality and 100% Original content, Without the aid of any automated software, only with the writer's mental ability.


I have just established a limited company (three directors spread around the UK) and I am in the process of setting up a business account. We will be able to arrange everything over the phone and each of us will have to appear in one of the branches with original documents: passport, bank statement. We are EU citizens and have UK bank accounts for over 5 years. That would probably be a problem for you. But still, you can try to call around and see if you can find a company to help you. You can also setup an account on one of the online currency exchange websites and then provide your customers with the website's bank account details with appropriate reference. You would have to check the legal side of this solution.


"Congratulations on recognizing your problem and getting serious about paying down your debt. That's the first step. If you have a loan with 80% interest, yes, get that paid off as quickly as possible. Much better to be paying even the outrageous 20% on a credit card than the astounding 80%. As others have noted, if you can get a consolidation loan or refinance that 80% to something more realistic, do it and do it as soon as possible. Heck, if you have the credit limit, use the credit card to off the 80% loan. 20% on a credit card is better than 80%. Of course you may not have enough credit limit to do that. Cash-back rewards are nice if you are paying off the credit card balance each month. But in your case, you're not. 25% with a 2% cash back reward means you're still paying 23% the first month and 25% every month after that. That's worse than 20%. Remember you pay the interest on your balance every month that you don't pay it off, while a cash-back is a one-time thing. So if you're not going to pay off the balance, AT BEST a cash back reward could be effectively subtracted from the interest rate. 20% with a 2% cashback is effectively somewhere between 18% and 20%. If you're comparing 20% with 2% cashback to 19%, could be complicated to figure out which is better. But it's clearly worse than anything more than 20%. Besides that, you don't say what your total debt is in relation to your income. If you have a lot of debt, I'd say first thing is to figure out what you can do to cut your expenses. Lots of things that people call ""fixed expenses"" aren't really fixed at all, they just take some effort to cut. Like if you have a big expensive house and you're paying a large mortgage, you can (probably) cut that by selling the place and moving to a cheaper house. (I say ""probably"" because the housing market may make it impossible to sell for enough to improve your situation.) If you have large heating bills, you can turn the thermostat down and get used to wearing a sweater around the house. Etc.  Final note: I've talked to a fair number of people with debt problems, and I often hear them say, ""Yes, I really need to cut my spending and start paying off these debts. And I intend to ... right after I buy this one last thing that I really really want."" But of course after that there's one more vital purchase, and then another, etc. Avoid falling into this trap."


So you're saying a company has no responsibility whatsoever to ensure its employees make fair wages?  That the market will determine a person's salary based on their valuability?  What if market forces align to reduce wages in order to increase profitability?  That's exactly what's happened in the last 30 years and people like you protecting corporate greed is the reason why living wages has stagnated barely matching inflation while [executive salaries have skyrocteted.](https://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_1920w/Boston/2011-2020/2014/10/26/BostonGlobe.com/Business/Images/ceopay2graf.jpg)  You're either ignorant of the big picture, or a shill for a system that exploits the masses.


What you are positioning as a loan was not a loan at all. Your father bought something to be delivered in the future. Your aunt does not want to deliver it, so she should buy it back at whatever the current market value is. What is the price that your dad believes her share of the inheritance is currently worth? Is that based on actual appraisals and some sort of objective audit? If so, your aunt doesn't have much of a case. If not, then she could seek an audit to bolster her bargaining position. How much did your aunt benefit from having a place to live for the last 15 years. Was that benefit greater than some larger amount of money at an unknown future date? That's probably why she sold her inheritance 15 years ago. Now that the inheritance looks like it is going to be available soon, she wants to trade back after having enjoyed the use of your father's money. That might be okay, but simply paying back the original sum with inflation, but without interest, doesn't seem fair to your father. She may not be able to afford to give any more than what she is offering, in which case, she might want to consider offering the original sum now and some portion of her inheritance as interest on that original sum. I'm not taking sides in this one. If it were one of my siblings, I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt and take a smaller amount back if I felt that the lesson was learned (and if I felt that he/she would make wise use of my gift to him/her).  I have no idea what your father's current economic situation is, nor am I aware of any other baggage that might influence his feelings about his sister. It's as likely as not that money isn't really what is bothering him, in which case, the amount she repays may have little to do with bridging the divide between them. You might need to ask different questions in the Interpersonal Skills stack if you want to help your father feel better.


">What if everyone in college studied for a physics degree. How worthwhile would they be then?   You assume that everyone COULD obtain a physics degree.  (Hint: there is a *reason* why the panoply of degrees has expanded along with the percentage of people obtaining them.)   >Sure, a single individual can benefit from getting a difficult or niche degree, but I'm not sure that the system as a whole could benefit.  Yes, there is a supply/demand part of the equation as far as the degrees obtained.    But boss-hoss is just pointing out a current exception to the linked article's conclusion, he is not stating that everyone should obtain a physics degree (so you are arguing with a straw-man of your own construct).  And yet it is a valid point -- but likewise there is a fundamental supply/demand equation that drives college tuition costs: If ""everyone"" is enabled to attend college, and at no upfront preparation/sacrifice (in terms of saving money) but rather an unlimited fund of ""loan money"" is created to facilitate it, then ""price is no longer an object"" and the colleges will have no reason to constrain costs; competitive pressures having essentially been artificially eliminated."


Some people cannot get bank accounts because they have been seized by a creditor or they're illegal.   Some companies don't (or can't) deal with paper checks.  Giving them a prepaid debit card and auto depositing it to the card is sometimes simpler or cheaper.   Hell, when I was on unemployment the government tried to make me receive the funds on a debit card.  It was a major pain just to get the money sent to my bank account.


With gold at US$1300 or so, a gram is about $40.  For your purposes, you have the choice between the GLD ETF, which represents a bit less than 1/10oz gold equivalent per share, or the physical metal itself. Either choice has a cost: the commission on the buy plus, eventually, the sale of the gold. There may be ongoing fees as well (fund fees, storage, etc.) GLD trades like a stock and you can enter limit orders or any other type of order the broker accepts.


"Use with moderation. Powerful stuff. Your caller could be an offshore scammer too. Summarizing from http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt-validation.shtml: You can dispute the debt, and demand that the collector give you the name and address of the original creditor and show that it isn't past the statute of limitations. If they can't ""validate"" the debt by providing that info, in writing, they must drop it until they can do so. You can sue (though generally not for very much) if they don't. You may have to make this request in writing, so it has a paper trail. A valid verification respond must include: If they don't respond within 30 days, they are in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FDCPA section 809b), and you can send registered mail threatening them with a lawsuit if they don't immediately drop it and remove it from your credit report. They should respond to that within two weeks, and if they don't have darned good evidence will probably cave. If they can prove you do owe the money ... Well, you can hope they aren't licensed to collect in your state; if they aren't you can try to challenge them on that basis. Unlikely to work. If they agree, remember to send a copy of the letter to the credit reporting agencies to make sure it's taken off your record. If this isn't enough to resolve it, you'll probably need to bring suit. That's another long list of steps; I'm going to refer you to the linked site rather than summarize them here since at that point you should get a lawyer involved to make sure it's done promptly."


What's funny to me is that the sales tax isn't what gives Amazon better prices.  It's that stores have to include their costs on the price that's shown on the shelf.  Amazon gets to tell you later that there's a shipping fee, Amazon isn't paying a store staff and rental on store front property.  In short Amazon can show the customer a price that is making a decent profit, and still be lower than a retail outlet.


I agree with the advice given, but I'll add another angle from which to look at it. It sounds like you are already viewing the money used to either pay off the loan early or invest in the market as an investment, which is great. You are wise to think about opportunity cost, but like others pointed out, you are overlooking the risk factor. The way I would look at this is: I could take a guaranteed 6.4% return by paying off the loan or a possible 7% return by investing the money.  If the risk pays off modestly, all you've done is earned 0.6%, with a huge debt still hanging over you. Personally, I would take the guaranteed 6.4% return by paying off the debt, then invest in the stock market. Now this is looking at the investment as a single, atomic pool of money.  But you can split it up a bit.  Let's say the amount of extra disposable income you want to invest with is $1,000/mo.  Then you could pay an extra $500/mo to your student loan and invest the other $500 in  the stock market, or do a 400/600 split, or whatever suits your risk tolerance. You mentioned multiple loans and 6.4% is the highest loan.  What I would do, based on what I value personally, is put every extra penny into paying off the 6.4% loan because that is high.  Once that is done, if the next loan is 4% of less, then split my income between paying extra to it and investing in the market. Remember, with each loan you pay off, the monthly income that previously went to it is now available, and can be used for the next loan or the other goals.


"Brendan, The short answer is no, there is no need to get into any other funds. For all intents and purposes the S&P 500 is ""The Stock Market"". The news media may quote the Dow when the market reaches new highs or crashes but all of the Dow 30 stocks are included in the S&P 500.  The S&P is also marketcap weighted, which means that it owns in higher proportion the big ""Blue Chip"" stocks more than the smaller less known companies. To explain, the top 10 holdings in the S&P represent 18% of the total index, while the bottom 10 only represent 0.17% (less than 1 percent). They do have an equal weighted S&P in which all 500 companies represent only 1/500th of the index and that is technically even more diversified but in actuality it makes it more volatile because it has a higher concentration of those smaller less known companies. So it will tend to perform better during up markets and worse during down markets. As far as diversification into different asset classes or other countries, that's non-sense. The S&P 500 has companies in it that give you that exposure. For example, it includes companies that directly benefit from rising oil prices, rising gold prices, etc known as the Energy and Materials sector. It also includes companies that own malls, apartment complexes, etc. known as the Real Estate sector. And as far as other countries, most of the companies in the S&P are multi-national companies, meaning that they do business over seas in many parts of the world. Apple and FaceBook for example sell their products in many different countries. So you don't need to invest any of your money into an Emerging Market fund or an Asia Fund because most of our companies are already doing business in those parts of the world. Likewise, you don't need to specifically invest into a real estate or gold fund.  As far as bonds go, if you're in your twenties you have no need for them either. Why, because the S&P 500 also pays you dividends and these dividends grow over time. So for example, if Microsoft increases its dividend payment by 100% over a ten year period , all of the shares you buy today at a 2.5% yield will, in 10 years, have a higher 5% yield. A bond on the other hand will never increase its yield over time. If it pays out 4%, that's all it will ever pay. You want to invest because you want to grow your money and if you want to invest passively the fastest way to do that is through index ETFs like the $SPY, $IVV, and $RSP. Also look into the $XIV, it's an inverse VIX ETF, it moves 5x faster than the S&P in the same direction. If you want to actively trade your money, you can grow it even faster by getting into things like options, highly volatile penny stocks, shorting stocks, and futures. Don't get involved in FX or currency trading, unless it through futures."


Agreed, it'll be faster.  Let's do a little math.  Tesla is trying to hit 500k units in 2018.  They want 1m in 2020.  If Tesla can do 1m in 2020, how many EVs can *ALL* other western auto manufacturers build in 2020 (GM + Nissan + VW + Daimler + etc)?  I'd take a swing at 2-3m.  What about Chinese auto manufacturers?  Probably 3m more, since EVs are a focus there?  So if you count that up, it's 7-8m EVs in 2020, which is 10% of worldwide new car sales.  This can all be accomplished in the $35k+ market.  This also provides the volume to drive down battery and electronics costs to hit $30k and then $25k price points later in the 2020's.  So if we're at 10% by 2020, I'd be shocked if we didn't have 50-75% EVs of new car sales by 2030.  20-50% growth over 10 years adds up quickly.  The oil price crash of 2014 was caused by a 2% imbalance between supply and demand.  So this predicts crashes in the price of oil and oil company stocks in the early 2020's.  There's likely also political unrest in oil producing countries, as their economies start having revenue shortfalls.  Given the friendliness of EVs to demand response, I'd think we'd just keep building intermittent renewables.  When the wind blows and sun shines, EVs charge (and turn off otherwise)  This will increase electricity demand, but put pressure on expensive and dirty coal and natural gas.  All of this drives down the cost of electric driving, and CO2 emissions.


Yeah, I think this is true, but my credit scores are 810+ and I have a similar amount of liquidity and I think I would still have a tough time getting what I wanted in this market due to the cash buyers. People with outstanding credit are losing to cash.


> Google and others essentially have in-house investment banking departments that are vetting, valuing, negotiating, and sealing these deals. These M&A guys are mostly former bankers.  Corporations are also making more use of consultants for M&A deals, often former banking MDs who play a similar 'oversight' role as they would in a bank.   Perhaps we are seeing the emergence of a new business model - fixed price costs (no commission),  in-house at junior levels and highly flexible at senior levels. By cutting out the bank there are huge amounts of money to be saved.  I agree with you about the article being a bit silly. The vast majority of deals are done is small sub-sections of industry where everyone knows the potential targets. A match.com style dating for m&a algorithm wouldn't really add much value.


This is a very simple picture book on ***financial statements*** with retard level examples. Shows COGS, SGA and the like. stockbroker is using terms that are on financial statements.   http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Statements-Step-Step-Understanding/dp/1564143414  A good map for you might be to think in terms of Macro and Micro economics. stockbroker is doing micro - analyzing the fundamentals of a business. Macro economics has to do with big issues of a nations  economy like gdp. Both are important.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://wol.iza.org/articles/do-social-interactions-in-workplace-lead-to-productivity-spillover-among-co-workers) reduced by 70%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Should one expect a worker&#039;s productivity, and thus wage, to depend on the productivity of his/her co-workers in the same workplace, even if the workers carry out completely independent tasks and do not engage in team work? This may well be the case because social interaction among co-workers can lead to productivity spillover through knowledge spillover or peer pressure.  > The available empirical evidence suggests that, due to such peer effects, co-worker productivity positively affects a worker&#039;s own productivity and wage, particularly in lower-skilled occupations.  > Evidence suggests that peer pressure affects productivity and is an important reason why workers&#039; wages and productivity depend on their co-workers&#039; productivity.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/77o9hf/do_social_interactions_in_the_workplace_lead_to/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~231949 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*: **productivity**^#1 **work**^#2 **peer**^#3 **spillover**^#4 **co-worker**^#5"


If your purchases are done at year end, but the money withheld over that 12 month period, the 17% return is for an average time of 6 months, and the return annualizes to 38% or so. All due respect to Alex B, the return would be 100/85 as he states, if the investment were funded in January and sold in December. But this isn't the case on ESPP, the average time you are out that money is 6 months.  I will warn you. Don't let the tax tail wag your investing dog. It's easy to wait for long term gains to kick in and then ignore the stock. You then find yourself overloaded on one stock and risk some bad losses. I enjoyed my 15% discount all the way to the stock crashing by 60%+. If you must wait and hold some, be religious about selling the long term shares like clockwork. The 15% is virtually risk free (unless the shares crash between purchase and hitting your account.)


I've always had a job in Healthcare IT, past 11 years, but never went to school for computers. All of my skills came from on the job training or company paid certifications. Instead of taking on debt, take a position at a company that will help with your tuition. In the long run, a company willing to pay for you to get smarter is one you'd want to stay with. In my opinion.


Taxes  Based on the numbers you quoted (-$360) it doesn't appear that you would have a taxable event if you sell all the shares in the account.  If you only sell some of the shares, to fund the new account, you should specify which shares you want to sell. If you sell only the shares that you bought when share prices were high, then every share you sell could be considered a loss. This will increase your losses. These losses can be deducted from your taxes, though there are limits. Fees Make sure that you understand the fee structure. Some fund families look at the balance of all your accounts to determine your fee level, others treat each fund separately.  Procedure If you were able to get the 10K into the new account in the next few months I would advise not selling the shares. Because it will be 6 to 18 months before you are able to contribute the new funds then rebalancing by selling shares makes more sense. It gets you to your goal quicker.  All the funds you mentioned have low expense ratios, I wouldn't move funds just to chase a the lowest expense ratio. I would look at the steps necessary to get the mix you want in the next few weeks, and then what will be needed moving forward. If the 60/40 or 40/60 split makes you comfortable pick one of them. If you want to be able to control the balance via rebalancing or changing your contribution percentage, then go with two funds.


This very much depends how you use that second line of credit and what your current credit is. There are of course many more combinations buy you can probably infer the impact based on these cases.   Your credit score is based on your likely hood of being profitable to a creditor should they issue you credit. This is based on your history of your ability to manage your credit.  Having more credit and managing it well shows that you have a history of being responsible with greater sums of money available.  If you use the card responsibly now then you are more likely to continue that trend than someone with a history of irresponsibility.  Having a line but not using it is not a good thing.  It costs the creditor money for you to have an account.  If you never use that account then you are not showing that you can use the account responsibly so if you are just going to throw the card in a safe and never access it then you are better off not getting the card in the first place.


I have managed two IRA accounts; one I inherited from my wife's 401K and my own's 457B.  I managed actively my wife's 401 at Tradestation which doesn't restrict on Options except level 5 as naked puts and calls. I moved half of my 457B funds to TDAmeritrade, the only broker authorized by my employer, to open a Self Directed account.  However, my 457 plan disallows me from using a Cash-secured Puts, only Covered Calls.  For those who does not know investing, I resent the contention that participants to these IRAs should not be messing around with their IRA funds.  For years, I left my 401k/457B funds with my current fund custodian, Great West Financial.  I checked it's current values once or twice a year. These last years, the market dived in the last 2 quarters of 2015 and another dive early January and February of 2016.  I lost a total of $40K leaving my portfolio with my current custodian choosing all 30 products they offer, 90% of them are ETFs and the rest are bonds. If you don't know investing, better leave it with the pros - right?  But no one can predict the future of the market.  Even the pros are at the mercy of the market. So, I you know how to invest and choose your stocks, I don't think your plan administrator has to limit you on how you manage your funds. For example, if you are not allowed to place a Cash-Secured Puts and you just Buy the stocks or EFT at market or even limit order, you buy the securities at their market value. If you sell a Cash-secured puts against the stocks/ETF you are interested in buying, you will receive a credit in fraction of a dollar in a specific time frame.  In average, your cost to owning a stock/ETF is lesser if you buy it at market or even a limit order.  Most of the participants of the IRA funds rely too much on their portfolio manager because they don't know how to manage. If you try to educate yourself at a minimum, you will have a good understanding of how your IRA funds are tied up to the market.  If you know how to trade in bear market compared to bull market, then you are good at managing your investments.  When I started contributing to my employer's deferred comp account (457B) as a public employee, I have no idea of how my portfolio works.  Year after year as I looked at my investment, I was happy because it continued to grow.  Without scrutinizing how much it grew yearly, and my regular payroll contribution, I am happy even it only grew 2% per year.  And at this age that I am ready to retire at 60, I started taking investment classes and attended pre-retirement seminars.  Then I knew that it was not totally a good decision to leave your retirement funds in the hands of the portfolio manager since they don't really care if it tanked out on some years as long at overall it grew to a meager 1%-4% because they managers are pretty conservative on picking the equities they invest.  You can generalize that maybe 90% of IRA investors don't know about investing and have poor decision making actions which securities/ETF to buy and hold. For those who would like to remain as one, that is fine.  But for those who spent time and money to study and know how to invest, I don't think the plan manager can limit the participants ability to manage their own portfolio especially if the funds have no matching from the employer like mine. All I can say to all who have IRA or any retirement accounts, educate yourself early because if you leave it all to your portfolio managers, you lost a lot.  Don't believe much in what those commercial fund managers also show in their presentation just to move your funds for them to manage.  Be proactive.  If you start learning how to invest now when you are young, JUST DO IT!


">>You do realize that just because you quote the Bible doesn't mean you have morals.  Obviously, you didn't understand my point. The utopian ideal of everyone having the exact healthcare they require (or really desire) is the LEFT's standard. It's ignorance of Christian morality to say that's what their beliefs dictate.   >>For the record, wealth distribution is perfectly acceptable. Funny how Republicans hate it, but don't have a problem with ""trickle down economics"".  You're referring to crony capitalism in essence (favorable tax status). Now there's some real hypocrisy by both sides! I love my solar subsidized green electrcity almost as much as my subsidized gasoline!"


Nowadays, the field is irrelevant for processing the transfer and completely ignored by the banks. Pretty much the only purpose it has is for documenting whom you intended to send the transfer to. If you mistakenly send a transfer to the wrong person (which is becoming extremely unlikely with the IBAN due to the builtin check digits) then they are mandated by law to give it back to you. If they refuse to do so and you end up going to court, the content of that field could be important to prove them wrong if they claim they are the rightful recipient.


"If I have a house that its market value went from $100k to $140k can I get HELOC $40K? Maybe - the amount that you can borrow depends on the market value of the house, so if you already have $100k borrowed against it, it will be tough to borrow another $40k without paying a higher interest rate, since there is a real risk that the value will decrease and you will be underwater.   Can I again ask for HELOC after I finish the renovation in order to do more renovation and maybe try to end up renovating the house so its value raises up to $500k? I doubt you can just ""renovate"" a house and increase its market value from $140k to $500K.  Much of a house's value is determined by its location, and you can quickly outgrow a neighborhood.  If you put $360k in improvements in a neighborhood where other homes are selling for $140k you will not realize nearly that amount in actual market value.  People that buy $500k houses generally want to be in an area where other homes are worth around the same amount.   If you want to to a major renovation (such as an addition) I would instead shop around for a Home Improvement Loan.  The main difference is that you can use the expected value of the house after improvements to determine the loan balance, instead of using the current value. Once the renovations are complete, you roll it and the existing mortgage into a new mortgage, which will likely be cheaper than a mortgage + HELOC. The problem is that the cost of the improvements is generally more than the increase in market value.  It also helps you make a wise decision, versus taking out a $40k HELOC and spending it all on renovations, only to find out that the increase in market value is only $10k and you're now underwater. So in your case, talk to a contractor to plan out what you want to do, which will tell you how much it will cost.  Then talk to a realtor to determine what the market value with those improvements will be, which will tell you how much you can borrow.  It's highly likely that you will need to pay some out-of-pocket to make up the difference, but it depends on what the improvements are and what comparable homes sell for."


Whether or not you'll be allowed to enter the UK is a topic for a different forum (and really more a topic for a lawyer rather than strangers on the internet). That being said, as a non-lawyer giving my opinion of the situation, you should be granted access to the UK as the banks/money lenders/phone companies don't have a relationship with Border Entry. With regards to debts in the UK, there is some precedent to debts being waived after a certain period of time, but the minimum is 6 years for unsecured debt, and the companies you owe money to can still chase you for payment, but can't use legal proceedings to force you to pay. However, the big caveat to this is that this only applies to residents of England and Wales.  From the cleardebt.co.uk site: What is out of date debt? Debts like these are covered by the Limitation Act 1980, which is a   statute of limitations that provides time scales as to how long a   creditor can chase you (the debtor) for an unpaid debt. The Limitation   Act 1980 only applies when no acknowledgement of a debt has been made   between you and the creditor for six years for unsecured debts or 12   years for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans. This law only applies   to residents of England and Wales. When does debt go out of date? If the creditor fails to maintain contact with you for six years or   more, you may be able to claim that the outstanding debt is statute   barred under the Limitation Act 1980. This means the creditor cannot   use the legal system to enforce payment of the outstanding debt. The   time limit starts from when you last acknowledged owing the debt or   made a payment to the account. When can a creditor pursue an unsecured debt?  You may think a creditor has written off your debt if you haven’t heard from them for   a long time. The reality is that the debt still exists. The creditor   can still contact you and they are entitled to chase the outstanding   debt, even if the debt has been statute barred, but they are unable to   use legal proceedings to force you to pay. Creditors can pursue an   unsecured debt if:


Obviously, I am very hesitant. Is there any possible way that this act of kindness could come back to bite the kind person who sends the money? Or does this sound perfectly safe to do? There is some amount of risk. If you know the person very well ... i.e. vouch for his/her integrity and there is a legitimate reason why they can't send it with their name, then yes. The red flags are;   So if someone is a casual acquaintance it is not a good idea. You may want to consider this only if you know the person extremely well and there is some genuine reason why he is asking you to do something like this.


"A lot of  ISA's allow both shares and funds as well as gilts, Hargreaves Lansdown  comes to mind as does the Alliance Trust. Some penalise (charging wise) securities vs UT (unit trusts)  funds but in that case just go for a low cost IT (Investment Trust)  ISA and hold individual shares as well as pooled investments in the Big IT's. I think you might have to be an ""approved investor"" to buy gilts."


Randomly selected stocks would probably become worthless at a similar rate of all businesses going out of business do.  I'm not sure why you'd randomly select a stock though.  Stocks in the S&P500 (or other similar index), or large-cap stocks probably become worthless at a much lower rate.


Based on my personal experience with that particular offer, I can say that it's not really a scam. I signed up for an Amazon Credit Card to get $70 off a purchase, but then never used the card. In fact, I never even called to activate it! After a few months, I then called to cancel it. I did not see a significant hit to my credit. However if you do shop frequently at Amazon it may be in your best interest to use their card, because it has other discounts associated with it.


Very advanced like Ph.D? I'm four credits from an undergrad in mathematics (Just... didn't enjoy it anymore at all, so I switched to stats) so I have a nice grasp of advanced calculus, combinatorics and linear. But I suppose you're talking far and above that, yes?


>i dont see what's the big deal, all the banks got bailed out. Govt printed over 7 trillion bucks, not much inflation. govt has to help private sector. gave plenty of freebies to the rich mother fukers in the banking sector.  Yes that was bullshit, I agree. The difference is that most of the money that went to the banks is held with the banks. It didn't cause inflation because it isn't circulating in the economy. The government also had to do something with the banks because it would have triggered a major depression if they didn't. I don't think they handled it the best way at all. They should have nationalized the banks after the bailouts rather than let them keep thriving. However, students don't **need** that extra debt. That would be $1 trillion extra that actually is circulating in the economy, which would cause serious inflation. That would mean [doubling](http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12773.htm) the amount of money in circulation. That is a lot different than the trillions the government printed, mostly just to set monetary policy.


Note:  This is not professional tax advice.  If you think you need professional tax advice, find a licensed professional in your local area. What are the expected earnings/year? US$100? US$1,000?  US$100,000?  I would say if this is for US$1,000 or less that registering an EIN, and consulting a CPA to file a Partnership Tax return is not going to be a profitable exercise.... all the earnings, perhaps more, will go to paying someone to do (or help do) the tax filings. The simplest taxes are for a business that you completely own.  Corporations and Partnerships involve additional forms and get more and more and complex, and even more so when it involves foreign participation.  Partnerships are often not formal partnerships but can be more easily thought of as independent businesses that each participants owns, that are simply doing some business with each other. Schedule C is the IRS form you fill out for any businesses that you own. On schedule C you would list the income from advertising.  Also on schedule C there is a place for all of the business expenses, such as ads that you buy, a server that you rent, supplies, employees, and independent contractors.  Amounts paid to an independent contractor certainly need not be based on hours, but could be a fixed fee, or based on profit earned.   Finally, if you pay anyone in the USA over a certain amount, you have to tell the IRS about that with a Form 1099 at the beginning of the next year, so they can fill out their taxes.  BUT.... according to an article in International Tax Blog you might not have to file Form 1099 with the IRS for foreign contractors if they are not US persons (not a US citizen or a resident visa holder).


Yes. Donating to name-brand charities or politicians will result in you geting solicitied for more donations -- charities sell your info and donation habits.


what I should think about. If you decide to do this - get everything in writing.  Get lease agreements to enforce the business side of the relationship.  If they are not comfortable with that much formality, it's probably best not to do it, I'm not saying that you should not do this - but that you need to think about these type of scenarios before committing to a house purchase.


Sales taxes are charged at the point of purchase, while a VAT is assessed during the production process of the item. In the end, the amount paid by the consumer is the same, but with the VAT, the tax was collected from the manufacturer, instead of the consumer. One of the big arguments for VAT is that it prevents lost revenue due to things like smuggling (if sales tax increases past 10% smuggling spikes, so the VAT is a good mechanism if you're looking to implement large taxes on goods). It also keeps the tax burden away from shippers and other tiers of the production process that don't change the intrinsic value of the item.


"Training8m Corporate Technologies Pty Ltd, Australia Australia ABN 48133544297 UK Company Number:  7538482  Maiden Pre-IPO offer from Training8m Corporate Technologies Pty Ltd, Australia!! Unique opportunity for investors!!! Move to a most profitable and defensive investment!!! We offer Preferential Allotment / Private Placement of Debt / Equity. Most Profitable offer from The Global Leader!!  www.training8m.com  Subscription Offer Open:  First ever pre-IPO offer from Training8m Australia Group!! Unique opportunity for investors!!! Move to a most profitable and defensive investment!!! Preferential Allotment / Private Placement of Debt / Equity to multiple business investors pre IPO from $ 50k to $ 25 Mn for start up venture set up and Capital market Listing on Frankfurt Stock Exchange.   We offer Preferential Allotment / Private Placement of Equity to multiple business investors Pre- IPO from $ 50K to $ 25 Mn. Higher investment welcome for this International public issue. Equivalent Debt / Equity / Options / Preference Shares can be discussed. Minority Equity participation can be discussed.  We at Training8m Australia are Going Public Soon on Frankfurt Stock Exchange.  Status: Approved funding by major Global Private Equity Fund.  We are pleased to write that our major funding, raising funds from the equity market listing on Frankfurt Stock Exchange, is approved by major and most reputed Private Equity Group. This is one of the largest upcoming IPO, highly profitable with high ROI.   Subscription: Open to Institutional and Retail Investors Pre IPO offer in Debt / Equity / Preference Shares / Options  Serious investors only please. We would like to conclude this current deal immediately. We at Training8m, Australia are willing to discuss on the Debt / Equity / Options / preference shares and will be liberal for this transaction, which will be issued to you directly from our fund managers. This is definitely a really profitable and high return investment.  Payback period: 1 - 2 years (expected turnover at least $ 2 Bn in 3 years)    Start up Stage of business. This investment has very attractive returns. Unique opportunity to associate prior to the IPO on Global Stock Exchanges  Location: Head Quartered in Gold Coast, Australia with Global Operating Offices.  Set up including Property Investment, Recruitment and Appointment of permanent personnel, Fees for Listing on major Global Stock Exchange, other expenses as needed for the business.  Business Models:  Training8m Corporate Technologies Pty Ltd, Australia Corporate Training, Marketing, Premium Recruitment Portal, Premium and Moderated Recruitment Social Networking, Training and Development for all industry Verticals, Global Business Solutions.  Advanced Lighting Designers Pty Ltd, Australia We offer International Lighting Technologies, Design, Specifications, Software Solutions and High End Information Technology Services to Global Industry sectors.   Please do note that we are officially registered in Australia and UK for our Global Business ventures. With appropriate funding for takeovers, mergers and Acquisitions, we will be listing the companies Training8m Corporate Technologies Pty Ltd, and Advanced Lighting Designers Pty Ltd, on major global stock exchanges. The punch line of Advanced Lighting Designers Pty Ltd is “Go Green with Force Green"" in which we will be focussing on Green Energy Worldwide.  Please feel free to ask details privately.  Offer for limited time and closes on receipt of funds.  E- Mails: investors@training8m.com, business@training8m.com   Shrikant G. Shete  Chairman and Managing Director  Training8m, Australia  LinkedIn: http://au.linkedin.com/in/shrikantshete  +61-400769125 ................................Australia Mobiles  +61-434415521 ................................Australia Mobiles"


I'll check it out. We'll need it to be a reference that's easy to understand for those that will ask us these questions--not for those of us with master's degrees in business.       (*I* don't need it to be easy to understand--I need something that saves me the trouble of explaining over and over...)


Just to make the deal sweeter, see if you can negotiate a cash discount for paying for grad school with cash. If not, at least look into paying with a rewards credit card so you can get a rebate through your own means. Pay the school loan. People can default on mortgages, school loans are forever. Nothing wrong with sacrificing your dreams for a house several more years while you save. My wife and I are debt free, but it will take a few more years to save for a down payment on a house. It sure feels good knowing we don't owe anyone anything while we make our money have the purpose we want to give it. When you have to pay the bank interest, you do not have control on some of your money.


The LLC (not you) is probably in debt to the California FTB. Any LLC registered in California must pay at least $800 a year, until it is officially dissolved (i.e.: notice of cancellation/dissolution properly filed with the California Secretary of State). The FTB may come after members (including you) personally, if it can prove that the failure to pay was due to your negligence. Talk to a CA-licensed EA/CPA about how to resolve this. Otherwise, at least from what you've described, there were no other taxable events. LLC is a disregarded entity, so the IRS doesn't care about it much anyway (unless someone was stupid enough to elect it to be taxed as a corporation, that is). Keep in mind that when in doubt - you are always better off with a professional (a CPA/EA licensed in your State) advice.


You've got the right idea, except that the stated interest rate is normalized for a 1-year investment.  Hence if you buy a 4-week bill, you're getting something closer to 4/52 of what you've computed in your question.  More precisely, the Treasury uses a 360 day year for these calculations, so you multiply the stated rate by (number of days until maturity)/360 to get the actual rate of return.


There are so many issues with this graphic.  Plus the timing -- this is a well known and agreed-with position.  This might have been valuable insight or a novel discussion piece 15-20 years ago, but certainly not today.  All it does is provide circle-jerking with logical fallacies using moderately acceptable graphics.


Sure, let's keep bailing them out without ever holding them accountable for risky behavior. I'm sure every time they predictably take huge long term risks for short term gain and get away with it, our bailouts will fix everything. Thus solving the problem once and for all.   But...   ONCE AND FOR ALL!


You better consult with a tax adviser (EA or CPA) on this, my answer doesn't constitute such an advice. Basically, you're selling stuff on Kickstarter. No matter how they call it (projects, pledges, rewards - all are just words), you're selling stuff. People give you money (=pledges) and in return you're giving them tangible or intangible goods (=rewards). All the rest is just PR. So you will pay taxes on all the money you get, and you will be able to deduct some of the expenses (depends on whether its a business or a hobby, the deduction may be full or limited). It doesn't matter if you use LLC or your own account from the financial/taxation point of you, but it matters legally. LLC limits your personal liability, but do get a legal advice on this issue, and whether it is at all relevant for you. If you raise funds in 2012 you pay taxes on the money in 2012. If you go into production in 2013 - you can deduct expenses in 2013. If you're classified as a hobby, you'll end up paying full taxes in 2012 and deducting nothing in 2013. Talk to a tax adviser.


Typically developing economics are marked by moderate to high inflation [as they are growing at a faster pace], higher in savings rate and higher lending rates. If you reduce the lending rate, more business / start-up will borrow at cheaper rate, this in turn means lowers savings rate and leads to higher inflation. To combat this Central Banks make borrowing expensive, which lowers inflation and increases the saving rate. Essentially all these 3 are tied up. As to why these countries offer higher interest on USD is because most of the developing countries have trade [current account] deficit. They need to bring in more USD in the country. One of the ways is to encourage Non Resident Citizens to park their foreign earning back home, ensuring more funds USD inflow.  The rate differential also acts as a guide as to how the currency would be valued against USD. For example if you get 8% on USD, less than 12% had you converted same to Rouble, at the end of say 3 years, the exchange rate between USD and Rouble would factor that 4%, ie rouble will go down. Developed countries on the other hand are marked by low inflation [they have already achieved everything] as there is no spurt in growth, it more BAU. They are also characterized by low savings and lending rates.


Google Finance and Yahoo Finance have been transitioning their API (data interface) over the last 3 months. They are currently unreliable. If you're just interested in historical price data, I would recommend either Quandl or Tiingo (I am not affiliated with either, but I use them as data sources). Both have the same historical data (open, close, high, low, dividends, etc.) on a daily closing for thousands of Ticker symbols. Each service requires you to register and get a unique token. For basic historical data, there is no charge. I've been using both for many months and the data quality has been excellent and API (at least for python) is very easy! If you have an inclination for python software development, you can read about the drama with Google and Yahoo finance at the pandas-datareader group at https://github.com/pydata/pandas-datareader.